John Lennon's Letter To Paul McCartney | 24 November 1971

The man had some chutzpah (with good reason) to get up there and conduct an orchestra. Symphony musicians are so full of themselves.

More ✨McLennon✨!!!!

This song by Paul was just too perfect not to use!

What wsa the objection to this hairstyle? I just don't get it.

Get Back Narrative

I’ve received a couple of asks seeking clarification regarding my earlier post about how the Get Back documentary was redefining the Beatle narrative.

I’ll try to summarize. 

1. Media articles like this, this and this regarding Ono’s presence. While it’s obvious that the band was heading toward dissolution with or without Ono’s presence, Ono’s continued presence in the studio, her unsolicited participation in band business (no, she didn’t just sit there and read, as some would claim), and her willingness to speak on John’s behalf is hardly exculpatory. Even Time magazine, which at least attempted a more considered analysis of the Beatle break-up era, claimed, after watching Get Back, that ‘Yoko’s presence was not a huge negative factor, and that none of the band members appear much bothered by her constant presence; they joke and talk with her comfortably”.  This is a shocking claim, given that a) the documentary clearly depicts the deleterious effect of Yoko’s presence upon band members during the failed meeting at George’s house, and b) George, Paul, and Ringo have all gone on record regarding their discomfort in Ono’s presence and the disruptive nature of her involvement in band business. 

(As an aside, I would also like to know in what workplace, no matter how creative or unorthodox, it would be acceptable to bring your lover or spouse to work everyday and insist that the presence of that person was absolutely benign.)  

2. The exclusion of information which would provide context to behaviour, such as John and Yoko’s heroin addiction. “By the advent of the “Get Back” sessions, Ono openly joked about taking heroin being the couple’s form of exercise”).  This was excluded in the Get Back documentary and, as a consequence, from mainstream media. Obviously the inclusion of this information would more accurately contexualize John’s behaviour in the band, including his insistence on Yoko’s presence.  

Another compelling piece of information that was not included in the documentary was that Patti Harrison briefly left George around the time of George’s departure from the band.  Since there was no mention of this event during filming, Peter Jackson decided not to share it, claiming he didn’t want to make any “moral judgements.” To whatever extent his brief estrangement from Patti affected George’s judgement we’ll never know (George didn’t even mention it in his diary of that day), but its exclusion in the documentary is regrettable. 

3.  Editorial Choices by the filmmaker.  Peter Jackson has gone on record that he was not influenced by Ringo or Paul, and nor by Olivia or Yoko at any point in the making of the Get Back Documentary. And there’s no reason not to believe him.  But:  the Get Back documentary reflects his editorial choices–what he believed was important to leave in, and what he believed was acceptable to leave out.  As Erin Torkelson Weber indicated in this earlier post, “the reality is that, without unrestricted access to the hundreds of hours of actual audio and visual tapes Hogg and Jackson used to make their films, fans are still being offered only someone else’s interpretation/vision/translation of the primary source material…so we have to rely on evidence that has already been framed and filtered.” 

And that reality–that we are watching someone’s else’s version of the truth, has escaped mainstream media and a certain cohort of Beatle fans who either find the Get Back version of the Beatle break-up era more commensurate with their own beliefs, or simply don’t know any better. 

So ridiculous.

Psychotherapist Hugo G. Beigel analyzes the sexual appeal of the Beatles. Circa 1964.

OK, but is 'The Long and Winding Road' for John? I don't know any story about the song, I only have lyrics that brings me a lot of mcln-feelings and tears. It was 1969 so I think lyrics match perfectly. It sounds for me like 'You broke my heart on Abbey road, you left me for her, I tried so hard to return to you and I don't know what to do now 'cuz I still love you'. Don't you tell me you've never cried over this song!

I’ll tell you a story about this song. I never actually loved it, it was never my favourite beatles song. When I went to Paul’s concert 4 years ago it was the song that hit me the most, I cried like a baby, it was so emotional. 

All the songs in the Let it Be and Abbey Road album written by Paul are about loss, separation and broken hearts. Paul was engaged with Linda in 1969 and seemed quite happy too, so WHY WOULD HE WRITE SUCH A SAD COMPILATION OF SONGS?

Because he was breaking up with John, he was losing him, and tried his best to have him back. He knew it was over and he could do nothing but sing his desperation away. ‘let it be’ is about dreaming his mother telling him that that’s life, that he had to let it happen, no matter if it hurted. ‘Oh!darling’ was a desperate scream of love. ‘The long and winding road’ is his resignation, he gave up, singing how much he tried to come back to him, to put the pieces together and start again.

Many times I’ve been aloneAnd many times I’ve criedAny way you’ll never knowThe many ways I’ve tried

He’s completely lost and desperate, still begging forgiveness from John, waiting for him to come back 

Don’t leave me standing hereLead me to your door

We all know that it will never happen. 

Looks like rehearsals just after Ringo joined

Young Beatles at the Cavern Club

OMG look at Ringo! Why was it necessary to have a random girl in this pic?

Having a swim in 1963