BeatleLinks Fab Forum

BeatleLinks Fab Forum (http://www.beatlelinks.net/forums/index.php)
-   Menlove Avenue (http://www.beatlelinks.net/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=18)
-   -   John in 1980 (http://www.beatlelinks.net/forums/showthread.php?t=43331)

4iiiis Apr 30, 2011 09:18 PM

John in 1980
 
I was surfing on youtube a few days ago for some John music videos and came upon this nicely done fan compilation. The soundtrack is "You Can't Do That" and it has tons of pics of John and family in 1980.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zQ-rJj8vmZE
There are many, many great pictures, most I've never seen before--but I couldn't help noticing how skinny John was! Not even skinny, more like emaciated. I showed the video to my girlfriend who is a nutritionist and she even agreed that John looks considerably thinner than he did even in the 1970s when he was a pretty slender guy. What is up with that? Was he OK? I'm not at all referring to drugs because I don't actually think he looks like he's strung out in any of these pictures, but he just looks toooooo skinny (& hungry!) It made me realize I haven't looked at too many pictures of John in 1980. The ones I have seen, like the covers of Double Fantasy and Milk & Honey I think he looks pretty good. What's the deal on this??

Badgirl66 Apr 30, 2011 11:37 PM

I have the book



http://www.amazon.com/John-Lennon-Su...4231817&sr=8-1

Apple Scruff May 01, 2011 12:01 AM

^ That book is SO beautiful. Gorgeous pics.

Badgirl66 May 01, 2011 12:55 AM

on the end of this book are the lyrics of Double Fantasy

Maia 66 May 01, 2011 09:18 AM

The whole "John was too skinny in 1980" thing is a huge debate/battle in the Lennon fan camp. I'm on the side of "he was way too skinny and unhealthy looking," but... then again, there are some photos where he looks okay. Here's an example where I think he looks thin, but definitely not emaciated:



My belief is that he was still doing coke (it was 1980, after all), but the "conventional wisdom" said it was the macrobiotic diet Yoko had him on. Who knows for sure? Personally, I think he may have had an eating disorder because John had a lot of issues, and when someone once called him "the fat Beatle" I think he took it very hard...

Apple Scruff May 01, 2011 11:27 AM

^ Maia, that picture you posted is simply gorgeous. He still looks SO skinny, but it doesn't look unpleasant on him [in this photo].

(Slightly OT but I love the way John dressed in 1980. I think that alone deserves a thread. Like, this monochromatic set with some yellow-toned wayfarers is hot. I can't even...)

I'm along the same line of reasoning as you on the matter. I do know that they found in John's system, upon his death, not a trace of any drug other than caffeine and nicotine. And cocaine normally stays in the system for days...so if he was doing coke, I imagine it was dabbling.

I agree that he was very insecure about his weight. He started becoming alarmingly thinner in 1966. Like, you can even see the difference in him when they were on their tour in '66. He definitely looks much thinner, and at that point he really shouldn't have lost any more weight. He was skinny enough right there. From that point on there were periods where he just looked alarmingly thin- and the late 70s/1980 is very much in that camp.

I also believe he was a very strict macrobiotic follower. He would pass along this book to people he knew:

http://www.amazon.com/Sugar-Blues-Wi.../dp/0446343129 and was obsessed with how many times he chewed his food: http://macrobiotics.co.uk/chewwell.htm

I read that Sean wasn't allowed to really eat any candy but was given things like Nori seaweed sheets or dried fish treats (um, ew). And John ate like miso soup for breakfast and tons of kale, brown rice, etc.

Yoko said he would cheat and have coffee and dark chocolate because he LOVED it, but even those things aren't exactly glazed in fat.

And also, what I never took note of but probably should have, is the fact that John's family (mom, dad, aunts, etc.) were all kind of slight/slender people. Like his sisters, for example, are pretty thin women. As are Sean and Julian (I met Sean in person and he was shockingly tiny). So maybe it was just John's natural propensity to be thinner. I mean, he wasn't really following his macrobiotic diet that strictly in the early 70s and he STILL was pretty skinny, so....

darkhorse23 May 01, 2011 09:59 PM

It amazes me that people (even "fans?") try to tarnish others'. I just don't get it. What is there to "gain" by "proving" John was using illegal drugs at the time he was killed. I can understand a positive effort, but I'm glad I'm not one all caught up in negative energy.

I thought John looked great. It kind of sucks that people who are thin through healthy diet and lifestyles are thought of as "sickly" or "unhealthy" by overweight people.

