Re: Interesting take on Paul v. Yoko
- From: "hoist" <william@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2005 18:43:19 -0700
"dlarsson" <derek_larsson@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>>> 1. The Beatles had personal friends around them all the time
>>> in the studio and inside Apple. For example, two of their
>>> greatest recordings: "A Day In The Life" and "All You Need Is
>>> Love" were made with 'guests' sitting around right there with
>>> them in the studio. So this 'legend' that there was
>>> something inherently evil or unthinkable about John inviting
>>> his girlfriend-fiance into the studio is a phony-issue on face
>>> value. The Beatles did not "break-up" because John's girlfriend
>>> sat around on his guitar amp or speaker monitors or hung around
>>> during their recording sessions.
>> In your two examples, the guests were invited for the recording session.
>> A single session. This is far different from setting up residence during
>> a long period of time that spanned several days/several session.
> Of course its different. She was John's girlfriend-fiancé.
> The point was having guests in the studio was not a new thing
> and it was not something aggressive against Paul McCartney.
>> While John had already dug his heels in and decided that Klein would
>> manage his affairs regardless of whether George, Ringo or Paul wanted
> Absolutely False. John interviewed the Eastman's, Klein, and
> sought advice from Mick Jagger & others. Klein appeared to
> be the most knowleable and had a reputation as being an expert
> at certain management issues. John put it to a group vote. All
> three: John, George, & Ringo voted for Allen Klein and they were
> all impressed enough with him to let him manage their individual
> solo careers -- after the Beatles as well.
Absolute falsehood. Downright lie, actually. John DID indeed *inform* the
others, all of them, that HE and YOKO were going to have Klein for THEIR
manager and everyone else could do whatever the hell they wanted. He didn't
care anymore. HE broke the 'all for one' rule, not Paul. George and Ringo
went along with Klein down the road. John fired the first shot across this
> Only Paul here disagreed and created the whole "management riff".
OMG you're nuts! After John's 'fuck you' announcement Paul did a naturally
human resentful thing. He picked someone that -he- knew no one else would
want (tho I think ---my opinion only--- that he probably thought Lee, having
music business contacts, was certainly as qualified as Klien, except Lee was
> Had Paul not been dating/marrying Linda Eastman -- there would have
> ever been any "Eastman's" and hence no management tug-of-war here.
Again, you are full of shit on every level, not a fact to be found here.
>> Had she spoken so eloquently, the "June and spoon" comment would not be
>> viewed by some as an attack on McCartneys songwriting skills.
>> She didn't and some take her slight on "other writers arbitrary pop tune
>> writing" as a shot at McCartney
> I'm not sure what eloquence has to do with it.
> She did not make any insult about McCartney.
> She talked only about John's songwriting.
IF there was a slam, and I am of a mind she could easily be given the
benefit of the doubt on this, it was so slight as to be non-existent.
>> I've not read anyone fly off the handle or launch into large Yoko attacks
>> here on rmb.
> It was McCartney who flew off the handle and attacked
> Yoko for not being smart.
> Whether Yoko is smart or not, Yoko did not attack Paul
> and it was Paul who initiated the public insult war.
While not in keeping with his usual public face, he may well have simply
gotten sick of people like you telling him all the time how evil he is, and
it just hit him wrong? No excuses, frankly I'm kind of happy to see him
tell it like it is instead of bullshitting his emotions all the time.
To this point I agree: Paul made a more overt comment. BUT...like with the
RAM album, John says there were many things on the LP that applied not just
to him but to the other two Beatles, things that they would immediately
recognize but no one else would have a clue. Perhaps Yoko used a hot button
buzz word or two of his knowledge but not ours.
Either way, it would have to have been buried pretty deeply in her comments,
that was not much of a slam.
>>> 3. Trying to blame Yoko -- because 15 years after Lennon's death
>>> McCartney decided to tamper with their partnership arrangement
>> Time and again you are reminded of "Wings Over America" and time and
>> again you choose to ignore the fact that the "McCartney - Lennon" credit
>> issue was first done under the watch of John and Yoko without a single
>> comment or action taken.
> The difference is he wanted a specific legal action to be signed
> to permanantly alter & change the publishing credits.
> No Beatle wife is in a position to chnage or alter Beatles band
>> Yoko has been able to arbitrate Apple business for 25 years now as well
>> as make sweeping decisions regarding the Lennon Estate.
> Fine, but that's merely about ongoing business management issues
> not something like the re-working of songwriting credits.
Seems to me this whole tempest in a teapot is over anyway. He agreed not to
pursue it. So why all the gnashed teeth still?
> That can only be done by John & Paul together.
> If it was not something Paul thought was important to
> take up with John over a 20 year period -- it is then
> not important enough to worry about now with John dead
> and certaintly inappropriate to blame John's wife for
> his own partnership arrangement (who had nothing to
> do with it).
>>> "People are saying Paul was on the fringe of this, that, and
>>> everything else
>>> but the point is John -was- the edge, and say what you
>>> will it was his band."
>>> -Ringo Starr, RS Mag.
>>> "but I always liked 'the Walrus', 'Strawberry Fields', the
>>> 'Lennon things'
>>> the best. I miss that, I miss that side of music."
>>> -George Harrison, Musician Mag.
>>> Paul never did attack Ringo or George for these comments,
>>> or John publically when he was alive for his -- but yet
>>> he does pounce-upon & attack a 5' foot widow and try to
>>> constantly rewrite Beatles band history with Lennon dead
>>> and out of the way.
>>> Sad indeed .............
>> Yes, sad that this thread became another opportunity for you to launch
>> into one of your cut and paste soapbox lectures.
> The point is anytime Yoko or anyone else says something
> positive about John's songewriting or his importance to the
> Beatles -- McCartney and some of his fans all wet their pants
My God, if you could just look around and apply this to yourself you would
be awash in self-revelation.
> and equate that with a "Paul sucks" attack.
> But no one ever said that... and what was said about John's
> songwriting was true.
> So, the question remains -- why must Paul attack John's widow
> in knee-jerk fashion over true statements?
Why must derek attack Paul in knee-jerk fashion?
Life's mysteries, I guess.
- Re: Interesting take on Paul v. Yoko
- From: dlarsson
- Re: Interesting take on Paul v. Yoko
- Prev by Date: Re: Interesting take on Paul v. Yoko
- Next by Date: Re: Was Bush Is Insane Thread (Re Rove, Libby & JudyMiller)
- Previous by thread: Re: Interesting take on Paul v. Yoko
- Next by thread: Re: Interesting take on Paul v. Yoko