Cynthia Lennon Craps In Public

[LucyLennon4me]

Found this at Beatlesnumber9.com - The header is the article title, not mine.

John Lennon's first wife says the late Beatle was a violent and insecure bully who couldn't control his temper and once struck her in a burst of jealousy. "I discovered that John's temper could be frightening,"writes Cynthia Lennon in her new memoir, John, to be published at the end of this month.
She must want money really bad to diss Lennon in a book. Anyone who knew John, even as a public figure, will know he admitted to hitting Cyn and being a bad father. He was in the process of making amends when he was murdered.
He freely admitted his own temper lead him to peace activism. John freely shared everything about himself in public. Now that takes a real man. Yes, he hit his wife when he was young and dumb. In his 40s he was a different man. Why do we have to expose our heros defects in books and movies? We should already know they are human beings. Do the ones throwing stones at John want their faults exposed? It would be quite poetic. When will Cynthia write a book about her being unfaithful with Magic Alex?
You can find fault in anyone who is alive. If your bag is to sink to tabloid gossip, this book is for you. John's been dead 25 years and this book didn't tell me anything John didn't already tell us when he was a live. Those that weren't alive can now read a book that smears John Lennon. But let it be known that we that loved him knew about Johns mistakes. He shared them with us in interviews and songs. That's what made him a hero.
David Holmes
Beatlesnumber9.com
http://beatlesnumber9.com/

[matt5]

I think the person who wrote this is taking things a bit too personally.

[adayinthelife]

I read excerpts from the book and I was little...astounded.

First she says John was "horrified" by homosexuality and that Brian totally did not love John. I'm sorry but I have a really hard time believing either one.

[LucyLennon4me]

And we all thought Cynthia had class. I am surprised as well by the stance she is taking. Seems more like something from May Pang, oh right those two are buddies. Well, that says a lot. Even Cynthia is using the "I'm being airbrushed out" complaint.

Sorry but I think we need a bigger brush.

[HMVNipper]

I am putting on my moderator hat here because Angel and Tim are not around.

Lucy, give it up already...no need to be so nasty and abusive. You don't have to like Cynthia or May, but your comments are just too much, and frankly, if they continue, grounds for being banned from these forums.

You can say you don't like something, but don't get nasty, please.

[HMVNipper]

By the way -- John wasn't perfect. Not even in his 30s. (He never MADE IT to his 40s, which the person who made the initial comments doesn't seem to realize...) I DO think Cynthia has class, I think she's telling the truth as she sees it. And she was a big part of John's life BEFORE Yoko showed up and tried to erase her...she, of all people, is entitled to talk.

If some fans can't take a little knocking of their hero off his pedestal, then it's pretty sad -- I've been well aware of John's faults for 30 years, and I don't find anything in these exerpts (or what I am sure will be in the upcoming book) to be particularly astonishing...and I still love the guy no matter what.

[LucyLennon4me]

I am in no way being nasty. I really did think Cynthia had class. Now I am not so sure. I do not see what comment is "too much", my opinion seems to fit the theme of this thread. I have not used foul words, or done anything but state my opinion. It seems that if you disagree with anything or anyone here the watchdogs come out to bite. Christ you know it ain't easy. We are all adults so let's converse like them. I happen to prefer Yoko to any of these others and if I need to put my opinion in acceptable terms for you well then here goes.

I do not like Cynthia or May.

[HMVNipper]

First she says John was "horrified" by homosexuality and that Brian totally did not love John. I'm sorry but I have a really hard time believing either one.
Yeah, me too! :laugh2:

[HMVNipper]

I am in no way being nasty. I really did think Cynthia had class. Now I am not so sure. I do not see what comment is "too much", my opinion seems to fit the theme of this thread. I have not used foul words, or done anything but state my opinion. It seems that if you disagree with anything or anyone here the watchdogs come out to bite. Christ you know it ain't easy. We are all adults so let's converse like them. I happen to prefer Yoko to any of these others and if I need to put my opinion in acceptable terms for you well then here goes.

I do not like Cynthia or May.

That's fine. For the record, I've defended Yoko on these forums many times to those who would be just as nasty towards her. You are entitled to your opinion of Cynthia and May, whom I have also defended to their detractors. I'm an equal-opportunity defender! But there's a way to say you don't like something and a way not to, and frankly, even the title of this thread is offensive or can be construed as such.

[matt5]

I have not used foul words, or done anything but state my opinion.

I agree with you 100%.

[LucyLennon4me]

As I made clear I did not create the header that was the article from the David guy.

And thank you Matt as I as well have seen much more nasty comments coming from members and moderators anytime someone mentions Albert Goldman (whom I detest) of Guiliano or Robert Rosen, all authors of horrible books.

[HMVNipper]

They've been taken to task for their comments too. If I discuss those "authors" I try to make it plain that I do not care for their "work" (I use the term loosely) without getting nasty. I just do not want to see this thread degenerate into a discussion of Cynthia and May using ugly language. It hasn't so far, let's try to keep it that way.

[Rellevart]

Woah, everybody, step back from the keyboards, take a cleansing breath and go do something in the real world for a little while. Seriously.

Isn't there already a topic on Cynthia's book? Maybe it'd be best to debate our opinions of it there and close this one, since it's mostly arguments and not really on topic all that much? Just a thought?

[LucyLennon4me]

I have no intention of using ugly language.

[Jerry]

Matt, if you have a problem with the forum or a moderator, don't talk about it here ok. Send somebody a private message.

[HMVNipper]

I have no intention of using ugly language.

Great. :smile1: Let's move on, shall we, then?

[Zimmerman The Gnome]

Should we really care about a book that has been written purely for money which is taken from memory from a time long gone.

[LucyLennon4me]

Time moves on thousands of tiny little feet.

[Zimmerman The Gnome]

If you were asked to write a book about 30 years ago would it be accurate? I don't think so.

[ImaginePeace78]

Cynthia was there. We were not. Most of us posting here on this thread were only kids when all of this was going on or weren't even thought of. We we've read so far (in the other thread) about the book is nothing new. I'm still interested in reading it though from someone who was really there. It's about time Cynthia said something instead of sugar-coating it (like in her first book).
-Kristi

[ringo_rama]

My thing is, why was she too much of a coward to publish this when John was alive? Also, it seems kind of a slap in the face to defame the guy after his death, when he's the only reason she's famous...

Yes, she was there and I'd rather read what she has to say than some girl who gave John a quickie in 1965. But in the end, it's essentially the same thing: a glorified kiss-and-tell book.

[Sentimentalist]

I do honestly think it's right for Cynthia to be releasing another book... and I'm not just lanching into my usual Beatlegirl mode here, I have other reasons for looking forward to this book:

* The market has become flooded with Beatles books for so many years now, and the vast majority are written by people who were not there at the time, and don't even have second hand knowledge, they have third, fourth, and so on knowledge all taken from other books written by people who weren't there. All of us on here are dedicatd Beatlemaniacs, how many articles and books have we all read that have made is mutter and curse at all the blaringly obvious inaccuracies scattered all over the place? So much recycled, inaccurate information getting more and more inaccurate as time goes by. It's like a round of Chinese Whispers. So I really value the words of those who were there at the time as even if their memories are a little clouded, at least they have an actul real life experiance memory to share with us.

* The first book was all very nice, but it was so sugar coated and all the so-called bad experiances she went through in her life were told in such a sweet blame-free way that wasn't realistic and you could tell she was skimming over things and not giving us the real hard truth. Both with the bad things and some of the good things too.

* Apparently when Julian told John his mother was writing a book about their life together he was poised and ready to sue her... so he was expecting her to write all sorts of wrotten things. John read the finished book, didn't find any of the things he was expecting, and let Cyn release the book without any hassle at all. So even John proved that there were some major facts that she didn't tell us in the first book... and he might not have wanted people to know about them back then, but time has gone by and people get a lot more settled about the truth as they grow older, and I'm sure he'd rather have Cyn tell the real truth than someone like Albert Goldman guessing at the truth at making a mess of it.

* A lot of nasty things have been said about John since he died and wasn't able to defend himself. Cynthia has stood up and defended him many times, and I think it will do a lot of good if she can go through all of her life with John in one go and destroy a lot of those myths and put the facts straight, even about the not-so-perfect sides of John (and I like John not being perfect. I can't admire some perfect God-like image in anyone but God. All of those I admire and copy on earth have to be human and realistic. I'd rather have someone who has faults but still succeeds in life to use as my example than some saintly person who has no demons of their own to overcome, because they just wouldn't be on my wavelength). I'd rather hear her truth about his faults than someone who never knew him blowing things all out of proportion.

* there's a lot about John that only his two wives (and maybe people like May Pang) can tell us. They were very close to John, he trusted them, he could be himself around them as they loved him and didn't expect him to put on an act for them... and people do even put on a bit of an act for their close friends. It's only the people you intimately share your life with that see you at your very best and at your lowest points. I can't see Yoko ever telling her side of the story as she's suffered too much at the hands of the press, Beatlefans and the general public to be able to share anything so intimate with the world... but Cynthia can do it, and we should be grateful that she's taking the effort to finally put the record straight.

...and okay so she'll make money out of it. So what. People nag her every day of her life to share her time telling them about her life with John. She's put a lot of time and effort into writing this book, this is her work just like we each have the work we do every day, the thing the world asks of us everyday and pays us for doing. Why shouldn't Cynthia get paid for her work? I'd rather she made money from the Beatles than all these other people who make money from them who really don't deserve it. She was there supporting John through difficult times, she made her contribution towards the existance of the man we know as John Lennon, and he loved her very much and wanted her to reap the reqards of his fame when they were a couple, so why not now? Give the woman a break. She's giving us what we constantly ask of her, and thankfully she'll get a little something in return for that.

love, moons and starrs,
Senti.*

[sourmilkpinky]

I do honestly think it's right for Cynthia to be releasing another book... and I'm not just lanching into my usual Beatlegirl mode here, I have other reasons for looking forward to this book:

* The market has become flooded with Beatles books for so many years now, and the vast majority are written by people who were not there at the time, and don't even have second hand knowledge, they have third, fourth, and so on knowledge all taken from other books written by people who weren't there. All of us on here are dedicatd Beatlemaniacs, how many articles and books have we all read that have made is mutter and curse at all the blaringly obvious inaccuracies scattered all over the place? So much recycled, inaccurate information getting more and more inaccurate as time goes by. It's like a round of Chinese Whispers. So I really value the words of those who were there at the time as even if their memories are a little clouded, at least they have an actul real life experiance memory to share with us.

* The first book was all very nice, but it was so sugar coated and all the so-called bad experiances she went through in her life were told in such a sweet blame-free way that wasn't realistic and you could tell she was skimming over things and not giving us the real hard truth. Both with the bad things and some of the good things too.

* Apparently when Julian told John his mother was writing a book about their life together he was poised and ready to sue her... so he was expecting her to write all sorts of wrotten things. John read the finished book, didn't find any of the things he was expecting, and let Cyn release the book without any hassle at all. So even John proved that there were some major facts that she didn't tell us in the first book... and he might not have wanted people to know about them back then, but time has gone by and people get a lot more settled about the truth as they grow older, and I'm sure he'd rather have Cyn tell the real truth than someone like Albert Goldman guessing at the truth at making a mess of it.