4iiiis May 01, 2011 10:54 PM

I appreciate the responses. I don't own this book but I certainly want it. Double fantasy is such an amazing, wonderful, beautiful creation that I can't get enough of it!

I think this macrobiotic diet is crazy restrictive. I was reading a little of what Apple Scruff linked and that seems like a very hard thing to follow. My girlfriend tells me, though, that it is extremely healthy if done correctly.

I recall reading a post from Sean on his board where he mentioned that he was raised macrobiotic and is still macro, but not as strictly. Anyway, check out these pics of John. I'm surprised there isn't much talk about it:










Snoopy66 May 02, 2011 02:00 AM

Hi :wave1:

It's indeed an interesting debate, trying to find out, why John looked so thin in 1980. First, I don't think he must have been taken coke, just because he was thin. In 1965 John was already on drugs and looked chubby, so... He said personally that he was on a strict macrobiotic diet, which I think was the main reason. Generally, looking skinny doesn't have to mean being unhealthy :rolleyes:. Finally, it also very much depends on his haircut, which he changed several times during 1980.

There are some pictures (like the one Maia shows in her posting) in which John really looks good; I mean "thin", but "okay" and not unhealthy at all. It's true that there are some pictures of this period in which he looks unfavorble and way too thin, like the one taken in the airplane, which you attached above. This (bad :afraid2:) haircut made him look even thinner than he actually was. On the other hand, I think John looked very good with the haircut from the pictures of "Double Fantasy" and "Milk of Honey" :teeth1:.

Snoopy

Apple Scruff May 02, 2011 03:38 AM

John in 1980 is up there with my favorite period of all-time for him, artistically and physically speaking. I actually think he looked gorgeous 9 times out of 10 and so full of life in his interviews. I loved ALL the music he put out, I loved his style, his outlook on life...it's all very bittersweet for me.

I never go to the drug thing first in this case. Like I mentioned, there wasn't anything found in his system anyway so that's not typically the signs of a drug addict- but it can't be ignored that many cruel people have jumped to this theory alone as the reason.

I think 4iiiis that the fact even Sean mentions macrobiotics being such a major part of his lifestyle is a good enough indication that John had adapted a very strict plan. I'm a huge health advocate and I have personally studied various healthy lifestyle approaches- especially macrobiotics. It is strict but incredibly rewarding if you can handle it. The benefits ate extraordinary, not just weight-wise. :)

Maia 66 May 02, 2011 07:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Apple Scruff (Post 1060579)
I'm a huge health advocate and I have personally studied various healthy lifestyle approaches- especially macrobiotics. It is strict but incredibly rewarding if you can handle it. The benefits ate extraordinary, not just weight-wise. :)

Obviously, it has done well by Yoko... she looks great at 78!!

Like I mentioned above, this whole issue is a big debate and it stirs up a lot of emotions in people. As a life-long Lennon fan, I find nothing offensive when other fans wonder if John did drugs... after all, 96.2% of all rock stars in 1980 were regular drug users. :wink2: No judgment, just being realistic.

And sometimes I wonder why some of those who think John looked perfectly healthy in '80 get so upset when someone even mentions that he looked slightly unwell. I mean, George was a very thin guy, but you don't hear people talk about him looking unhealthy. Why? Because he didn't look unhealthy. To many of us, John did... and why is that so wrong?

But, then again, who knows? There's so much about John and the three other Beatles that we'll never know. But because they mean so much to us, we all have our opinions and theories...

Apple Scruff May 02, 2011 09:08 PM

I find it an interesting topic. John was extremely insecure. He had a lot of insecurities he wrestled with yet he was this beautifully gifted man who wrote music that brought so many people happiness, love, warmth, and made people feel stronger and more confident. Artists like John create for the people. Their work becomes other people's anthems. It's natural to feel protective and want to know as much as you can about someone who has impacted your life in that way. I don't think it's strange and I appreciate this topic.

Also, I have NEVER seen that pic of John in the airplane! Where/when was it taken?

AeolianCadence May 02, 2011 10:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by darkhorse23 (Post 1060570)
It amazes me that people (even "fans?") try to tarnish others'. I just don't get it. What is there to "gain" by "proving" John was using illegal drugs at the time he was killed. I can understand a positive effort, but I'm glad I'm not one all caught up in negative energy.

I thought John looked great. It kind of sucks that people who are thin through healthy diet and lifestyles are thought of as "sickly" or "unhealthy" by overweight people.

