John, the meanie Beatle?, ( of god not this again!).

Depends on what day one met him I suppose, & whether he was juiced or not. But if one had to vote on such a thing, he would be the likely choice.





being forcibly shown the door at the Troubadour Club along with drinking companion Harry Nilsson after heckling a Smothers Brothers performance and striking a waitress in March 1974.



http://www.superseventies.com/lennon4.html

John sure did act a fool during his Lost Weekend. John admitted in 1963 at Live at the BBC that "sometimes he played a fool." He could sure act a fool, though.

He interrupted the Smothers Brothers show; wore a feminine product on his head; screamed and was finally not too gently shown the door.

John could be very biting and sarcastic, but from everything I have read about him (and I have read a lot about him), he was only a "meanie" in public when he was drunk.

In fact, many reports of people who have met the Fabs claim that John was the most well-mannered and gracious of all of them...

His personal relationships were another story. He could be a right bastard, but he could also be incredibly sweet and loving.

In a similiar vein, Shatner gets some rancid behavior reports from TOS cast members, yet Deforest Kelley mentioned he always took good care of the other people involved on the set. & there is the story just after Trek was cancelled of Shat stopping to help a stranger whos car wouldn't start.

Good point about Johns professional life & personal relationships being different entities. A mixed bag. He did donate to charity & did stop the war work, however, Males that strike females don't make my most favorite persons list by & large. Tommy Lee etc.

Originally Posted by Maia 66

John could be very biting and sarcastic, but from everything I have read about him (and I have read a lot about him), he was only a "meanie" in public when he was drunk.

His personal relationships were another story. He could be a right bastard, but he could also be incredibly sweet and loving.

Pretty much how I feel on the matter.

of what i read he was some times jokenly mean to George

and another thing i read is that he a gentlemen

George mentioned John had no influence on him whatsoever in his book. John wasn't to happy about that. & mentioned as much in the 1980 Playboy interview. The interpersonal dynamics of those 4 are interesting, but really only known by those 4. & even they have individual/divergent views regarding it.

What I like most about this forum, is the fans here always look objectively at John.

Ocassionally I read some Beatles pages on Livejournal, and the fans there totally bash John. It saddens me because I'm a very, very big fan.

I've read a lot about John, and he was a human being. Our culture is ever increasingly obsessed with the media, and we tend to try and make saints out of people like John Lennon. Then when a celebrity shows any kind of human flaw, we flay them alive. I think it's a defence mechanism in a way, it helps us to forget out own flaws.

John had a lot of insecurites, and a lot of demons. He had trouble coping with them at times, and it seems to be part of human nature that when we're having trouble with our own baggage we take our frustrations out on others.

I'm not saying that everything John did was right. Yes he could be mean at times, but we all have that potential within us.

There are just as many stories of the kind, gracious John as their are of the bastardly John.

I've read a lot of quotes/interviews where Paul talks about John, because I find their dynamic very interesting, and Paul often says that the harder side of John was like a protective shell, and he could be very kind when he wanted to be. In fact, I think there's even a clip on youtube, with Paul on the Parkinson show, saying something along those lines... I'll try and dig it up in a bit :D

John did not go for hagiolatry and he did not want people worshipping him. He was a man, warts and glasses and all and a very extraordinary one at that.

John was kind and he was bastardly. John was a genius and he was also a bit of a madman. John was brilliant, yet he could really act a fool. John could be tough and he could be tender. John could be very cutting edge and he could be mild.

John Lennon was for many a parodoxical personality. He was just too complex to put into any category, but one thing everyone can all agree on aside from his obvious brilliance and flair for self expression was his zany humor.

Originally Posted by Loony_leo

John had a lot of insecurites, and a lot of demons. He had trouble coping with them at times...

walrus gumboot. please tell us what philosophical insights led you to say such a fantastic thing.

if you want insecure then look as this. It is Sean Lennon, Johns and Yokos offspring. He's been known to wear pink fur coats and sometimes sing songs about eating chicken.


Ringo on John :
"I met John in a coffee bar in Liverpool. He was rehearsing with George and Paul. I was with Rory Storm at the time, 1960 - could even have been '59 - and that’s where I first met him. We weren’t friends then; we just said hello because we were both in bands and I really got to know him in Germany. Fabulous guy. He liked to rock and roll and that’s what I liked to do too.