* A lot of nasty things have been said about John since he died and wasn't able to defend himself. Cynthia has stood up and defended him many times, and I think it will do a lot of good if she can go through all of her life with John in one go and destroy a lot of those myths and put the facts straight, even about the not-so-perfect sides of John (and I like John not being perfect. I can't admire some perfect God-like image in anyone but God. All of those I admire and copy on earth have to be human and realistic. I'd rather have someone who has faults but still succeeds in life to use as my example than some saintly person who has no demons of their own to overcome, because they just wouldn't be on my wavelength). I'd rather hear her truth about his faults than someone who never knew him blowing things all out of proportion.

* there's a lot about John that only his two wives (and maybe people like May Pang) can tell us. They were very close to John, he trusted them, he could be himself around them as they loved him and didn't expect him to put on an act for them... and people do even put on a bit of an act for their close friends. It's only the people you intimately share your life with that see you at your very best and at your lowest points. I can't see Yoko ever telling her side of the story as she's suffered too much at the hands of the press, Beatlefans and the general public to be able to share anything so intimate with the world... but Cynthia can do it, and we should be grateful that she's taking the effort to finally put the record straight.

...and okay so she'll make money out of it. So what. People nag her every day of her life to share her time telling them about her life with John. She's put a lot of time and effort into writing this book, this is her work just like we each have the work we do every day, the thing the world asks of us everyday and pays us for doing. Why shouldn't Cynthia get paid for her work? I'd rather she made money from the Beatles than all these other people who make money from them who really don't deserve it. She was there supporting John through difficult times, she made her contribution towards the existance of the man we know as John Lennon, and he loved her very much and wanted her to reap the reqards of his fame when they were a couple, so why not now? Give the woman a break. She's giving us what we constantly ask of her, and thankfully she'll get a little something in return for that.

love, moons and starrs,
Senti.*


I agree whole-heartedly with this, nicely said :teeth1:

[Sentimentalist]

From what I understand, kiss and tell books are written by modern-day groupies who chase after someone just because they're famous and they can get something out of being with them other than the joy of being in their company. And then they sell their sordid little story to the world for cold hard cash.

Cynthia was with John when he was a nothing... a very lovable and talented nothing, but not exactly someone she could sleep with in order to go to the papers and get given a load of money for telling them all about it the next day. Just like many musician girlfriend before and since, she worked hard at a boring underpaid job in order to keep him when he hadn't any money and was too busy learning his craft and being battered down by music-industry rejection to support himself. And even when he'd got a record contract and a load of reasonably well-paying tour dates Cyn was back home in Liverpool having to share a home with his Aunt Mimi who she did not get on with and carrying and then looking after his child. She wan't some floozy in a series from "Footballers Wives". She didn't turn up all designer gear and highly polished nails to be wined and dined on his vast wages. She slummed it to be with John, and she supported him.

So I don't understand why she can be classed in the same league as the kiss-and-tell women.

I class her words the same way I class historical documents. Someone important existed, and the people around them make records of what they were like in the form of diaries, reports and manuscripts that can be passed down through the ages so that in hundreds of years time people can read them and understand what they were really like, and not know them through a lot of passed down myths where the facts have been lost through the years.

...and I bet when we actually read this book there will be a lot of love written into it too. Papers don't sell by telling us how sweet people are, how loving a husband was towards his wife, how supportive a young lad was to his girlfriend. But the book will tell the story as Cyn wants it told, and she still seems to love him very much, so I'm really looking forward to reading what she has to share. there will be bits I won't enjoy reading, but if I want to really know who John was I have to take the rough with the smooth.

love, moons and starrs,
Senti.*

[ringo_rama]

So even John proved that there were some major facts that she didn't tell us in the first book... and he might not have wanted people to know about them back then, but time has gone by and people get a lot more settled about the truth as they grow older, and I'm sure he'd rather have Cyn tell the real truth than someone like Albert Goldman guessing at the truth at making a mess of it.

If he didn't want the truth published then, why would he want it published now? We're never going to know.

[EnchantingLennon]

right ringo_rama, we will never know why if John didn't want it published the truth then and what about now- however, for many years Yoko has tried many times to wash Cynthia and Julian away from John's life story. Julian needs to say "hey, look, I do exist, I'm right here, I have my father's blood running in my veins, I deserve at least some mention in John's biography" and Cynthia has a right to stand up for her son. Cynthia also has a right to tell her story- I agree with everything Senti says, and I also have to say that there's a freedom of speech and print. If Cynthia has a story to tell, then she should tell it, she should defend John and Julian, after all, she was THERE. John wasn't perfect, we all know that. Nobody is perfect, not even Joan Crawford! So please, if anything I trust Cynthia's words better then I do with Geoffrey Guiliano, Albert Goldman. As for John, he has admitted that he was crazy, he did admit that he wanted Cynthia to give him attention and trust.

As for her memories, maybe a lot of people do jumble up their memories, I mean, who can possibilly keep track of 365 days a year? I'm been known to jumble up memories of mine, but that doesn't say that I forgot, I do remember stuff but I don't really remember what order. And also, who knows? Maybe Cynthia kept a diary of those times to help her guide thru her book. She made a few mistakes in A Twist of Lennon, like her marriage year.

[erinluv182]

I'm ready to hear what Cynthia really has to say. I would have a very hard time thinking of anyone who would deal with writing a book in a more classy way than Cyn. She was and still is a wonderful woman who loved John when every person in her life told her to stay away from him. She has my utmost respect and I will always appreciate her beautiful spirit and character. I won't take everything she says as the gospel truth (as someone said above, no one can remember every date and exact detail of their life), but I will take it as an account from an extremely reliable witness who lived it.

[GeorgieGirl]

Hummmm.... I was wondering if anyone read about this. Ah, nothing shocks me.

Artists live in dispair. It's part of the resume. Read about the personal lives of some of the great painters, writers, and musicians. Many took their own lives--usually through a bottle.

Regarding MEMORIES. Ahem. I remember in clear detail every single thing about my first true love, down to conversations, and that was well over 35 years ago. She does remember. Trust me. I remember 30 years ago sometimes better than yesterday. But this realization comes with age...

Peace out!

[GeorgieGirl]

This topic is also in Paperback Writer. I don't know for sure how to link a post I wrote, so if the mod's don't mind, I'm reposting something I said over there. Forgive me but it still stands to how I think about this book:

Paperback Writer (http://www.beatlelinks.net/forums/showthread.php?t=23265&page=2)

Perspectives change with time. She might be able to relive her life with John from a different angle now that the emotions are removed. Sometimes having distance is having perspective, and this understanding comes with age.

I figured it out...the link that is... sorry Mods.

[LovinLennon909]

As with everything I read based on "fact" or "truth," I'll take it with a grain of salt. I hope it isn't too Loving Johnish, because overt trashing just takes away from credibility, but it doesn't surprise anyone who knows much about who John was.

[Sentimentalist]

If he didn't want the truth published then, why would he want it published now? We're never going to know.

Please re-read the bit you quoted yourself, I've already answered this.

he might not have wanted people to know about them back then, but time has gone by and people get a lot more settled about the truth as they grow older, and I'm sure he'd rather have Cyn tell the real truth than someone like Albert Goldman guessing at the truth at making a mess of it.

[HMVNipper]

You know what I find really funny about all this uproar? That the people who seem most upset by it are clearly unable to stand the idea of John being knocked off that pedestal upon which they have placed him. So, he was a nasty, verbally abusive, violent sonofabitch when he was young. Big deal, we all knew that even if it was never stated without mincing words. So he had a cold childhood. Big deal, we all knew that too, it was no secret. So he had huge issues. Big deal, we all knew that as well. This is just the same story told in the words of a woman who was there for a good portion of it...I do think this book should be approached with the same caution as ANY book about John, and not accepted as strictly the gospel truth, but it is certainly a welcome addition to the canon, IMO.

If anyone thinks John was some kind of saint, or that it is totally impossible that he ever did the things described here, he or she has bigger problems than the things said in this book. Puh-leeze.... :rolleyes:

[Sally]

I bet if this was about Heather, people could be as nasty as they liked :devious:

[HMVNipper]

Nope, I wouldn't want to see that either, I would not appreciate anyone using foul language to describe Heather. Strong opinions are fine, foul language is not. And frankly, I could care less about her at this point, I've stopped talking about HER long ago.

Can we please move on? Honestly, this has no relevance to the further discussion going on here. I thought this was ironed out yesterday.

[Sentimentalist]

It honestly bothers me that anyone feels they have the right to be nasty towards anyone just because one of the Beatles loves/loved them. It makes no sense to me at all, even though it tends to happen a lot in the music world, these bizarre hatreds of the girlfriends. I find it fascinating discovering all the reasons why those four wonderful guys were so in love with each of the Beatle wives/girlfriends. And maybe the girls have their faults too... but there's so many admirable qualities there as well.

If the people who knock Heather (or Cyn or any of the other girls) are doing it because they are a little jealous that they get to be with a Beatle... would it not make more sense to find out about what makes her so special and aim to be that fabulous yourself? A Beatle is highly unlikely to ever fall in love with you, but if he met one fan who attacked the woman he loved and another fan who appreciated that woman and took on some of her ideals then it's blatantly obvious which of the two fans he's most likely to get on with.

I really do think it's a shame that the price you pay for loving a Beatle is that millions of girls all over the world will hate you forever, even when they are married with children of their own. And that you will constantly be attacked for your relationship. Such a shame.

love, moons and starrs,
Senti.*

[Sally]

It honestly bothers me that anyone feels they have the right to be nasty towards anyone just because one of the Beatles loves/loved them. It makes no sense to me at all, even though it tends to happen a lot in the music world, these bizarre hatreds of the girlfriends. I find it fascinating discovering all the reasons why those four wonderful guys were so in love with each of the Beatle wives/girlfriends. And maybe the girls have their faults too... but there's so many admirable qualities there as well.

If the people who knock Heather (or Cyn or any of the other girls) are doing it because they are a little jealous that they get to be with a Beatle... would it not make more sense to find out about what makes her so special and aim to be that fabulous yourself? A Beatle is highly unlikely to ever fall in love with you, but if he met one fan who attacked the woman he loved and another fan who appreciated that woman and took on some of her ideals then it's blatantly obvious which of the two fans he's most likely to get on with.

I really do think it's a shame that the price you pay for loving a Beatle is that millions of girls all over the world will hate you forever, even when they are married with children of their own. And that you will constantly be attacked for your relationship. Such a shame.

love, moons and starrs,
Senti.*

I agree with you 100%.

[Asha]

I've been a fan for 38 years. I remember that when John was alive, I wanted to meet him, but had a fear that I could cross him if I wasn't careful. Even then people knew that John could have a temper or whatever you want to call it. So, I'm with Nipper in that we know he wasn't perfect, but who is & does that stop anybody from caring about him or anybody else who's not perfect? No way! :)

I personally don't care who writes about the Beatles. I have a bookcase that is leaning over from the weight of Beatles books. LOL! Have I read them all? No. Some I buy just for the photos! *giggles! (Hey, I'm a visual girl, ok?) ;) So, Cynthia can write all the books she want & she can do it for whatever reason. I don't have to agree or disagree with what she's doing in her life. She has to do whatever she feels is necessary or whatever she wants. Like others have mentioned here, at least she actually knew the man & wasn't an aquintance who goes around saying they knew a Beatle like so many authors.