The women who have opined that John went through periods of looking skinnier than is healthy have all established on other threads that they are devoted fans and supporters of him. Not to speak for anyone else, but I am confident that the last thing they would want to do is "tarnish" him. And please don't assume that people who are concerned about John's weight are themselves overweight. As a person who is on the low end of "normal," I get that thinner people often are unfairly maligned. But I do agree that there were times when John looked alarmingly thin. (And I agree it's natural to feel protective.)

4iiiis May 02, 2011 10:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Apple Scruff (Post 1060640)
I find it an interesting topic. John was extremely insecure. He had a lot of insecurities he wrestled with yet he was this beautifully gifted man who wrote music that brought so many people happiness, love, warmth, and made people feel stronger and more confident. Artists like John create for the people. Their work becomes other people's anthems. It's natural to feel protective and want to know as much as you can about someone who has impacted your life in that way. I don't think it's strange and I appreciate this topic.

Also, I have NEVER seen that pic of John in the airplane! Where/when was it taken?

Thanks for all of your great comments AppleScruff :wave1: The picture of John was apparently taken as John was leaving South Africa in June 1980 to return home to New York. I found it in this great Beatle Px website:
http://beatlephotoblog.com/tag/1980/page/2

Apple Scruff May 02, 2011 10:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 4iiiis (Post 1060647)
Thanks for all of your great comments AppleScruff :wave1: The picture of John was apparently taken as John was leaving South Africa in June 1980 to return home to New York. I found it in this great Beatle Px website:
http://beatlephotoblog.com/tag/1980/page/2

Thank you!!! Omgosh! There are sooooooo many cool pics on that link. Thank you 4iiiis!!!

4iiiis May 02, 2011 10:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Apple Scruff (Post 1060648)
Thank you!!! Omgosh! There are sooooooo many cool pics on that link. Thank you 4iiiis!!!

You're welcome AppleScruff! Here's some other pictures of John in 1980 that show John looking very good, imho. What do you think?











Man, he really looks like Julian here, no?

Apple Scruff May 02, 2011 11:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 4iiiis (Post 1060649)



Man, he really looks like Julian here, no?

There are some pics where Julian's resemblance to his dad is SO uncanny. Like this one:


(Look at the chin, nose length, eyes, hair color, etc.)

Apple Scruff May 02, 2011 11:01 PM

But back on-topic. Like I said earlier, I believe John looked really beautiful for the most part in 1980. But he was very thin. He just looked...delicate. Kind of fragile, which in retrospect is very poignant considering what was to happen. :(

Maia 66 May 03, 2011 05:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Apple Scruff (Post 1060640)
John was extremely insecure. He had a lot of insecurities he wrestled with yet he was this beautifully gifted man who wrote music that brought so many people happiness, love, warmth, and made people feel stronger and more confident. Artists like John create for the people. Their work becomes other people's anthems. It's natural to feel protective and want to know as much as you can about someone who has impacted your life in that way.

Beautifully said!!

Quote:

Originally Posted by AeolianCadence (Post 1060645)
The women who have opined that John went through periods of looking skinnier than is healthy have all established on other threads that they are devoted fans and supporters of him. Not to speak for anyone else, but I am confident that the last thing they would want to do is "tarnish" him. I do agree that there were times when John looked alarmingly thin. (And I agree it's natural to feel protective.)

Also beautifully said!!

:cool1:

Snoopy66 May 03, 2011 08:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Apple Scruff (Post 1060652)
But back on-topic. Like I said earlier, I believe John looked really beautiful for the most part in 1980. But he was very thin. He just looked...delicate. Kind of fragile, which in retrospect is very poignant considering what was to happen. :(

Hi :wave1:

Me too; I think John looked mostly very handsome during his comeback in 1980 :cool1: and also shows a relaxed attitude which is quite surprising after 5 years of retirement. He really seemed to be in a mood like "starting over" :music2: Sometimes I got the feeling that maybe he felt a bit too secure :wink2:, especially on the streets of N.Y.

Snoopy

Lucy May 03, 2011 12:22 PM

Maybe it was just part of his natural aging process. Some people get chunkier as they age....some slimmer. I think his face looking narrower was down to age.

In some pics he looks amazing, in others he looks maybe a little bit frail....but not every pic can be perfect!

Apple Scruff May 03, 2011 09:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lucy (Post 1060680)
Maybe it was just part of his natural aging process. Some people get chunkier as they age....some slimmer. I think his face looking narrower was down to age.

In some pics he looks amazing, in others he looks maybe a little bit frail....but not every pic can be perfect!