"He influenced me quite a bit actually. You know, one of the things with John is if there was a swimming pool he would jump in and he’d be out getting dry by the time I got my toes in. He influenced me that way – taking a chance. He had the biggest heart of any man I’ve met to this day. He was a giving, loving, caring human being. He was crazy as well some days but the guy would give you his heart."

Mick Jagger on John Lennon :
"I was friends with all four of them in different ways, but I got on with John perhaps the easiest. We had a lot in common. He had two different sides to him: a very acerbic side – I don't want to say a Scouse thing, but it was distrust of pretentiousness, and also quick-witted and funny – and the other facet of his personality was this sort of universalist, the give peace a chance, this naive idealism that obviously struck a chord with people. And it could be difficult to reconcile those two sides."

http://www.primaltherapy.com/about-j...al-therapy.php

Originally Posted by PepperlandFrog

walrus gumboot. please tell us what philosophical insights led you to say such a fantastic thing.

Well at least your animal friendly.
Practise on animals first.

I just think it's important to remember that everyone is human. We all have our good days & our bad days & being a Beatle doesn't make you immune to such days.

But he struck females twice, I agree with all the above, but do not condone or think it's something to ignore or dodge & just brush off say he had a bad day like most of us do. I've never struck a female & I think neither have most of us males.

Originally Posted by Legs

Well at least your animal friendly.

walrus gumboot.
tell us what philosophical insights causes you to say such a thing.

Originally Posted by Elephantshampoo

But he struck females twice, I agree with all the above, but do not condone or think it's something to ignore or dodge & just brush off say he had a bad day like most of us do. I've never struck a female & I think neither have most of us males.

well Elephantshampoo, the answer is simple. we weren't there we don't know, this is mostly remote speculation. and there is twist and shout John, Beatle John and the real John, which unfortunately none of us knew.

Originally Posted by Elephantshampoo

But he struck females twice, I agree with all the above, but do not condone or think it's something to ignore or dodge & just brush off say he had a bad day like most of us do.

Twice that we know of... probably more that we don't know of.

And no one here condones that or ignores that. But we're also not in a personal relationship with him. We love his music and his message.

Most truly great men have/had feet of clay. Read a biography of FDR, Lincoln, Churchill, Beethoven, Alexander the Great, Leonardo da Vinci... you may be shocked that many of them did "worse" things than John.

But they're still great.

I have read some on Da Vinci, never heard of him doing something worse, & just because someone else did something worse doesn't make right or lessen what the other person did. If Jim Morrison or some other music celeb were found to have been a Manson follower & child molester, it doesn't change or diminish what John did in other words.

I guess it all comes down to whether the listener is capable of separating the man from his work or not.

Originally Posted by Maia 66

Twice that we know of... probably more that we don't know of.

And no one here condones that or ignores that. But we're also not in a personal relationship with him. We love his music and his message.

Most truly great men have/had feet of clay. Read a biography of FDR, Lincoln, Churchill, Beethoven, Alexander the Great, Leonardo da Vinci... you may be shocked that many of them did "worse" things than John.

But they're still great.

Well said, Maia!

John was the first to admit that he had feet of clay and he never wanted people idolizing him. John had no use for toadies. John was just a person who happened to be brilliant and talented and who had behavioral issues as well.

One thing we can all agree on is that without John Lennon, there would have been no Beatles; no cultural rise musically; no British Invasion and the artists we know today and the world would be sadly lacking in a much needed voice.

John Lennon, I salute you for being true to your core convictions and NEVER being a sycophant!

Originally Posted by hibgal

I guess it all comes down to whether the listener is capable of separating the man from his work or not.

exactly. yeah we all have our favorite Beatle or two, but to idolize and/or criticize their pretended human characteristics, seems to me to be a sure-fire way to misintepret the meaning and message of their music, not to mention artistic intent.

John was just a person who happened to be brilliant and talented and who had behavioral issues as well.

walrus gumboot. not sure what you mean by this... errrr... subjective stuff.

according to Sir Paul :
"Whatever bad things John said about me, he would also slip his glasses to the end of his nose and say, 'I love you'..."

"John said so much crap that he later said he hadn't meant. It's bullshit...

"The image of John is seriously flawed because he was not the hard, mad man that people think he was."

According to Peter Brown :
Remembering John Lennon: “indelicate, but spot on”

"John’s remark was not a boast or a blasphemy. He was pointing out the absurdity of the Beatles’ fame, which at that point was at its madding zenith. For anyone who knew John Lennon, the observation was typical: indelicate, but spot on. He neither sought nor required forgiveness, only understanding."

one thing you can't hide is when you're crippled inside.