The bottom line is, I don't have to buy it or read it & you all have that choice, too. For whatever reason, you will make a choice based on what you feel is necessary or what you feel you want. It's no biggie. Buy it if you want to see what she has to say. Don't buy it if you're uninterested. Be free & know that other fans have the right to be free, too. We're all different with different interests in the Beatles & that's what makes us so cool! :) Celebrate it, don't fuss over it!

:) shanti always...

[LucyLennon4me]

"A Beatle is highly unlikely to ever fall in love with you, but if he met one fan who attacked the woman he loved and another fan who appreciated that woman and took on some of her ideals then it's blatantly obvious which of the two fans he's most likely to get on with."



I disagree with this, and I'm not trying to be nasty.

It is a known fact that May Pang in her book said some not too nice things about Yoko, yet she was a girlfriend of John, because Yoko arranged it for her to be. John ALWAYS hated when anyone spoke badly of Yoko, but May and MANY others waited until he was dead to air their feelings of Yoko. While they have the right to do so, I do not think that John would have been happy about it in the least.

[HMVNipper]

I agree with you 100%.

As do I. (And just so no one leaps on my ass, I am sorry about the strident things that I ever said about Heather...I don't have to care for her, but I sure as heck don't have to be nasty about it either...when I am wrong, I say so.)

[beatlefan]

If anyone's still listening--The slam against Cynthia (and then May?) is ridiculous.
(deeply ingrained fan jealousy can be treated.) ImaginePeace78 gets it right. Some of us do want to know what happened at various periods in John's life, from someone who was there. Since he's gone now, Cynthia's memories matter. Everyone's entitled to share their memories, whether you believe everything or not--and I'm glad she's telling it all now. She was careful what she said in her first book. Alot was left out. So I'm waiting to get the book in the mail. Just my two cents. She is woman, watch her roar. Cheers...

[HMVNipper]

If anyone's still listening--The slam against Cynthia (and then May?) is ridiculous.
(deeply ingrained fan jealousy can be treated.) ImaginePeace78 gets it right. Some of us do want to know what happened at various periods in John's life, from someone who was there. Since he's gone now, Cynthia's memories matter. Everyone's entitled to share their memories, whether you believe everything or not--and I'm glad she's telling it all now. She was careful what she said in her first book. Alot was left out. So I'm waiting to get the book in the mail. Just my two cents. She is woman, watch her roar. Cheers...

And a very valuable two cents they are! I could not agree with you more!

Welcome to the forums!

[beatlefan]

[would it not make more sense to find out about what makes her so special and aim to be that fabulous yourself? A Beatle is highly unlikely to ever fall in love with you, but if he met one fan who attacked the woman he loved and another fan who appreciated that woman and took on some of her ideals then it's blatantly obvious which of the two fans he's most likely to get on with.

love, moons and starrs,
Senti.*[/QUOTE]

BRAVO!!! Perfectly said.

[MonaMe577]

If he didn't want the truth published then, why would he want it published now? We're never going to know.

It's true--we'll probably never know how John would feel about a book like this today. But, in all honesty, so what? Should Cynthia not have considered writing this book because John might not have liked what it has to say? Should all books written about John feature only nice things about him because, gee, he might not have liked it? John was, if nothing else, a man who valued the truth over everything and sometimes, the truth hurts. He may not have wanted it published forty years ago because he was still too close to it, it was still too raw. I can't imagine he felt 100% good about everything he did when he was younger (hey, who does?) Who's to say now, he wouldn't be able to look back on his past behavior and say, "Wow, how I've changed since then?" Just remember that, like someone else mentioned, this book is coming from someone who ultimately loved John, and probably still does, not someone like AG who wants nothing more than to drag him through the mud for the sake of entertainment.

[Sentimentalist]

(deeply ingrained fan jealousy can be treated.)

Oh, I *do* hope so! :)

I personally think that it would be fab if all overly jealous female Beatlefans could date a musician and then see how it feels to have hurtful comments thrown far and wide by people who have no true knowledge of you as a person, and for them to know what it's like be too scared to go into the bathroom at a gig for fear of what will happen when all the jealous witches follow you in there! Then they might chill out a bit.

It's been very useful to me being a Beatlegirl fan in that I knew what they'd had to go through and how they'd dealt with it... otherwise as soon as I started getting attacked for hanging out with my muician friends I'd have collapsed in a mass of tears and wondered what I'd done to make everyone hate me so much... but I understood the best ways to avoid trouble, and I understood that I wasn't the first to be attacked and that it wasn't my fault. I'm really glad I reacted to the Beatlegirls in the way I did when I first became a Beatlefan. I'd have felt dreadful if I'd been hateful towards them and then got that same treatment directed at myself a few years later.

But I do have to admit that in the past - in my deep devotion to Maureen - I have been rather heartless in my attitudes towards Barbara and Nancy Andrews.. but I've got over that now. I understand that Ringo loves Barbara very much and that she makes him very happy and saved him from dreadfully destructive addictive behaviour. And now I've chilled out a bit over Nancy I'm beginning to understand that she really did get trampled all over when she was with Ringo, and I sympathise with her.

I really do wish Cynthia all the best of luck with her book. When you read the extracts she does seem to still be protecting John even though she's explaining some of his faults. She shows how trivial the faults were, how they could have been worse, how he corrected himself. She didn't have to do that. Bitter wives in the past have slated their ex-husbands and told only the bad. Cynthia seems to want people to know the truth but understand that deep down John was a very wonderful man. I really can't wait to get hold of my copy of the book!

Her comments about Mimi do seem very strange in a way though. It's as though she's still protecting John from Mimi, that she's fighting his battles for him. It's quite sweet, but I would have thought that with time she'd see Mimi in a more rounded way. Oh well. It should be interesting to see what else she says of Mimi as the books goes on.

love, moons and starrs,
Senti.*

[MonaMe577]

Her comments about Mimi do seem very strange in a way though. It's as though she's still protecting John from Mimi, that she's fighting his battles for him. It's quite sweet, but I would have thought that with time she'd see Mimi in a more rounded way. Oh well. It should be interesting to see what else she says of Mimi as the books goes on.

I posted this in another thread, but I'll paraphrase it here. Cynthia might have written Aunt Mimi a certain way because that's how Cyn perceived her. I don't think Mimi ever really liked Cyn too much, and the feeling was probably mutual, so this may be the only side of her that Cyn ever really saw. Someone else might have a different impression of Mimi, and neither Cyn nor this other person would have been wrong. That's why I think you need to read more than one person's perspective, and draw your own conclusions.

[LucyLennon4me]

If anyone is referring to "fan jealousy" regarding me, I would like to say that I am not jealous of any of them. No need to be. My issue and opinion is that I find Cynthia and May to be non-credible is all. I also find Albert Goldman and Robert Rosen to be non-credible as well. This is not a slam it is my perception. I am curious to read this new book, but I believe that many people who "were there" have a certain amount of bitterness when it comes to Yoko. I like Yoko a lot and while these others have every right to tell their stories, just because they spent some time with John in any capacity does not automatically guarantee that they tell the complete truth or that the stories are unembellished. I think both Cynthia and May have their own axe to grind with Yoko. This is what I dislike. We all know John was not perfect, that is not the issue. We all know certain people were "there" that is not the issue. I take offense to folks who always have someone to bash in their books, whether it is Yoko or Mimi or whatever. I think it is a clear indication of the charactor of these people. My comments are meant as a part of a discussion not a confrontation.

By the way I happen to be married to a musician for the past 20 years.

[HMVNipper]

Cynthia spent more than "some time" with John, she was married to him for six years and knew him for some time before they married. I would say that she's a pretty credible witness to John's life, and to lump her in with Goldman and Rosen is mind-boggling to me. There is NO COMPARISON between a woman who was married to and lived with John Lennon for a significant portion of his life and a pseudo-biographer who never met the man.

Your argument that May and Cynthia cannot tell the story unembellished would hold true for Yoko too, by the way -- she bashes people in her own way by excising them from the record and has been wont to behave like John didn't start breathing until he climbed that ladder in the Indica Gallery, which we all know is patently untrue. I prefer to think that ALL of these women have valid stories to tell about THEIR lives with John -- and some of it is gonna be pretty unsavory, personal motives notwithstanding.

I generally like Yoko a lot too -- I've defended her more times over the years than I can say. But she's not perfect either -- and to tar Cynthia and May with the brush you are tarring them with and imply that only Yoko is a "credible" source is...incredible.

[ringo_rama]

I am certainly well aware that John was not a saint, and I hardly put him on a pedestel. But as I said, Cynthia published a book about John while he was alive. It was lightweight fluff that made it quite clear that she did love John and she was a big part of his life.

But why was she too cowardly/ashamed to say any of this when John was alive? Because he would then have the ability to refute any false allegations she might make?

I always believed that there are three sides to every story: the protagonist's, the antagonist's, and the unbiased observer's. I'm sure that Cynthia won't be lying in her book, but there's certainly no way of knowing. Leave this kind of stuff to the Peter Browns and Albert Goldmans of the world. When John married Cyn, he didn't think that she'd be publishing her memories (good or bad) in a book 40 years later.

[beatlebangs1964]

I bet if this was about Heather, people could be as nasty as they liked :devious:

Sally, if anybody got ugly and personal about Heather on my watch, believe me they would be talked to about this. I hate that kind of thing and think it is cruel and needless. What Susan said is fair and reasonable - nobody is required to like or dislike her, but there is never, repeat never any need to resort to personal attacks and bitter invectives.

Mona made good points about not writing just sweetness and light about John, as Hunter Davies did in his Beatles biography. I sincerely doubt John would have wanted to be put on a pedastal with his life airbrushed, but I also don't see any real purpose in tarring and feathering the man. We all know Goldman was quite a master of the tar and feather routine and I don't think Goldman's work reflected well on him or served in anybody's interest.

Susan was dead on when she said it is common knowledge (certainly among Beatle fans) and has been well documented that John had ISSUES, as does everyone. John sounded like he was ADD/ADHD as a boy. His acerbic wit has been well documented. His zany sense of humor and zany side has also been duly noted. Ain't nobody perfect. :smile1: I also think John would be the last person who would want to see John on a pedastal!


I personally think that it would be fab if all overly jealous female Beatlefans could date a musician and then see how it feels to have hurtful comments thrown far and wide by people who have no true knowledge of you as a person, and for them to know what it's like be too scared to go into the bathroom at a gig for fear of what will happen when all the jealous witches follow you in there! Then they might chill out a bit.

It honestly bothers me that anyone feels they have the right to be nasty towards anyone just because one of the Beatles loves/loved them. It makes no sense to me at all, even though it tends to happen a lot in the music world, these bizarre hatreds of the girlfriends. I find it fascinating discovering all the reasons why those four wonderful guys were so in love with each of the Beatle wives/girlfriends. And maybe the girls have their faults too... but there's so many admirable qualities there as well.

