idontwanttospoiltheparty reblogged
Why the slash, John? Why the slash?
John Lennon’s handwritten lyrics to ‘Woman’, 1980
idontwanttospoiltheparty reblogged
Yoko said to me: ‘I was told John was in danger in New York’
Elliot Mintz was the friend with whom John Lennon and Yoko Ono spent some of their most private moments. Now he has written a book in which he reveals what went on after the former Beatle was murdered in 1980
John Lennon and Yoko Ono in New York on November 26, 1980, just days before his death
idontwanttospoiltheparty reblogged
Last days of John… December. 5th. 1980
idontwanttospoiltheparty reblogged
So, with no musical background or talent, why did [Linda] join the group that Paul was forming?
"I loved music. I was a rock'n'roll kid, though I never sang or played keyboards or anything. It was Paul. We were up in Scotland after The Beatles had split up and he had nobody to play with, friendship-wise, so he said 'Let's get a group together' and I said Yeah because I'm always jumping in at the deep end.”
idontwanttospoiltheparty reblogged
Can everyone please pass the message round that that photo is not Paul buying a newspaper on the morning after John’s death.
It makes perfect sense that Linda would take a photo of the newsstand. It does not make sense that Paul would a) change clothes, b) do a bit of shopping, c) pop out to buy a newspaper in the middle of London when everyone wanted to get his reaction
This is Paul on 9th December 1980…
(spot the crowds of people and microphone and camera shoved in his face?)
This is not
sometimes i think john was greying in 1980 but then i realize no those are just black and white pics
idontwanttospoiltheparty reblogged
beatlesneveroutofstyle
John Lennon photographed leaving the Dakota on October 10th 1980.
idontwanttospoiltheparty reblogged
John Lennon and his first bread: — Interview from 1980. 📸 John Lennon.
idontwanttospoiltheparty reblogged
In 1980, ABC's Countdown visited Paul in Abbey Road Studios to ask him about media interest in a Beatles reunion, as well as his favourite song of his own.
#cErtaIn lvl of f@me
it is literally so wild how many interviews John did in the last week of his life. it's wild he referred to Reagan as "our president-elect" – he witnessed that election but not the inauguration BUT was interviewed so much in between he actually made a reference to him (when rationalizing his own mommy issues no less lmao!!). crazy man idk
idontwanttospoiltheparty reblogged
NEVER SEEN BEFORE photo of John Lennon on his 40th birthday at the Hit Factory Studio, taken by Bob Gruen, October 9, 1980.
the problem with December 8 1980 is, murder aside, it's an objectively iconic date in John history……………
idontwanttospoiltheparty reblogged
ok WHERE is that yoko quote about yes im your angel where she makes a joke about the “you’re my fairy” line. i have a need for it.
found it! here’s my transcription:
Yoko: And it’s sort of like a tongue-in-cheek, “you’re my fairy”, you know. (laughs) And John would say “Oh, great, great, now I can come out of the closet!”
Interviewer: After all these years.
Yoko: Right. (laughs)
- John and Yoko’s interview with Dave Sholin, December 8th 1980
Anonymous asked:
You are right though that it’s very sad. Because at the point Paul gave that interview (2 or 3 months before John was killed), they were obviously estranged to the point where Paul didn’t know Sean well enough to even refer to him by name. He was just ‘John’s son’ who seemed nice. Which is what Seaman has said all along.
Well, we've known Paul found John's territorialness over Sean off-putting for a long time ("You know he wouldn’t let me even touch his baby," said to Hunter Davies in 1981).
I don't know if it's weird Paul used "his son" in the context of a recorded interview with Peter Brown and Steven Gaines, though. Paul is talking about someone else's kid to someone who is mostly a stranger and someone else he hasn't been in much contact with for the past decade, from what I understand. Like, I agree with you it doesn't make Paul and John seem extremely familiar with each other, but I also feel like maybe you're reading too much into that particular phrasing.
Anonymous asked:
No, I said I think it’s possible that he felt guilty and that this caused him to worry/obsess about what he’d done. What I meant was that Seaman’s account (that John was delighted) and Green’s account (that he was worried) might both be correct. Look, if he was involved, it was probably his idea of a joke. I sincerely doubt he expected it to go so far that Paul would still be in prison 10 days later. That’s probably when the guilt/worry set in. But like everything else to do with John, the guilt/worry was all about him. He wasn’t actually worried enough about Paul to call him at any time in the following 10 months.
All right.
Anonymous asked:
In Paul’s interview with Peter Brown, which was done after the publication of John’s Newsweek interview (so late September/early October 1980), he said the last time he had spoken to John was Christmas 1979. The fact that John didn’t call him when he got back from Japan supports Seaman’s claim that John and Yoko were involved in my opinion. That’s not to say John Green (Charlie Swan) was lying when he said John was worried. It’s entirely possible (and in my view, not unlikely) that John and Yoko were involved but that John started to feel guilty a few days in when it didn’t seem quite so funny. Whatever - if he had cared about Paul at all, he would have called him at any point between January and October at the very least. The fact that he didn’t speaks volumes.
I mean, you confuse me a little because you both say it's possible he felt bad and also say he didn't care. Like, it's fair if you think John was treating Paul poorly by that point (or any other point), but you seem to be aware that feelings can be more complicated than that.
I also don't think John not calling about this = this was John's fault. That seems like a huge leap (not saying there isn't other evidence to indicate it though). IDK, John supposedly was upset Paul didn't call him when his dad died – that doesn't mean Paul killed Alf?
Also, Paul doesn't necessarily say that was the last time they spoke, but I grant the wording in the book looks like that.
(from All You Need Is Love)
But also, this interview actually somewhat calls into question the concept of Paul ringing John up and failing to get through 3 weeks later, which is supposedly the inciting incident for the Japan bust. I know it still may make sense if Yoko blocked Paul's call, but Paul also isn't making it sound like he's been trying to talk to John and not getting through.
Anonymous asked:
Seaman wrote in his book that John thought Yoko (or John Green, instructed by Yoko) had cast some kind of occult spell. It’s not implausible that John would believe that - he was obviously gullible and drug-addled enough. However, my impression is that Seaman thinks Yoko actually made a phone call or two and got Paul busted. That’s also not implausible in my opinion. I have no idea whether Yoko is ‘evil’, though Goldman interviewed her first husband and I understand he described her as sociopathic - a person ‘who could kill’. What is quite clear from her appalling behaviour over the years (her treatment of Julian, her hate campaign against Paul, her eviction of John’s poor old uncle from his house) is that she is a nasty piece of work and - in my opinion - quite capable of shopping Paul to the Japanese authorities. Put it this way, it’s more believable that she did it than that she made a choice to look the other way. When did she ever pass up an opportunity to stick the boot in?
IDK anon, this feels a bit over the top to me. "When did she ever pass up an opportunity to stick the boot in?" isn't really a question I can engage with easily, if that makes sense. Except, I guess I could say, I'm sure she had tons of theroetical opportunities to get Paul in trouble for drug charges, really.
And also Seaman's book implies John thought Yoko literally did a magic trick, but Goldman very much paints him as fully conscious of Yoko allegedly tipping off the authorities, so I'm not sure why you so easily absolve him meanwhile don't give her much benefit of the doubt.
I'm not saying you have to like her, btw, nor that I don't think she had it in her to do that – but I don't know that I find your characterization convincing. Anyways, thank you for sharing your thoughts, and I might try to look into what her first husband said. I've never heard much about him, as opposed to Tony Cox.