I don't know about that. I personally believe he was naturally a slender guy, but John in 1980 didn't look "naturally" thin. He had bones sticking out in a lot of pics for goodness sakes. He was just really limiting what he ate and was obsessed with his weight. John was kind of vain. I remember reading that, when he was a Beatle, he went off on some photographer because the guy took a pic of him while water-skiing and his bangs were blown back, revealing his forehead- which he was apparently insecure about (at the time). lol!

I always thought it was stupid that the Beatles had those nicknames because they generalized them and perhaps someone like John felt because he wasn't called the "cute" Beatle he was somehow not as attractive as Paul and instead had to showcase his rapier wit and "coolness," whereas John in my opinion was just as handsome- if not more- than Paul and Paul was also very smart. George wasn't always quiet and...oh, I forget Ringo's nickname but you all get what I mean.

4iiiis May 06, 2011 07:59 PM

Do you think John looks particularly skinny in any of these px? Personally, I think he looks pretty good in the black turtleneck, but I'm sure he's bony underneath that sweater. His hands are somewhat revealing how skinny he was at the time.

<p>




Apple Scruff May 06, 2011 08:28 PM

He definitely looks very skinny in the first two pictures. Normal thin in the latter two.

Has anyone ever noticed that he went through, like, 20 different hairstyles in the second part of 1980 alone?

4iiiis May 06, 2011 08:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Apple Scruff (Post 1061115)
He definitely looks very skinny in the first two pictures. Normal thin in the latter two.

Has anyone ever noticed that he went through, like, 20 different hairstyles in the second part of 1980 alone?

Actually, I've been very confused by that! I've seen quite a few px from the late 70's, 1980 and he looks different from month to month almost, and I found it hard to believe they were all taken in a short period of time. So...20 different hairstyles would go a lonnnnng way to explaining that! Thanks ;-)

Apple Scruff May 06, 2011 09:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 4iiiis (Post 1061119)
Actually, I've been very confused by that! I've seen quite a few px from the late 70's, 1980 and he looks different from month to month almost, and I found it hard to believe they were all taken in a short period of time. So...20 different hairstyles would go a lonnnnng way to explaining that! Thanks ;-)


I was exaggerating the "20" comment, lol! But he changed his hair a lot. Like, he had the ponytail and beard, then he had the long hair/clean-shaven look. Then he did a regular haircut and had it brushed back, then he had some hair to the front. After this he had his 40-year-old version of the Beatle haircut (cover of Double Fantasy), then he had another shorter haircut, and finally that Teddy Boy haircut he was wearing in his very last photos.

I mean, that wasn't even in 6 months. It was like a span of 4 months and he had all those hairstyles. lol! I should post pictures but I don't want to get off topic.

I would really love to find this article where John was referred to, in 1965, as the "fat Beatle." The jerk who wrote that. :angry11:

Great pics 4iiiis!!!

Snoopy66 May 07, 2011 12:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Apple Scruff (Post 1061120)
I was exaggerating the "20" comment, lol! But he changed his hair a lot. Like, he had the ponytail and beard, then he had the long hair/clean-shaven look. Then he did a regular haircut and had it brushed back, then he had some hair to the front. After this he had his 40-year-old version of the Beatle haircut (cover of Double Fantasy), then he had another shorter haircut, and finally that Teddy Boy haircut he was wearing in his very last photos.

I mean, that wasn't even in 6 months. It was like a span of 4 months and he had all those hairstyles. lol! I should post pictures but I don't want to get off topic.

Great pics 4iiiis!!!

Yeah, it's awesome how often John changed his look during 1980, but I think that's also what makes his personality so interesting and fascinating; it's never boring watching those pictures :cool1: It's probably the period of his life when he changed his look as quickly as a chameleon :teeth1:

Snoopy

Apple Scruff May 07, 2011 07:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snoopy66 (Post 1061177)
Yeah, it's awesome how often John changed his look during 1980, but I think that's also what makes his personality so interesting and fascinating; it's never boring watching those pictures :cool1: It's probably the period of his life when he changed his look as quickly as a chameleon :teeth1:

Snoopy

Definitely. Whenever I find a new John pic I realize just how vibrant and alluring he must have been in person. Because one can just stare and see all the facets of what mood he was in or at what period of his life the photo was taken...there's so much to observe in just a photo.

Snoopy66 May 08, 2011 03:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Apple Scruff (Post 1061217)
Definitely. Whenever I find a new John pic I realize just how vibrant and alluring he must have been in person. Because one can just stare and see all the facets of what mood he was in or at what period of his life the photo was taken...there's so much to observe in just a photo.