If the people who knock Heather (or Cyn or any of the other girls) are doing it because they are a little jealous that they get to be with a Beatle... would it not make more sense to find out about what makes her so special and aim to be that fabulous yourself? A Beatle is highly unlikely to ever fall in love with you, but if he met one fan who attacked the woman he loved and another fan who appreciated that woman and took on some of her ideals then it's blatantly obvious which of the two fans he's most likely to get on with.

Amen, Sister!

Sentimentalist makes some good points about trying to seek what qualities/characteristics the Beatles' wives and girlfriends had that attracted them instead of attacking them. Well said - there ain't no need to be nasty to anyone.

All You Need is Love.

[LucyLennon4me]

John didn't start breathing until he climbed that ladder in the Indica Gallery, which we all know is patently untrue.


According to John after he met Yoko he pretty much stated himself that he did not start breathing until he met Yoko. He said the Beatles suffocated him and she was his freedom, his love, and his life. He has said this for years. So Yoko is going to have this point of view since he not only told her this but the world as well.

I prefer to think that ALL of these women have valid stories to tell about THEIR lives with John -- and some of it is gonna be pretty unsavory, personal motives notwithstanding.

This is agree with 100% though interesting as their stories might be they are biased as each woman seems to feel they were the "only one" for John. But the only one John publically declared "the one" for him was Yoko.

[HMVNipper]

I'm sorry, Lucy, but I cannot and will not dismiss his entire pre-Yoko life like that...and no matter what he may have said, I do not think he truly believed that his life before her was nothing.

And I don't think Cynthia OR May are saying they were "the only one" for John, not at all. They are just stating their points of view about their relationships with him.

Co-dependency makes people say strange things, and I believe that John and Yoko's relationship was extraordinarily co-dependent. I would like to think that eventually he would have come to his senses and recognized that if he were still here.

[MonaMe577]

When John married Cyn, he didn't think that she'd be publishing her memories (good or bad) in a book 40 years later.

Maybe so, but I don't think he was so naive as to believe he was immune to it, either.

But why was she too cowardly/ashamed to say any of this when John was alive? Because he would then have the ability to refute any false allegations she might make?

So we should never publish books about people after they've died? Or we should, but filled only with good things so we won't offend them? Whatever her reasons, Cynthia was not comfortable publishing certain things 30 years ago, and now has worked up the courage to tell the John Lennon story as she lived it (that's the key, her impressions). As far as I know, Cynthia has never made false allegations about John and has made it patently clear that she loves him, so what reason do we have to believe that she'll tell lies about him now?

I have a feeling that Julian might have been part of her decision, as well. When her first book came out, Julian was only 15 or 16, still very much a child. She might not have thought it was appropriate to write a scathing, tell-all book about John when Julian was too young to deal with the repercussions of it ("So, young Julian, how do you feel about your dad cheating around and beating your mum?") Now, Julian's 43 years old, a grown man mature enough to handle the truth and make his peace with it. And now his mther feels comfortable enough to let the world know how she really feels. I have nothing but respect for both her and Julian, and they certainly have a right to be heard.

[MonaMe577]

Co-dependency makes people say strange things, and I believe that John and Yoko's relationship was extraordinarily co-dependent.

I don't know about co-dependent so much. John always seemed to be a lot more dependent on Yoko than she was on him. That's what always strikes me about certain pictures of them together: always John leaning on Yoko, almost never the other way around. Speaks volumes to me.

[HMVNipper]

I don't know about co-dependent so much. John always seemed to be a lot more dependent on Yoko than she was on him. That's what always strikes me about certain pictures of them together: always John leaning on Yoko, almost never the other way around. Speaks volumes to me.

Good point...and I still maintain that NO ONE led John Lennon around by the balls unless HE ALLOWED IT...

At any rate, I do think he would have recognized the inherent problems with a relationship such as the one he had with Yoko eventually...as I said in another thread, I don't think they would have had an awful and bitter breakup, but rather a parting of the ways once they both realized they had resolved the issues that brought them together, John particularly.

And you make some very good points about why Cynthia would want to write a more forthright book now, rather than years ago.

[beatlefan]

Oh, I *do* hope so! :)


Her comments about Mimi do seem very strange in a way though. It's as though she's still protecting John from Mimi, that she's fighting his battles for him. It's quite sweet, but I would have thought that with time she'd see Mimi in a more rounded way. Oh well. It should be interesting to see what else she says of Mimi as the books goes on.

love, moons and starrs,
Senti.*

Senti I LOVE your take on it all, and such genuinely compassionate thoughts from such a real place. My take on the Mimi thing is this: if you read Cyn's first book, her troubles with Mimi are in fact there, but she is still nice about it. I think perhaps in her new book she is allowing herself some venting room. Call it middle-aged female empowerment or what have you, after this many years, she knows Mimi's legend has been now cemented in people's minds; and to leave another viewpoint,another set of memories, is good for us to know. My two cents---coming from a difficult childhood myself---I know how nice you try to be when you are in your 20's and 30's, only to say it like it is when you are older and stronger!

[beatlefan]

But why was she too cowardly/ashamed to say any of this when John was alive? Because he would then have the ability to refute any false allegations she might make?

I always believed that there are three sides to every story: the protagonist's, the antagonist's, and the unbiased observer's. I'm sure that Cynthia won't be lying in her book, but there's certainly no way of knowing. Leave this kind of stuff to the Peter Browns and Albert Goldmans of the world. When John married Cyn, he didn't think that she'd be publishing her memories (good or bad) in a book 40 years later.

Well the fact was, that she WAS afraid. John was alive when the book came out. She knew he was really pissed when he found out she was writing a book. When he actually read it, he calmed down, because there was nothing to get upset over. She didn't want to create such a scene back then, just get her story out. She was always meek and mild, and this was one of the reasons she couldn't keep up with John.

Secondly I love your three sides---but why leave it to dare I say Goldman??? We are all doomed if it comes to that. There will be nothing real left. I would say the opposite. Forget the biographers, stick to the real people who have real story to tell. Every person in John's life has a slightly different angle. And that is fascinating. Just try attending your grandpa's funeral and get a story from every person there. Few will be in total agreement.

[beatlefan]

According to John after he met Yoko he pretty much stated himself that he did not start breathing until he met Yoko. He said the Beatles suffocated him and she was his freedom, his love, and his life. He has said this for years. So Yoko is going to have this point of view since he not only told her this but the world as well.



This is agree with 100% though interesting as their stories might be they are biased as each woman seems to feel they were the "only one" for John. But the only one John publically declared "the one" for him was Yoko.

Reaction to this is hilarious laughter and choking on my coffee. You don't REALLY believe this do you? John may have said that at the time. Falling in love when you are 1)ready to leave the confines of a "comfortable" but stagnant marriage, 2)ready to leave the boys in the band and 3)on heroin or cocaine mixed with booze, 4)with an arsty woman with "issues", no doubt created this reaction with him. THIS was when he truly "started over". He was 29 for petes' sakes....consider that. It doesn't mean that the Beatles and his prior life with Cyn meant nothing, it means at the time he was sick of it and wasn't in the mood to reflect. I think we can all discount "things we said" back then in hindsight. Either that or she drugged him into being under her spell to forget himself. OK I'm kidding now---but really. Anyone who says that they had no life prior to an event like this, is either brainwashed or on drugs. If you asked John now, if he were alive, I'm sure he'd laugh his head off. We have to take it all in perspective. And what else would he say about Yoko? That she WASN'T the only one for him? (with her sitting there?) She was at the time. So be it. But all these years later, everyone is entitled to remember their time with John, even if he had moved on. I'm glad they do.

[ringo_rama]

I never said that you shouldn't write books about dead people. I said that Cyn has already written a book 30 years ago and didn't tell the full truth. Who's to say she will this time?

The point is, yes, you do give up a certain extent of privacy if you're a celebrity. But that doesn't include things that happen when not in public. Airing John's dirty laundry in public all these years later is unnecessary. We all know he wasn't a saint and I'll admit, I'm a little interested in hearing all these stories...but the time she's releasing the book (around his birthday, right before the 25th anniversary of his death) makes it a little questionable for me.

I'd love to hear Paul, Ringo, or Pattie's reaction to this book.

[beatlegirl9977]

but the time she's releasing the book (around his birthday, right before the 25th anniversary of his death) makes it a little questionable for me.
Would it make a difference if she'd released it next year on the 26th anniversary? :confused: Cyn would catch hell for this book no matter what time of year the book hits the shelves, it seems.

[HMVNipper]

Why is it okay for Yoko to release books on John's birthday or the anniversary of his death, but no one else? And actually, it's the PUBLISHER who decides when a book is released, not the author. (I worked in publishing for many years, I know what I'm talking about.) Clearly her publisher wanted to tie it in with the anniversary, and that's excellent marketing, let's face it. People will be thinking about John and therefore will be receptive to books about him.

I don't understand why people think that Yoko's opinions are the only valid ones, and that her stories are the only ones to be trusted...she has always told her story the way she wants to. why is it okay for her and not for anyone else who actually knew John?

I think Mona's and Beatlefan's points about Cyn being much stronger now and able to say things she didn't feel she could years ago are quite valid. And she has a right to say what she wants.

[Apple Scruff]

I really don't have a problem with Cynthia writing a book. In fact, I plan to get it. I like Cynthia. It isn't fair for me to just assume John met Yoko and everything else in his life was meaningless up to that point...Yoko infuriates me enough sometimes, but I still like the woman a great deal.

Basically, my big issue is with Julian. I'm sure others will disagree, but I can't stand reading anymore of this wooing-in-my-misery stuff from Julian. Every time he mentions his dad he has to bring up some points about how he is being ignored and his dad let him down and so on and so forth. I personally feel that Julian, being in his 40s now, should just learn to let go of all this anger. I know that sounds weird, what with John being so confesional and so angst prone. The difference, of course, was that John had pretty much straightened himself out by the time he was in his mid-to-late 30s. At 40, he seemed at enough peace to come out with "Double Fantasy" and be overjoiced at the thought of being a father. And furthermore, he was trying with Julian. What happened to John at the moment when Julian really needed him was unfair and certainly made things horrible for all involved...and for a long, long period of time I could understand Julian's frustration.

But at some point it is probably healthy to have a self-analysis and realize that all that anger and regret and pent-up frustration at your deceased father really isn't doing you any good. John made some mistakes, but Julian should just note them and act against them in his own, quiet way. No need to constantly declare to the world what a jerk your dad was...I just get fed up of reading some of it sometimes.

But anyway, I still like Julian. Porbably less so now, though, but he's still cool. I just had to mention this finally because I couldn't really hold it in. I've only recently felt this strongly about it, seeing as Julian will be turning 43 now in the upcoming year. He (as far as I know) has not had any children or dealt with the level of fame and public obligations his father had...but that's neither here or there. All I say is, Julian should probably stop with the, "My dad was this and wasn't that..." talk and perhaps show us all just what Julian is without having to resort to anything negatively directed at a poor innocent dead man.

[HMVNipper]

Scruff, I could not have said it better myself...and I totally agree with you about Julian.

[LucyLennon4me]

I don't understand why people think that Yoko's opinions are the only valid ones, and that her stories are the only ones to be trusted...she has always told her story the way she wants to. why is it okay for her and not for anyone else who actually knew John?

Because Yoko was the Primary wife. The wife John chose without the duress of "doing the right thing" and marrying a girl he got pregnant.

