Bagism: Web Board
[Show Followups] [Post New Message]
[Search Web Boards] [Web Boards Menu] [John Lennon Web Board]

Re: Yoko Took The Fall for Breakup

Posted by **Beatles Fan Robert** on Sep 1, 2017 at 12:13:40 PM:
In Reply to: Re: Yoko Took The Fall for Breakup posted by **backbeat** on Aug 30, 2017 at 10:38:43 PM:

********There is a lot of mythology as to why the Beatles broke up.
********
********Internal rifts.
********
********Each developing his own style and preference.
********
********George's frustration at continuing to be treated as the 2 tracks an album junior at a time when he was cranking out songs as good or better than many of the Lennnon/McCartney ones.
********
********Lennon's growing drug addiction and personality changes.
********
********Paul's (not really true, more Lennon's increasing passiveness post-Pepper).
********
********Front and center was the widely held belief that Yoko's growing prescense in John's life was fragmenting the allegiance of the group among each other, disturbing their chemistry.
********
********Not true.
********
********Truth was they had grown up and were tired of all the adoration, nothing was left to conquer. The pressures of being #1 for so many years, being under a microscope, different temperaments, etc. Brian's death, the emergence of Alan Klein, their individual marriages. Each now had his own life. They were no longer wed to each other.
********
********So I contend that Yoko was almost an after thought. True, she was the only Beatles wife invited to recording sessions.
********
********But was that so bad?
********
********And as far as non-Beatles being invited in, there was Eric Clapton (White Album) and Billy Preston (Get Back/Let It Be).
********
********In a way she took the blame for decades. Not helped by the icy reception she received from the media (I don't know how each fellow Beatle regarded it, nor to I want to conjecture).
********
********Just my rambling thoughts.
*******
*******
*******
*******They broke up because they quite simply "grew up" ..they married and started living their lives individually instead of being crammed into countless hotel rooms, cars, trains and planes.
*******
*******Yoko had nothing to do with their breakup even Paul admits that
*******now and John's appearance on Dick Cavett's show years ago also confirmed it. It got to be too much like work and they weren't enjoying themselves anymore, hence the invites into the studio
*******like Eric Clapton and Billy Preston. When they had an outsider
*******around, they were cordial and everything was cool. As john put
*******it, it was a "slow death".
*******
*******
******But you find other brit-pop groups that stuck together much longer. The Who until Moon died - Led Zepplin until John Bonham. Mamas and Papas until Cass left and John Phillips died
******Doors until Morrison kicked the bucket.
******
******The Stones were the exception, carrying on well after Brian was booted out and died, although their heyday to me was mid-sixties to early seventies, my preference being 64-69. The last incarnation was very inferior, or to me since Wyman left.
******
******But what the heck, John was the first to leave and then had a fit when Paul announced that he was, and was dissolving the Beatles. So go figure.
******
*****
*****Rumor has it the Rolling Stones will be embarking on their
*****"Wheelchair Tour" later this year. LOL
*****
*****Something alot of people don't stop and think about is that the
*****Beatles were together alot longer than people realize. For them
*****it didn't take a death of a band member to break up..it was became they felt they were getting stagnated and it wasn't fun anymore. It became like going to a mundane job.
*****They each had successful solo careers as a result. I don't think
*****the Stones would survive if they broke apart and did solo careers (which is probably the reason they've stuck together all these years).
*****
*****
*****
*****
****The Stones have all had solo projects and then come back together for band projects. I wish The Beatles could have done that.
****
***
***I think they would have, at least based on what I have read about Lennon. I recollect that is why he was so enraged when McCartney announced that they were through.
**
**John quit the band but Paul convinced him not to announce it to the world yet. Then Paul announced that he was quitting the Beatles, to promote his solo album. John felt Paul had back stabbed him with that and said so, in no uncertain terms. Paul blew any chance for a reunion with that betrayal.
**
**
*
*Lennon would have for sure:
*
*JOHN LENNON talks of BEATLES Reunion 1975!
*
*Lennon Talks About The Beatles Getting Back Together in 1973
*
*ohn Lennon talks about a Beatles reunion being a real possibility, Butchers cover & I am the Walrus

Yep. After the litigation you could have put a fork in them - they were toast. No wonder George soon recorded Sue Me, Sue You for the Living in the Material World LP. It stunk, although he always went on record as stating he hated being a Beatle. So it would Lennon, Starr and fill in the blanks, which of course would never have happened. Without McCartney and Lennon there is no Beatles, and Ringo is driving a cab, or making bad albums (the latter is what happened after the Ringo LP).

Followup Messages:

top of page

 

Home Web Chat Web Boards Discography Library Quiz Art & Poetry Links Store

Image Map -- text links below

Home | Web Chat | Web Boards | Discography | Library | Quiz | Art & Poetry | Links | Store


Produced by Sam Choukri
Frequently Asked Questions
Last updated on Sep 1, 2017