Yeah, I often read from people who met John that he was very charismatic and made people feel at ease. His face was always expressive, no matter which pose he had :cool1:

I think that most of today's artists look quite sophisticated and even artificial compared to John.

Snoopy

Badgirl66 May 08, 2011 02:19 PM

i am 42


Apple Scruff May 08, 2011 03:42 PM

Alrighty then. I'm confused. Um...you look good for your age?

4iiiis May 08, 2011 07:12 PM

Ok, here are some on topic pictures of John to compare:




















Apple Scruff May 08, 2011 07:15 PM

^ Okay, #3 and #6 are extraordinarily disturbing- even as far as skinny John in his last years is concerned. I can't even...:bigeyes3:

Apple Scruff May 08, 2011 07:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 4iiiis (Post 1061312)
Ok, here are some on topic pictures of John to compare:


]

This picture is so cute. What's up with the preppy hair style, John? It's extremely formal looking, and Yoko's even rocking a blazer. I like.

Quote:


I love this picture because it's from that footage of them walking through Central Park where he's got on that puffy silver coat. That's like the COOLEST coat. On the "LennonNYC" documentary Jack Douglas explained that John was ecstatic when he got that coat because he walked in, handed them his American Express, walked out. It was very "normal" for him.

Quote:


He looks SO FANTASTIC here. I love the outfit. His clothes in 1980 (at least all the pics i've seen) were rocking. He always looked so pulled together in these in/out Dakota pics.

Quote:


Beautiful pic! He looks so happy...:cry2:

Snoopy66 May 09, 2011 02:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Apple Scruff (Post 1061313)
^ Okay, #3 and #6 are extraordinarily disturbing- even as far as skinny John in his last years is concerned. I can't even...:bigeyes3:

Yes, I agree :afraid2:; I hardly can recognize John on picture no. 6. :bigeyes3:, it depends also very much on the hair-style... but the other pictures are fine :cool1:

Snoopy

Apple Scruff May 09, 2011 10:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snoopy66 (Post 1061323)
Yes, I agree :afraid2:; I hardly can recognize John on picture no. 6. :bigeyes3:, it depends also very much on the hair-style... but the other pictures are fine :cool1:

Snoopy

Yes, he looks positively skeletal at #6 (but Sean looks darling). I read he used to fast and perhaps that pic was taken during one of those fasts because...well, look at him!

Snoopy66 May 10, 2011 11:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Apple Scruff (Post 1061326)
Yes, he looks positively skeletal at #6 (but Sean looks darling). I read he used to fast and perhaps that pic was taken during one of those fasts because...well, look at him!

Yeah, I read it too that John apparantly used to fast...:rolleyes:

Hmmm... "positively" skeletal :afraid2: I really find him faaaar too thin on picture no. 6 and it doesn't suit him at all. Thank's god there exist many other, much better pictures of John in 1980 :cool1:. And it's true that Sean looks lovely.

Snoopy

Apple Scruff May 11, 2011 01:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snoopy66 (Post 1061496)
Yeah, I read it too that John apparantly used to fast...:rolleyes:

Hmmm... "positively" skeletal :afraid2: I really find him faaaar too thin on picture no. 6 and it doesn't suit him at all. Thank's god there exist many other, much better pictures of John in 1980 :cool1:. And it's true that Sean looks lovely.

Snoopy

I just showed that picture to someone and they can't believe it was him. :afraid4:

Well, people have body hang-ups. But does anyone honestly think he was fat at any point around that 1965 period to be labeled as such? He was a solid guy compared to how skinny he was a couple years prior, but fat? And I have heard people say, "well compared to the other Beatles..." and I'm sorry but no. Paul was not that much thinner than John when John was at his heaviest. I just don't see a fat guy in any of the pics/films/interview clips. He looks completely healthy and normal-sized. The media is so jacked up.

4iiiis May 11, 2011 09:06 PM

And the flipside: John looking INCREDIBLE in 1980




:clown1:

Apple Scruff May 11, 2011 09:17 PM

^ Those pictures are STUNNING. I think all, but especially the last two are classic John images. That photo with Sean just touches my heart.

He was truly a handsome guy. The up-close is proof enough. In a society that indulges in the superficial joys of plastic surgery, botox, laser skin treatments, fillers, and extra white/fake teeth parts it's refreshing to see a guy look completely natural. Like a 40 year old would look, only he wasn't your typical run-of-the-mill 40-year-old, eh?


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:04 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.