[LucyLennon4me]

I really don't have a problem with Cynthia writing a book. In fact, I plan to get it. I like Cynthia. It isn't fair for me to just assume John met Yoko and everything else in his life was meaningless up to that point...Yoko infuriates me enough sometimes, but I still like the woman a great deal.

Basically, my big issue is with Julian. I'm sure others will disagree, but I can't stand reading anymore of this wooing-in-my-misery stuff from Julian. Every time he mentions his dad he has to bring up some points about how he is being ignored and his dad let him down and so on and so forth. I personally feel that Julian, being in his 40s now, should just learn to let go of all this anger. I know that sounds weird, what with John being so confesional and so angst prone. The difference, of course, was that John had pretty much straightened himself out by the time he was in his mid-to-late 30s. At 40, he seemed at enough peace to come out with "Double Fantasy" and be overjoiced at the thought of being a father. And furthermore, he was trying with Julian. What happened to John at the moment when Julian really needed him was unfair and certainly made things horrible for all involved...and for a long, long period of time I could understand Julian's frustration.

But at some point it is probably healthy to have a self-analysis and realize that all that anger and regret and pent-up frustration at your deceased father really isn't doing you any good. John made some mistakes, but Julian should just note them and act against them in his own, quiet way. No need to constantly declare to the world what a jerk your dad was...I just get fed up of reading some of it sometimes.

But anyway, I still like Julian. Porbably less so now, though, but he's still cool. I just had to mention this finally because I couldn't really hold it in. I've only recently felt this strongly about it, seeing as Julian will be turning 43 now in the upcoming year. He (as far as I know) has not had any children or dealt with the level of fame and public obligations his father had...but that's neither here or there. All I say is, Julian should probably stop with the, "My dad was this and wasn't that..." talk and perhaps show us all just what Julian is without having to resort to anything negatively directed at a poor innocent dead man.

I agree with this 100% It is more then time for Julian to get past this especially if he plans to be a father someday.

[HMVNipper]

Because Yoko was the Primary wife. The wife John chose without the duress of "doing the right thing" and marrying a girl he got pregnant.

Oh, come on, do you really believe that?

Sorry, but I maintain that Cynthia has a right to say what she wants about her life with John. And he DID love her once, despite what you might think. And despite Yoko's better efforts, Cynthia and Julian stand as living, breathing testimony to the fact that he had a life before Yoko -- even if she'd rather erase the first son from the record.

I do not say that to villify Yoko, either...as I said, I have defended her before and will continue to when the situation warrants it. But I think your devotion to her, while admirable, is a bit blind and one-sided. I am willing to consider ALL points of view from people who knew John -- and like it or not, Cynthia was married to him and has a story to tell and a right to tell it.

And I just don't really think that the SECOND wife is the "primary" one, sorry...

[beatlegirl9977]

Because Yoko was the Primary wife.
Ok, with that logic, does that mean that Paul was John's primary best friend?? So, Stu Sutcliffe (or George or Ringo or anyone else he was close with), wouldn't be able to talk about him because their story wouldn't be from the "true" source? :confused:

[HMVNipper]

Ok, with that logic, does that mean that Paul was John's primary best friend?? So, Stu Sutcliffe (or George or Ringo or anyone else he was close with), wouldn't be able to talk about him because their story wouldn't be from the "true" source? :confused:

Well, yeah...you didnt know, for example, that every single recollection about John from any person other than Yoko in the Anthology is b.s. too, right? Or any story anyone tells that isn't "pre-approved" by the "primary" wife? Gimme a break...

[ringo_rama]

Yoko's book is not a "dirty laundry" book, and most of it is written by others anyway. It's their memories and tributes to John.

Let's put it this way: which one would you rather be reading on December 8th?

[LovinLennon909]

I really don't have a problem with Cynthia writing a book. In fact, I plan to get it. I like Cynthia. It isn't fair for me to just assume John met Yoko and everything else in his life was meaningless up to that point...Yoko infuriates me enough sometimes, but I still like the woman a great deal.

Basically, my big issue is with Julian. I'm sure others will disagree, but I can't stand reading anymore of this wooing-in-my-misery stuff from Julian. Every time he mentions his dad he has to bring up some points about how he is being ignored and his dad let him down and so on and so forth. I personally feel that Julian, being in his 40s now, should just learn to let go of all this anger. I know that sounds weird, what with John being so confesional and so angst prone. The difference, of course, was that John had pretty much straightened himself out by the time he was in his mid-to-late 30s. At 40, he seemed at enough peace to come out with "Double Fantasy" and be overjoiced at the thought of being a father. And furthermore, he was trying with Julian. What happened to John at the moment when Julian really needed him was unfair and certainly made things horrible for all involved...and for a long, long period of time I could understand Julian's frustration.

But at some point it is probably healthy to have a self-analysis and realize that all that anger and regret and pent-up frustration at your deceased father really isn't doing you any good. John made some mistakes, but Julian should just note them and act against them in his own, quiet way. No need to constantly declare to the world what a jerk your dad was...I just get fed up of reading some of it sometimes.

But anyway, I still like Julian. Porbably less so now, though, but he's still cool. I just had to mention this finally because I couldn't really hold it in. I've only recently felt this strongly about it, seeing as Julian will be turning 43 now in the upcoming year. He (as far as I know) has not had any children or dealt with the level of fame and public obligations his father had...but that's neither here or there. All I say is, Julian should probably stop with the, "My dad was this and wasn't that..." talk and perhaps show us all just what Julian is without having to resort to anything negatively directed at a poor innocent dead man.
:clap1:

I've been thinking the same thing for years. As a flash-in-the-pan success, I think Julian is jealous of what his father achieved, not proud of him for it, so he criticizes his father at every given chance. Lots of Daddies aren't there, Julian, at least yours tried to fix the mistakes he made with you.

[Rellevart]

I'm not a particular fan of Julian's or anything, but I think making judgements about what he should or shouldn't "get over" is really short-sighted. Unless you've been through what he's been through (unbelievably famous dad who neglected you as a child and then was murdered just when it appeared he might be ready to renew a relationship with you as a late teen, all of which was in the media, oh, and by the way, you wanted to go into the same profession as said dad and were constantly compared to him), I don't think it's prudent to say "Oh please. You're 43. Get over it."

[EnchantingLennon]

About Julian: I don't appreciate how Yoko has been trying to push Julian away from John's life story. I don't like how Yoko is treating Sean as a "Golden Boy" and Julian as nothing but an annoying nuisiance. I'm not at all a Yoko fan, if she had treated Julian and other people around John better, then I would have a nicer view point towards her.

About Yoko: Yoko was John's SECOND wife, Cynthia's was John's FIRST wife, and primary usually means one. Yoko is, however, John's WIDOW, so of course Yoko will get say of things about John concerning, just the same as Paul for Linda, Olivia for George, and so on. However, Yoko does not have any sort of control of freedom of speech-- she could sue or whatever, but there's no power and so far, I have not heard anything thing of Yoko trying to stop Cynthia's book from publishing.

As for Cynthia's memory: well, do you remember the day you got married? the day you found out you were pregnant? the day your child was born? do you remember the day you got your Oscar? I mean, you remember the most important days of your life, and Cynthia had a number of them with her life with John, she also remembers the John that she really loved and knew before drugs and fame crept into his system and mind and changed him.

I am really looking forward to her book, and I will say this again as I did say many times, I trust Cynthia's word about John anyday over Albert Goldman, Geoffrey Guiliano, Bill Harry, or whoever researchs or was there from a distance or in a fantasy-negative land anyday. As Susan said, and Senti said, Cynthia WAS THERE, Cynthia wants to share her story, she wants us in with her memories- YES, John wasn't perfect, but neither are we, but we do LOVE John and we can embrace whatever memory or memoriablia that we can possibily get to keep his memory alive. Cynthia is not one to destroy John, she's the one that would protect him and her son. If you don't like her, that's fine, that's fine that you have your own opinions, but you can't ignore facts.

[Sally]

Its funny how people are so sure how they are treating whoever when they have never met them and can only go by what they read. Nobody really knows what goes on behind their front door so who are we to judge?

[HMVNipper]

Yoko's book is not a "dirty laundry" book, and most of it is written by others anyway. It's their memories and tributes to John.

Let's put it this way: which one would you rather be reading on December 8th?

Actually, to me, December 8 is just a day that I light a memorial candle for John every year. I celebrate his birthday and celebrate his life, and while I definitely mourn his death, I do not prefer to dwell on it. My mourning of John will go on for the rest of my life, but how I do it and what I do is nobody's business but mine. Sorry, I had to say that -- I just really didn't like the "what would you rather be reading on December 8" comment. I'm sure you didn't mean it to be hurtful, RingoRama, but it bugged me.

And I would rather read Cynthia's book than yet another book of "recollections" from "Anyone and Everyone Ever Tangentially Connected With or In the Same Room As John Lennon," sorry...I've already got dozens of books with those kinds of reminiscences in them...and you tell me, how are, say, Pete Townshend's memories of John more valid than those of the woman who was MARRIED TO HIM?

I think both books have their place, but all this nasty sniping at Cynthia because she wants to tell a story it is her right to tell is unjust. I also think that perhaps the early press reports and excerpts are playing up the "violent and nasty" stories precisely because that kind of thing causes buzz and sells tabloids, and ultimately, books. I don't think that is all there is to this book, and in fact, I think that Cynthia probably has more nice things to say than not. She has made it patently clear always that she is still very much in love with John, why would she go out of her way to be vicious?

This reminds me of the huge uproar over Pauline Sutcliffe's last book about Stuart. It played up the sordid aspects, such as her comments about John's violent outbursts or the possibility that Stu and John may have had a sexual relationship -- and when I read the book (and reviewed it, there's a thread around here someplace where I posted my review), what I found to be was that all this "controversy" was a tempest in a teapot...the book was a lot less lurid than the advance buzz would have you believe. I think that until we actually SEE this book, all we have to go by is the buzz, and let's face it, lurid buzz sells. I would not want to pre-judge the book based on just a few excerpts and heresay.

And Enchanting, I liked what you said, right on! :thumbu1:

[LucyLennon4me]

And I would rather read Cynthia's book than yet another book of "recollections" from "Anyone and Everyone Ever Tangentially Connected With or In the Same Room As John Lennon," sorry...I've already got dozens of books with those kinds of reminiscences in them...and you tell me, how are, say, Pete Townshend's memories of John more valid than those of the woman who was MARRIED TO HIM?

1) they are objective.
2) they are interesting
3) they have no emotional agenda

As far as Yoko being the "primary" wife I use that word not due to order but due to the amount of insistance that John made clear to the world that she was. Also Yoko spent more time with him than any other woman. 14 years, while Cyn had 10 and May had 2.

[HMVNipper]

Sorry, Lucy, but your debate points are getting weaker and weaker and weaker, IMO...

I don't see how four more years with John than Cynthia had makes Yoko "more valid." ALL of the above-mentioned women had real, solid amounts of time with John, not just a day or two here and there or a quick schtup now and again. (Yes, even May.) There aren't that many women who can say that -- in fact, these three are the ONLY ones who can. Why is it somehow "wrong" for anyone other than Yoko to want to talk about their experiences with the man?

