I Love This. This Is Why I Struggle With People Holding A Particular Book Or Author Up And Saying This

Completely agree. This is why I’m not a Cyn fan. The woman wrote 2 exposes! The first because he husband at the time wanted a cash grab. Say what you will about Yoko and Sean but they’ve done an incredible job bringing John’s music to the next generation. That shows true love for John.

I just realized something.

Yoko never wrote an expose about John. Cyn, May Pang and Pete Shotton did, but Yoko didn't.

exposes kind of rub me the wrong way. This is someone who trusted you with everything, and then you turn around and write a tell-all about them. As a fan I love them, but I'd feel so betrayed if a friend wrote one about me.

Pattie Boyd, George Martin and Pete Best wrote books, but they were more about themselves and their connection to the boys than a fictionalized version of the past.

Ivan Vaughn, Jimmie Nicol, Jane Asher, Peter Asher and Maureen Starkey never did. They didn't even write autobiographies from what I can find.

I think that all speaks volumes.

Especially Yoko. No matter what you think of her, that shows a strong sense of character and respect that we just don't talk about enough when it comes to her.

There’s no John hate here! Us John lovers have to stick together 😘❤️

December 8, 1980. 

I love your stories and the Rise and Fall of John Lennon is one of my fav stories in the fandom. It was such a great mix of humiliation, angst, fluff and intimacy. I really hope you continue with your stories. I’ve never re read a story more than that one lol

i might elaborate later but fanfic replies literally develop writer’s metacognition and make them better writers

Interesting he made this assessment when it was only Paul he got alone time with. If he only spent time with Paul one to one, why assume he’s more clever than John? As clever, fair enough. But more clever? Based on zero time with John? This is why I hate all this Paul revisionism going on. He reality is that few people had access to John in relation to Paul due to his introvert tendencies and difficulty trusting people and therefore few people really knew John well. So they put John down in relation to Paul because Paul flattered them more by giving them the time. Total stupidity

Their separate personalities are as clearly defined as characters in a fairy tale: John the clever one, Paul the sweet one, George the quiet one and Ringo the holy fool. As these public images are rooted in a private reality, there seems little point in meeting the Beatles; social confrontation can only confirm the known and simple truth. Yet I was curious to talk to John Lennon and Paul McCartney, because it is as songwriters rather than as performers that the Beatles interest me most. When I met them both together, however, they gave an impenetrable performance - a double act, with John facetiously punning on clichés and Paul obligingly feeding him. The jokes were good, but no better than Beatle jokes on the cinema or television screens. Later, I had the chance of spending two hours alone with Paul at Brian Epstein's office. He was ready to talk about his music, and did so with the minimum of suspicion or self-consciousness. The sweet, in their desire to please, can be even more articulate than the clever.

'Close-Up: Paul McCartney as Songwriter', Francis Wyndham (London Life, 4th December 1965)

they must be separated.....they're just too annoying together..... 😫

Lol! To be fair a group hug after throwing a brick through the window would make for a great story. I’m just protective of my Johnny. My husband says I collect broken people. Even at the pound I have to rescue the runt if the litter who looks the saddest. Hence why he love John and fight the good fight for him as even though he did so many annoying friends someone has to give him unconditional love you know? Yes I’m sad

Wholesome moment! ❤️ love to see it

(From McCartney by Christopher Sandford)

John Lennon begins to realise that Paul McCartney is broken. The Beatles, interviewed by Jeremy James for Day By Day. Portsmouth Guildhall, 12th November 1963 - part 2 (part 1)

This whole quote is hilarious. I know Paul is a smart man so it’s frustrating to see him will fully misunderstood John’s quotes. When he talked about the Beatles being bastards, he’s referring to the fact that they had to be tough and have think skins to withstand the hard core Hamburg days and the insane beatlemania days to make it and survive. And he wasn’t always dark about the Beatles. Yes he was dark in the early days when he was hurting but he mellowed so much through the 70s. It makes me understand why John didn’t trust Paul given his willingness to undermine John in subtle ways so he could get ahead. Also if he’s referencing cynicism and darkness, why does George get a pass. That man was far more bitter about his Beatle days but of course Paul doesn’t view George as his competitor in the same way he does John

Q: Do you have days now when you never once think of the Beatles?

PAUL MCCARTNEY: Oh, yeah. Most days. When the Beatles broke up it was painful to talk about. It was just hard. So you found yourself thinking about it. Now, having come all this way, I can remember only the good stuff. I know one or two spicy stories and I have my bitch now and again, but generally I always did dig it; I always did think that what we were doing was great. Even when we broke up, I never thought like John did. Who knows why he thought that! John’s pretty complex. He possibly didn’t even mean it. All the stuff about how we were “bastards”… He brought out the worst side, as if to exorcise it. But I really didn’t agree. It was pretty good, you know. But there are days when I don’t think about it because I’m doing all sorts of other stuff.

— Paul McCartney, Rolling Stone, March 30th 1979

My beautiful Johnny. This is why he was so beloved

Find someone who can make you laugh like this

Just wish I could read an article that praises Paul yet doesn’t crap on John. I’m the member of about 30 John Lennon pages across multiple social media platforms and they are really positive places that celebrate John with photos, video and articles. If the other Beatles are mentioned it’s always with respect and a desire to support their various projects. I can’t remember the last time someone bashed Paul. Why can’t this be the norm?

“Did you know Paul sent a telegram to Margaret Thatcher in 1982? He did. It wasn’t friendly. He lost his temper over her treatment of health workers and fired off a long outraged message, comparing her to Ted Heath, the prime minister (tweaked in “Taxman”) felled by the 1974 coal strike. McCartney warned, “What the miners did to Ted Heath, the nurses will do to you.” This controversy is a curiously obscure footnote to his life—it seldom gets mentioned in even the fattest biographies. He doesn’t discuss it in Many Years from Now. I only know about it because I read it as a Random Note in Rolling Stone, not exactly a hotbed of pro-Paul propaganda at the time. (The item began, “Reports that Paul McCartney is intellectually brain-dead appear to have been premature.”) But the telegram was a major U.K. scandal, with Tory politicians denouncing him. In October 1982, Thatcher was at the height of her power, in the wake of her Falkland Islands blitz. Many rock stars talked shit about Maggie—Elvis Costello, Morrissey, Paul Weller—but Paul was the one more famous than she was. He had something to lose by hitting send on this, and nothing to gain. What, you think he was trying for coolness points? This is Paul McCartney, remember? He was in the middle of making Give My Regards to Broad Street. He could have clawed Thatcher’s still-beating heart out of her rib cage, impaled it on his Hofner on live TV, and everybody would have said, “Yeah, but ‘Silly Love Songs’ though.” Why did he feel so intensely about the nurses? He didn’t mention his mother in the telegram, but he must have been thinking of Mary McCartney’s life and death. So he snapped, even though it was off-message. (He was busy that week doing interviews for the twentieth anniversary of “Love Me Do”—the moment called for Cozy Lovable Paul, not Angry Paul.) He didn’t boast about it later, though fans today would be impressed that any English rock star of that generation—let alone Paul—had the gumption to send this. You can make a case that it was a braver, riskier, and more politically relevant move than John sending his MBE medal back to the Queen in 1970. Still, John’s gesture went down in history and Paul’s didn’t, though his fans would probably admire the move if they knew about it. He couldn’t win. He was Paul. All he could do was piss people off.”

— Rob Sheffield, Dreaming the Beatles. (2017)