While I must say that I don't think Cynthia or May, or even Yoko, can be "objective" in their opinions of John, to say that their stories are "uninteresting" because there is emotion attached is just hogwash, IMO. And you think YOKO doesn't have an "emotional agenda?' Gimme a break -- you still haven't explained why you believe that Yoko's POV is the "only" valid one...I just don't think your arguments hold water, frankly. Maybe you are the one with the "emotional agenda?" :confused:

Clearly it incenses you that anyone other than Yoko might hold an opinion or have something to say -- that is frightening, frankly, and even smacks of censorship. I believe in freedom of speech and freedom of the press -- and if Cynthia, one of John's TWO WIVES, feels she has something to say, then I'm all for it. Without viewpoints from people who knew him other than Yoko's "approved" one, the world will never know a fair and balanced history of John Lennon's life -- it is up to these other people who actually knew him and loved him to present their stories too, so that it is not lost to the ages or left in the hands of the Goldmans and Giulianos of the world. And while I do respect Yoko (as I have made clear again and again and again), I simply just do not think that her version of history is the only one that is valid -- and in fact, I think if she had her way, she WOULD "erase" those parts of John's life before she came into the picture. Would you really want everything he did with the Beatles to be lost to the ages because Yoko doesn't "approve?" Would you want to pretend Julian doesn't exist? I think that's shameful -- there was so much more to John and his life than Yoko would allow if she had her way...and thank God she isn't getting her way on this!

[LucyLennon4me]

Sorry, Lucy, but your debate points are getting weaker and weaker and weaker, IMO...

I don't see how four more years with John than Cynthia had makes Yoko "more valid." ALL of the above-mentioned women had real, solid amounts of time with John, not just a day or two here and there or a quick schtup now and again. (Yes, even May.) There aren't that many women who can say that -- in fact, these three are the ONLY ones who can. Why is it somehow "wrong" for anyone other than Yoko to want to talk about their experiences with the man?

While I must say that I don't think Cynthia or May, or even Yoko, can be "objective" in their opinions of John, to say that their stories are "uninteresting" because there is emotion attached is just hogwash, IMO. And you think YOKO doesn't have an "emotional agenda?' Gimme a break -- you still haven't explained why you believe that Yoko's POV is the "only" valid one...I just don't think your arguments hold water, frankly. Maybe you are the one with the "emotional agenda?" :confused:

Clearly it incenses you that anyone other than Yoko might hold an opinion or have something to say -- that is frightening, frankly, and even smacks of censorship. I believe in freedom of speech and freedom of the press -- and if Cynthia, one of John's TWO WIVES, feels she has something to say, then I'm all for it. Without viewpoints from people who knew him other than Yoko's "approved" one, the world will never know a fair and balanced history of John Lennon's life -- it is up to these other people who actually knew him and loved him to present their stories too, so that it is not lost to the ages or left in the hands of the Goldmans and Giulianos of the world. And while I do respect Yoko (as I have made clear again and again and again), I simply just do not think that her version of history is the only one that is valid -- and in fact, I think if she had her way, she WOULD "erase" those parts of John's life before she came into the picture. Would you really want everything he did with the Beatles to be lost to the ages because Yoko doesn't "approve?" Would you want to pretend Julian doesn't exist? I think that's shameful -- there was so much more to John and his life than Yoko would allow if she had her way...and thank God she isn't getting her way on this!

John stated over and over that Yoko was the one and only woman for him. He said was bored in his marraige to Cynthia and he said he was miserable during his time with May. This is what JOHN said. Now I understand that Cynthia and May have different points of view and feelings about their time with John and that is their right to tell them. But for me it does not change what JOHN said. Frankly I care more about what JOHN said then any other person he was involved with including Yoko who does have her own tilt to things as well. I do not understand why Yoko was always so jealous of Cynthia since John chose Yoko over her. I CAN understand why Yoko wants to erase May Pang however and that is Yoko's own fault. It seems to be a sore spot for Yoko but Yoko was an idiot (in my opinion) for sending him off with ANY other woman. It seems she feels like she made a big mistake and regrets it now and that seems to be why she is trying to erase it. It does not matter that he had other relationships. It does not matter that they write books about him. What bothers me is that ALL of them yes even Yoko have an "emotional agenda" which I will not go into to avoid more arguements.
I am put off by the press on these books and that they sell the sleaze instead of the sentiment. Sure I am curious to hear Cyn story, but the press reviews have slanted it so far to it being another "dirty laundry book for money" so it is confusing to say the least. I see Yoko trying to keep John's name and memory alive and I have never seen her dish dirt on him, and quite frankly I'm sure she could. She does not and that is why I feel she is the most credible of them all. You may think this is a weak point, and that's fine. I can agree to disagree.

[Zimmerman The Gnome]

I agree with you about Yoko. She has kept herself more dignified and hasn't written a tell all book. Cynthia and May have cheapened themselves this way and have done it purely for the money.

[Asha]

Its funny how people are so sure how they are treating whoever when they have never met them and can only go by what they read. Nobody really knows what goes on behind their front door so who are we to judge?

I was glancing through this today & had the same thought, Sally. Thanks for posting it!

[Sally]

I was glancing through this today & had the same thought, Sally. Thanks for posting it!

Thanks! Good to see you back btw :wave1:

[GeorgieGirl]

I'm not a particular fan of Julian's or anything, but I think making judgements about what he should or shouldn't "get over" is really short-sighted. Unless you've been through what he's been through (unbelievably famous dad who neglected you as a child and then was murdered just when it appeared he might be ready to renew a relationship with you as a late teen, all of which was in the media, oh, and by the way, you wanted to go into the same profession as said dad and were constantly compared to him), I don't think it's prudent to say "Oh please. You're 43. Get over it."

I'm on this page.

I won't judge him. I won't judge Cynthia. I can't hypothesize about their mental and emotional states when I've had my own share of mental and emotional states without my husband (father) being a Beatle. Perhaps what he's saying 'now' is after he's had self-analysis. Self-analysis doesn't produce happy Dr. Phil results. Sometimes it's quite the opposite.

[EnchantingLennon]

John stated over and over that Yoko was the one and only woman for him. He said was bored in his marraige to Cynthia and he said he was miserable during his time with May. This is what JOHN said.

Of course John said those, WHILE he was with Yoko. And also, John said that his marriage to Cynthia wasn't UNhappy, it was like an Amber light, that did NOT at all say that his marriage to Cynthia was boring. Anyway, John has been known to say awful things about the people in his life, bitter things. Maybe if he was alive today he would say nicer things or something, we would never know of course.

But for me it does not change what JOHN said. Frankly I care more about what JOHN said then any other person he was involved with including Yoko who does have her own tilt to things as well. I do not understand why Yoko was always so jealous of Cynthia since John chose Yoko over her.

Like I just said, John said many things, hurtful and awful. Cynthia said that when John claimed that Julian came out of a whiskey bottle on a Saturday night, it hurt and offended her, as did Julian-- Cynthia also said that she could tell that John said it to impress the interviewer, to get a reaction from him. John can be verbally abusive, but he didn't say "I hate Cynthia and Julian", he didn't say "I hate Paul, George and Ringo, and Stu".

As for Yoko, the part of Cynthia was that Cynthia was in John's life first, Cynthia saw John grow from a rebel who didn't give a flying f**k in college to a loved icon around the world. Cynthia was also part of John's past and life, she had a position that couldn't be destroyed or disappear into thin air. Maybe that's part of the reason why Yoko wants to erase Julian and Cynthia?

I am put off by the press on these books and that they sell the sleaze instead of the sentiment. Sure I am curious to hear Cyn story, but the press reviews have slanted it so far to it being another "dirty laundry book for money" so it is confusing to say the least. I see Yoko trying to keep John's name and memory alive and I have never seen her dish dirt on him, and quite frankly I'm sure she could. She does not and that is why I feel she is the most credible of them all. You may think this is a weak point, and that's fine. I can agree to disagree.

That's the press for you- anything negative about a worshipped icon is drooling and $$$$$ for their papers and pens. From the excerpts I have read, I have a feeling of knowing that it has been edited, Cynthia's book should have more detailed stories then the excerpts gived, the excerpts gave John when he first hit Cynthia, his relationship with Mimi, and John's trip to Spain. Cynthia also said that it was the first and last time John hit her; but it shouldn't surprise you that John hit people, he also hit Bob Wooler and Stuart and many other people all the way back from his childhood years. Cynthia also warned that her book will be on one hand "sweet and loving" and the other hand "painful".

[beatlefan]

I see Yoko trying to keep John's name and memory alive and I have never seen her dish dirt on him, and quite frankly I'm sure she could. She does not and that is why I feel she is the most credible of them all. You may think this is a weak point, and that's fine. I can agree to disagree.[/QUOTE]

In actuality, Yoko HAS dished dirt on John quite a bit in her own way. In the Lennon Musical for ex--(and the liner notes inside the John Lennon Anthology set) she begins the Lost Weekend era with John screwing some chick at a party, after which she sends him to LA, which results in him being drunk and thrown out of clubs. She brings out this chick, but never mentions May, of course. (Scardino says "May was insignificant to the story"?? But that chick WAS somehow significant....hmmm.) The audience is left to believe this is ALL he did in LA--- which is completely untrue. He was very productive and also got together with his old friends and jammed with them. He wrote Walls and Bridges there, which as we all know, was a better album than Sometime in NY City. He got healthy. He had a few bad nights. But for the most part, he got alot done (and by the way was happy with May, not miserable...Again he had to say this, as a returning husband. Most men would agree on that I think!! :laugh5: ) His use of heroin stopped during that time. Rather than be honest about Walls & Bridges, and his renewed friendship with McCartney, and returning health, Yoko drags out the bad stuff he did, to show everyone how miserable he must have been. I have an issue with that! (He resumed Heroin use after he went back home.) It's her spin doctoring the story to come out the "Heroine" to use a pun....

[Sally]

I think we just have to accept that none of us here knew John (and if anyone of you did I apologise), and none of us knows what really happened behind closed doors and just leave it at that.

[beatlefan]

1) they are objective.
2) they are interesting
3) they have no emotional agenda

As far as Yoko being the "primary" wife I use that word not due to order but due to the amount of insistance that John made clear to the world that she was. Also Yoko spent more time with him than any other woman. 14 years, while Cyn had 10 and May had 2.

:confused: Not sure where your timing come from. If you're beginning with 1966 on Yoko then you are overlapping cyn's marriage to John and using time when Yoko may have been in hot pursuit but John wasn't buying it at first. Starting with 68 perhaps it's at the most 12. Cyn had ten with him if you start with 1957 when they first got together as a romantic couple. May officially had 18 months, but her friendship with John began in 1970 and went till his death, in different forms. So she also gets 10 years in my book. The three women are fairly equal in time. And if you got really technical you could subtract May's 18 months from Yoko's time, and then more later on after he went home and they spent most of the time in seperate parts of the house! OH well....I think it's about equal. 10/10/10. There ya go.

[beatlefan]

I see Yoko trying to keep John's name and memory alive and I have never seen her dish dirt on him, and quite frankly I'm sure she could. She does not and that is why I feel she is the most credible of them all. You may think this is a weak point, and that's fine. I can agree to disagree.

To clarify--this quote above came from LucyLennon4me. It posted without the source for some reason. --cheers

[Asha]

Thanks! Good to see you back btw :wave1:

Awww, ta very much!

Life is allowing me a little time here once again & I'm hoping I can stay a while!

[LucyLennon4me]

In actuality, Yoko HAS dished dirt on John quite a bit in her own way. In the Lennon Musical for ex--(and the liner notes inside the John Lennon Anthology set) she begins the Lost Weekend era with John screwing some chick at a party, after which she sends him to LA, which results in him being drunk and thrown out of clubs. She brings out this chick, but never mentions May, of course. (Scardino says "May was insignificant to the story"?? But that chick WAS somehow significant....hmmm.) The audience is left to believe this is ALL he did in LA--- which is completely untrue. He was very productive and also got together with his old friends and jammed with them. He wrote Walls and Bridges there, which as we all know, was a better album than Sometime in NY City. He got healthy. He had a few bad nights. But for the most part, he got alot done (and by the way was happy with May, not miserable...Again he had to say this, as a returning husband. Most men would agree on that I think!! :laugh5: ) His use of heroin stopped during that time. Rather than be honest about Walls & Bridges, and his renewed friendship with McCartney, and returning health, Yoko drags out the bad stuff he did, to show everyone how miserable he must have been. I have an issue with that! (He resumed Heroin use after he went back home.) It's her spin doctoring the story to come out the "Heroine" to use a pun....

Yoko was explaining WHY there WAS a "lost weekend" with those liner notes. For years no one knew or could understand why she sent him off with May. So Yoko explained it. John said all through the lost weekend that he was miserable and it shows on his face and in his music. He did not say these things only when he returned to Yoko, he said it all the way along on tape and in print. Others who were there with John have verified this. Also May was not the only woman John slept with during that time. There were many others. There has been testimony to this from many who "were there" some of whom are now dead as well. Again I feel that Yoko does not want to mention May because TO YOKO May is something that reminds her of the troubled time Yoko and John were going through. Also the fact that Yoko arranged, controlled, and ended the whole May thing, gives her much more of a right to decide how she wants the subject to be handled. Now if Yoko had NOT arranged the May situation and John did that on his own I would have to agree with all of you that Yoko is wrong to omit her and she would be seen as a shrew with a jealous and biased point of view.

Another thing, any woman who is married to a man who was not a virgin when she married him, knows that that man has had past relationships, and MOST women leave the past in the past. What woman would invite an ex wife to dinner, or include all her husbands past relationships in their current life? no one. Why should Yoko? Yoko is not telling the story of John's life as a biography, Yoko is telling the story of Yoko and John from the time they met. The past does not matter to her. I agree that to get a picture of John's WHOLE LIFE, you cannot rely on the story of ANY ONE wife or girlfriend, you have to sift through all the information, discrepancys, truths, lies and sensationalism and draw the truth out of that.

[Rellevart]

Maybe it's just me, but I find it really funny that we're complaining about the press sensationalizing this book and playing up the violence and scandal, when a topic titled "Excerpts from Cynthia's book" has a page and a half of replies, whereas the one with the spicier, sensationalized titled (this one) has five. Smirk.

[SnarkyKat]

I think we just have to accept that none of us here knew John (and if anyone of you did I apologise), and none of us knows what really happened behind closed doors and just leave it at that.

Sally, I think it best if you do not bring your Earth logic into this conversation. It's way beyond that, at this point. Save yourself!

[twovirgins]

let her make some $$ I say . she was paid like 400 dollars a month while John was making 20,000 dollars a week! and Julian was given 250,000 dollars out of aprox 250 million dollar estate and hes just as much Johns son as Sean..So let Cyn make some $$ and Im sure it will find its way to Julian too

[Sally]

let her make some $$ I say . she was paid like 400 dollars a month while John was making 20,000 dollars a week! and Julian was given 250,000 dollars out of aprox 250 million dollar estate and hes just as much Johns son as Sean..So let Cyn make some $$ and Im sure it will find its way to Julian too

yes but my dear erik, all this is just what has been written, none of it is fact!

[Sally]

Maybe it's just me, but I find it really funny that we're complaining about the press sensationalizing this book and playing up the violence and scandal, when a topic titled "Excerpts from Cynthia's book" has a page and a half of replies, whereas the one with the spicier, sensationalized titled (this one) has five. Smirk.

:laugh5: :laugh5: Nice one Rell!

[twovirgins]

yes but my dear erik, all this is just what has been written, none of it is fact!
Im a fiction writter ! :P na na na na neener neener *holds thumb to nose and wiggles fingers*

[Kramerica]

She TEETERS on hatred of the beatles. She's a jealous self hating animal.

[Kramerica]

Teeters

[Zimmerman The Gnome]

She TEETERS on hatred of the beatles. She's a jealous self hating animal.

A bit harsh.

[twovirgins]

are these Teeters?
http://www.carlsonherefords.com/images/2003_Fall/8055.jpg

[Zimmerman The Gnome]

Just plain old Teets I think!:laugh5:

[SnarkyKat]

She TEETERS on hatred of the beatles. She's a jealous self hating animal.

Teeters?

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

[ringo_rama]

Sorry about the 12/8 comment, Nipper.

But honestly, I'm not understanding some things.

A) Why does Cynthia feel the public needs to know these stories?
B) Why do some people praise Cyn for publishing her tell-all book while also praising Pattie Boyd for refusing to publish a tell-all book?
C) Why is Cyn's tell-all book ok if Peter Brown's wasn't?

Like I said, I probably will read Cyn's book. I liked Pete Shotton's book about John which covers the early years plus the same period Cyn's book will essentially cover. But I'm not sure why she wants the world to know these stories when they're private family memories.

[HMVNipper]

Apology accepted, RR, no worries...I know you weren't trying deliberately to be upsetting, it's not a big deal. Thanks.

Re the Peter Brown book -- well, as muckraking and tabloidy as it is, I don't think it's all that bad, especially when you compare it with stuff from people like Goldman and Giuliano! It's downright tame compared to that!!

And I don't so much think people in this thread are "praising" Cyn for telling her story as saying she has a RIGHT to tell it...does that make any sense?

And as I said before, I would be willing to bet that the majority of this book is not nasty and lurid and "tell-all." It's probably a lot more forthright than "A Twist of Lennon" was, but remember that a lot of the speculation we are engaging in here is based upon excerpts of what I am sure are the most lurid parts of the book...designed to create buzz. See my comment above about Pauline Sutcliffe's book and the tempest in the teapot...

I bet this won't be all that bad.

[HMVNipper]

She TEETERS on hatred of the beatles. She's a jealous self hating animal.

Are you referring to Cynthia here? Or someone else?

[Rellevart]

A) Why does Cynthia feel the public needs to know these stories?

Maybe it's not so much that she feels the public needs to know as it is that she feels SHE needs to tell them.

Maybe she wants to correct some misconceptions that are out there.

Maybe she wants vindication in some way.

Maybe she wants money.

Maybe she feels overshadowed by the whole "John and Yoko" mythology and wants to go "Hey, I existed too!"

Maybe she wants to share her perceptions of "her" John.

Maybe she's getting older and she wants to write this all down while she can still remember it.

There are a zillion reasons and I don't know which one it might be.

[HMVNipper]

And, IMO, ALL of those are valid reasons! Good points, Rell!

[Kramerica]

I was referring to Lucy. She knows what I mean.

[MonaMe577]

And as I said before, I would be willing to bet that the majority of this book is not nasty and lurid and "tell-all." It's probably a lot more forthright than "A Twist of Lennon" was, but remember that a lot of the speculation we are engaging in here is based upon excerpts of what I am sure are the most lurid parts of the book...designed to create buzz.

Exactly. I think this is what it ultimately comes down to. Whatever Cyn's reasons are for writing this book, the point is that she did write it. Now we all have a choice, we can read it or not read it as we see fit, but I do think it's a little ridiculous to argue over what's included in the book or whether she should have written it when it hasn't even hit the market yet.

How many times have we seen an exciting preview for a TV show, filled with racy and provacative images, only to discover that all the scenes are out of context and the actual show isn't nearly as exciting as it was played up to be? And look at all the controversy John drummed up with the whole "bigger than Jesus" thing. When you read the actual interview, you can see this comment wasn't nearly as inflammatory as it was taken on its own.

I think I'll reserve any further judgement until September 30th.

[LucyLennon4me]

I was referring to Lucy. She knows what I mean.

I have no idea what you mean. Never heard the term teeters before.

[LucyLennon4me]

She TEETERS on hatred of the beatles. She's a jealous self hating animal.


I have no idea what you mean by this. I have posted my points of view in a civilized manner and have even stated I can agree to disagree.

I see no reason to be insulted like this when I am not being insulting to anyone else here. I post my point of view in what I feel to be a fair and polite manner, stating my observations that I have gathered from many years and sources. I do not hate the beatles, myself, or anyone on this board. I have not been nasty or used foul words, and I do not know why this hostility has been flung at me, when I have obeyed the rules and am not being nasty.

I may have a difference of opinion to some of the posts made and I have tried
to explain my point of view clearly and unemotionally.

I am curious to what the moderators have to say about this insulting post from a person I do not know, since I have been following the rules here.

[MonaMe577]

See, when I first read the comment, I thought he was talking about Yoko. But if he is talking about you, Lucy, then yes, I agree--it's totally uncalled for.

No name-calling, please. Let's all try to be civilized here.

[LucyLennon4me]

See, when I first read the comment, I thought he was talking about Yoko. But if he is talking about you, Lucy, then yes, I agree--it's totally uncalled for.

No name-calling, please. Let's all try to be civilized here.


Thank you Mona, I have tried to have a discussion here that is all. I am not here to cause trouble, and I feel that all the different points of view being stated have made it a lively discussion at that. I have never claimed that my points of view are the only correct ones or any such thing. Again when I agree with a post I say so, and when I disagree I try to do so in a fair and balanced manner presenting my point of view for the purpose of discussion only.

None of the moderators have any issues with me even when they disagree with my point of view as I have shown respect to them and this group, so I do not understand why this person whom I do not know has chosen to be nasty to me.

[HMVNipper]

Okay, moderator talking...in cases where the forum's regular mods are not available and another mod is, it is acceptable for ANY mod to step in, so don't anyone leap on me, please. As long as no one uses foul language, I don't see any insults here...let's try to keep this discussion civil and on topic.

Back to the discussion, please. :smile1:

[erinluv182]

Sorry about the 12/8 comment, Nipper.

But honestly, I'm not understanding some things.

A) Why does Cynthia feel the public needs to know these stories?
B) Why do some people praise Cyn for publishing her tell-all book while also praising Pattie Boyd for refusing to publish a tell-all book?
C) Why is Cyn's tell-all book ok if Peter Brown's wasn't?

Like I said, I probably will read Cyn's book. I liked Pete Shotton's book about John which covers the early years plus the same period Cyn's book will essentially cover. But I'm not sure why she wants the world to know these stories when they're private family memories.

Well the point is that they are Cyn's private memories to share if she wishes. The poor woman has endured enough, and actually, the whole world already knows a LOT about her private marriage. Is it so much for to ask that she be allowed to talk about her marriage from her point of view?

If people want to praise Pattie for not writing about George that's fine. I would love it if she wrote one, but the point is that people can praise both decisions if they wish. There's no black and white, right and wrong answer to this. If Pattie doesn't want to write a book, then good for her. If Cyn wants to, well then good for her too!

And in response to everything on this thread in general, I applaud Cynthia for writing this book. I think the reason everyone is getting upset and why they feel like she should not release this book is because you all KNOW that John treated Cyn very shabbily. So before even reading it, you're thinking that she probably dishes some juciy stuff. So apparently you're getting upset since John is dead, and you think it's terrible to de-fame him. But what is she going to talk about that we really don't already have an inkling about? About the time John hit her? John talked about that openly. About how John cheated on her constantly? Umm... if you don't know that already, then I don't know what bios of the Beatles you've read and managed to miss that fact. About how John was rarely there for Julian during their marriage? See the answer to the last one. John was NOT perfect, people. He did some very bad things in his lifetime. It's natural that we want to turn him into a saint, because he was really lovely, but he did make mistakes, and he was a nasty guy sometimes to a lot of people.

I think Cyn's book will be great, I think she has a right to write it, and I think she even has a right to the money.

And of course, I need to make a dig at Yoko. I have a question for those of you who are so mad about Cyn's book:

Why is it OK for Yoko to talk about her life with John constantly, but the instant Cyn does it you're all leaping about ready to pull her hair out? Is she somehow less deserving to talk about the man she loved simply because he dumped her?

[beatlebangs1964]

are these Teeters?
http://www.carlsonherefords.com/images/2003_Fall/8055.jpg

Teats! The cow's udder has teats! And her teats don't teeter either! :laugh5: :joker:

[ShellyP]

Some of you say you have not heard the word "teeter." It means being on the edge of something rocking back and forth, trying not to fall off. It could be used like this:
The car was teetering on the edge of the cliff.

I am just reading this whole thread. Back to what someone was saying about Julian having issues with his dad...John had issues with BOTH parents, and spent his whole life NOT getting over it. He wrote songs about it, did primal scream therapy, and ended up addicted to drugs. I'm sure most of the angst in his life he blamed on his parental issues. Julian's issues with John are minor compared to John's issues with his parents. John has admitted that he did the same thing to Julian as was done to him.

[beatlefan]

I have no idea what you mean by this. I have posted my points of view in a civilized manner and have even stated I can agree to disagree.

I see no reason to be insulted like this when I am not being insulting to anyone else here. I post my point of view in what I feel to be a fair and polite manner, stating my observations that I have gathered from many years and sources. I do not hate the beatles, myself, or anyone on this board. I have not been nasty or used foul words, and I do not know why this hostility has been flung at me, when I have obeyed the rules and am not being nasty.

I may have a difference of opinion to some of the posts made and I have tried
to explain my point of view clearly and unemotionally.

I am curious to what the moderators have to say about this insulting post from a person I do not know, since I have been following the rules here.


I hope I'm not breaking any forum rules by commenting in general on the trends here which are culminating to this state of heightened emotion: But I'm seeing where some of this is going. Lucy, your deep hatred of May Pang is widely known, it's been evident Absolutely Elsewhere, Here There and Everywhere. So the point I suspect here is to say Gimme Some Truth....because now you are stamping on Cynthia for no reason. So where does it all come from? I'm not sure if all our arguments are getting anywhere or if we are wasting our time.
This thread started off in a shocking place with your comments, let's face it...(unless you're a teen) but has spurred on many interesting sidebar conversations, with most people giving their reasons why Mrs. Lennon #1 should be "allowed" to write a book, or why she should not. Most people are fair and intelligent, and the debate is fun. But really, the last caller was correct to once again point out that she does have a right to, and guess what? You don't have to buy it. Plain and simple. So is the point of your opening thread to incite others to also hate May and Cyn? Or just to vent, and come up with reasons why you think you make sense? (i.e., Yoko's the "primary" wife so she's the only one allowed to talk about John...huh?)
That being said, it seems like you are beginning to listen to what people are saying and perhaps coming down off the hissing fest. I don't know, I hope so. Women who have cat fights with other women to this degree of hatred, (even one sided like this) are in intense competition over one thing--the man in question, dead or alive. So what's that all about--because unless I'm wrong you never dated John, right?
I don't know if any of our comments have helped you on that path of healing...or not. It may be going Nowhere...I don't know. But good luck in your journey, and remember, hatred only poisons the soul. I assume you don't know May personally or Cynthia. So what gives you the right? To quote Ringo, "Choose Love."
~peace out .

[LucyLennon4me]

I hope I'm not breaking any forum rules by commenting in general on the trends here which are culminating to this state of heightened emotion: But I'm seeing where some of this is going. Lucy, your deep hatred of May Pang is widely known, it's been evident Absolutely Elsewhere, Here There and Everywhere. So the point I suspect here is to say Gimme Some Truth....because now you are stamping on Cynthia for no reason. So where does it all come from? I'm not sure if all our arguments are getting anywhere or if we are wasting our time.
This thread started off in a shocking place with your comments, let's face it...(unless you're a teen) but has spurred on many interesting sidebar conversations, with most people giving their reasons why Mrs. Lennon #1 should be "allowed" to write a book, or why she should not. Most people are fair and intelligent, and the debate is fun. But really, the last caller was correct to once again point out that she does have a right to, and guess what? You don't have to buy it. Plain and simple. So is the point of your opening thread to incite others to also hate May and Cyn? Or just to vent, and come up with reasons why you think you make sense? (i.e., Yoko's the "primary" wife so she's the only one allowed to talk about John...huh?)
That being said, it seems like you are beginning to listen to what people are saying and perhaps coming down off the hissing fest. I don't know, I hope so. Women who have cat fights with other women to this degree of hatred, (even one sided like this) are in intense competition over one thing--the man in question, dead or alive. So what's that all about--because unless I'm wrong you never dated John, right?
I don't know if any of our comments have helped you on that path of healing...or not. It may be going Nowhere...I don't know. But good luck in your journey, and remember, hatred only poisons the soul. I assume you don't know May personally or Cynthia. So what gives you the right? To quote Ringo, "Choose Love."
~peace out .

I never said I hated anyone. I said I do not like or care for Cynthia or May too much. I have tried to explain why this is. I like Yoko more. I am not fighting with anyone. Does having a different point of view constitute a fight? I dont think so. Others here have said that some of these women are only doing these books for money. No one is jumping on them. This thread I started did not begin with MY words but with a post I found on another Beatle website. I started this thread to get different points of view, because I am curious about this book, and what other folks would think about it. I did feel a little upset about John being dished about, but in perspective you are right. We do know most of what has been said. I got upset about the press sensationalizing the dirt and I feel that is wrong to do about anyone. If Mimi wrote a book dishing Cynthia i would be the first to defend Cynthia. I do agree that Cynthia has every right to tell her story no matter where or how she fit into Lennon's life. Ever since Goldmans book came out I have been wary and incensed at how far people could go with telling lies without the subject being able to defend their side of the story. I mean since Goldman could do it, what is to stop anyone else from doing it. Maybe I overeacted, but again seeing how other people feel and think has given me insight.

Peace

[EnchantingLennon]

When you write a book, you get money. When you release a cd, you get money. When you release a movie, you get money. Whatever Cynthia choose to do with her memories, she will get money either way. We pay money to hear or read her talk. And for all you know, she could be giving money away to charity. Or to pay bills, like how we work to pay our bills. She's human just like the rest of us and she needs to get by.

[beatlebangs1964]

Fan,

Thank you for your words of wisdom. :smile1: :thumbu2: You made good points and now, in re the thread and interesting sidebar topics which won't teeter into anything too far off the Long & Winding Road, we can continue to Give Peace a Chance! :thumbu2:

[Loka]

*Loka has just finished digging through this thread*
Ok, since it looks hopeless to quote posts from the first page and the writers might be aged immensely since they wrote them and can´t remember anymore, I´m not adding anything to the topic itself - sue me.
I just felt I HAD to remind some people that I once called Paul a "dickhead" for insisting on opening and closing the Live 8 - show in London this year, he said otherwise he wouldn´t appear, despite the honourable purpose. I received a lot AU CONTRAIRE, MADAME for that and I regret calling him names.
From the first reading I couldn´t believe that "jealous, self-hating animal" could be directed towards a member of this forum and I thought the author must have meant Yoko or Cinthia, whomever, which would NOT have been correct and does not focuss on anything matter-of-fact. But as it turned out, Kramerica addressed Lucy and THAT is The Apocalypse.
I´m no moderator but I would like to ask everybody to keep it moderate enough so that the reason, Cyn´s book, can still be visible in every post. Bash her, bash Yoko, bash John, but PLEASE don´t start hatred-sonnets towards each other. We all share something at least, the Beatles, and shouldn´t judge one another for the reason one might have joined here.
Don´t know. Reprove me again, but I just had to add something to this hassle.

[Asha]

Nicely put, Loka!

I wish it could be a discussion, rather than appearing like a finger pointing session. :cry3:

[beatlebangs1964]

All you need is love.
All we are saying is give peace a chance. :smile1:

[flowergirl]

I am reluctant to make a judgement on this book because i really do not know enought yet but i think i would like to read it.

[beatlebangs1964]

That is fair, Flower. I will reserve judgment until I actually read this book, which I intend to do.

[ABCKO]

I have no idea what you mean by this. I have posted my points of view in a civilized manner...

... and I do not know why this hostility has been flung at me, when I have obeyed the rules and am not being nasty.



Not that I necessarily agree with the person that got nasty with you...

... but, for starters, starting a topic with the title ''Cynthia Lennon CRAPS In Public''... doesn't strike as being a ''civilised'' way of putting it.

Further, as an actor that I quite like once said: ''Why is it that when people writes nice things (which aren't always true or accurate) about an artist, it's O.K.., but when someone writes something not-so-nice about an artist, they call that slander ?''

[LucyLennon4me]

... but, for starters, starting a topic with the title ''Cynthia Lennon CRAPS In Public''... doesn't strike as being a ''civilised'' way of putting it.

Again, as I have said before that was the title of the article, not my title.
I found it at beatlesnumber9.com

[Zimmerman The Gnome]

Lay off Lucy! She is entitled to an opinion and she gives it. Some may not agree but thats not the point. A forum is for expressing your views and last time I looked this was a forum!

[LucyLennon4me]

what is to lay off? I was explaining the origin of this article, which I posted only to discuss. I did not write the article. Sure it is controversial, why should that be a problem? If we are all intitled to an opinion it is reasonable to understand that not all opinions are going to be agreed upon which is fine.

[Zimmerman The Gnome]

I was saying for others to Lay off you Lucy! Feel they are being very unfair to you.:wave1:

[LucyLennon4me]

oh. :blush4:

[HMVNipper]

Okay...can we please stop the bickering?

'nuf said.

[ABCKO]

Again, as I have said before that was the title of the article, not my title.
I found it at beatlesnumber9.com

Oups, my mistake then... sorry, hadn't noticed that you'd mentionned that.

Still, how vulgar would an article title have to be before one decided not to quote it, word for word ?

I remember a moderator here once telling me not to quote Paul's lyrics from "Big boys bickering", because this was a "family oriented" board.