John Lennon's Anniversary

Chris LeDrew · Post by **Chris LeDrew** » 8 Dec 2006 8:41 am

I know it's unpleasant to even recall this date, but I think it's important to give a little thought to Lennon on this day every year. It's an annual reminder of the difference he made in millions of lives, and the devastating effects of violence in our society.

I'm always of the mindset that if Lennon had lived, things would be very different on all fronts today - musically, politically, and otherwise.

Gone too soon at 40 years old, he is still influencing people 26 years later.

Ken Lang · Post by **Ken Lang** » 8 Dec 2006 7:05 pm

I always thought Lennon was off in left field somewhere. A voice coming out of the overgrown vegatation that could be faintly heard but not paid much attention to. He had some pretty good thoughts, like Give Peace a chance and so on, but that never fit the real world. Saying that to a terrorist would only get your head lopped off.

Too much evil in the world for most of the dreamers, who we can count by the number of headstones sticking out of the ground. It's a sad statement, but I'm afraid it's true.

He was sort of a hero to me but he lived Farin Youngs son--Live fast, love hard, die young.....

Michael Johnstone · Post by **Michael Johnstone** » 9 Dec 2006 12:34 am

Yeah he was a dreamer - but he was not the only one...

Tucker Jackson · Post by **Tucker Jackson** » 10 Dec 2006 4:16 pm

Thanks for recognizing Lennon, Chris. He was a great songwriter and an intersting guy, to say the least.

As for the business about "give peace a chance" and terrorism... it's not fair to take a historical figure's quote out of context and try to apply it to current scenarios. His call for peace was directly addressing the Vietnam war, which he decided did not have to be won in order for the world to continue spinning on its axis. As it turns out, he was right: South Vietnam may have gone communist, but the 'domino theory' that claimed that all of Asia would following suit if Vietnam fell never materialized.

He was very much a realist, in this particular case. Which is to say, if his "dream" had been realized sooner, there would have been a lot less headstones sticking out of the ground.
[This message was edited by Tucker Jackson on 10 December 2006 at 04:53 PM.]

Frank Parish · Post by **Frank Parish** » 10 Dec 2006 4:50 pm

I'd say Lennon and McCartney were two of most prolific songwriters of my time. Lennon was a visionary and wished for things better. Nothing wrong with that. That's the most tragic death of any musician I ever heard of. We were in shock for days..weeks.

Mike Winter · Post by **Mike Winter** » 10 Dec 2006 5:08 pm

Thanks too, Chris. John Lennon was a huge part of the anti-war movement in the early seventies. Historically, the movement was instrumental in ousting Nixon and bringing an end to the Viet Nam war. There are no strong voices today.

Tucker Jackson · Post by **Tucker Jackson** » 10 Dec 2006 5:26 pm

Sorry... I really don't want to hijack this thread (again), but I'm a historian-in-training, so accuracy is a pet peeve:

As influential as Lennon was, I don't think he can take credit for ousting Nixon. Getting caught bugging the phone of the head of the Democratic party in the Watergate building... that's what caused Nixon's resignation.

Nixon privately wanted to end the Vietnam war from the beginning of his first term. But he absolutely did not want it to be viewed as a loss or "capitulation." And he certainly didn't want it to appear that he had caved in to the anti-war movement. It was critical to keep his conservative base happy, as well as to maintain an image of strength in the global arena. So he knew the US had to get out, but he had to save face while doing it. Not an easy thing, which is why it took so many years to finally pull out.

OK, sorry to interject the history-geek stuff here... carry on!

[This message was edited by Tucker Jackson on 10 December 2006 at 05:29 PM.]

Chris LeDrew · Post by **Chris LeDrew** » 10 Dec 2006 5:26 pm

Yes, Lennon was an advocate for world peace. Being too young for Vietnam and the protest movements of which he was a major proponent, I saw him as more of an emotionally-charged musician with a great gravelly voice who had a lots of guts to do and say what he did during his brief time on earth. By opening himself up to the world through his music and lyrics, he inspired many more to be themselves and follow their passions. That is why thousands were standing in front of The Dakota for days after his death. People felt a connection with Lennon because he was the real deal, not so much a distant celebrity but a human being with faults just like the rest of us. Up until his death he always seemed to display a child-like interest in learning new things, never the know-it-all or pompous rock star. He's been one of my idols since I started playing guitar 20 years ago, and he still inspires me today.

Roger Rettig · Post by **Roger Rettig** » 10 Dec 2006 5:43 pm

I see nothing remarkable in that - aren't most of us 'advocates for world peace'?

I'm willing to bet that, had Lennon lived, he'd be just another celebrity using his platform to voice half-formed political views (we all know where that can go on this Forum!). I think he was quite an unusual individual, but I don't want to see him sanctified.

RR

Steinar Gregertsen · Post by **Steinar Gregertsen** » 10 Dec 2006 5:58 pm

aren't most of us 'advocates for world peace'?

Sure (I hope), but some voices are heard louder and clearer than others. Lennon's influence was huge, I sincerely doubt "most of us" would have the same impact as individuals.

As for the sanctification bit - I agree, and I don't think Lennon would have wanted it either...

Steinar

------------------
"Play to express, not to impress"
www.gregertsen.com
Southern Moon Northern Lights

[This message was edited by Steinar Gregertsen on 10 December 2006 at 05:59 PM.]

Tucker Jackson · Post by **Tucker Jackson** » 10 Dec 2006 6:27 pm

Well, let's not loose perspective here. Lennon's anti-Vietnam-war work was only a small part of what he did in his life... and spending more time talking about that than his music would be like having a Sneaky Pete thread that devolved into the pros and cons of his claymation work on the Gumby show.

Lennon was probably more famous for playing in a rock band of some kind than anything else. Although I can't remember what the band was called... but I heard somebody say that they were pretty good.

[This message was edited by Tucker Jackson on 10 December 2006 at 06:51 PM.]

Chris LeDrew · Post by **Chris LeDrew** » 10 Dec 2006 7:07 pm

Like I said before, his political views did not interest me. That's not why I hold him in high esteem. In my opinion, he was one of the greatest songwriters in popular music history. And through his words he put forth a lot of hope and courage, as well as some sensible ideas about how to get along with one another. Nothing I said indicates I would like to see him sanctified, and I couldn't agree more that it would sicken him to be held in such regard. In fact, I think he put his personal life out there so sanctification wouldn't happen, and it hasn't. According to a few posts, quite the opposite has occurred. We all have our opinions about Lennon, but I certainly thought of him as more than "an unusual person".

Tucker Jackson · Post by **Tucker Jackson** » 10 Dec 2006 7:24 pm

You got it right, Chris. He didn't like that he had been deified.

In an interview later in his life, Lennon said that he was so put off by the way the Beatles had been put on a pedestal, that he went on an active campaign to destroy the myth. He wanted to make "Let it Be" -- both the album and the movie, which he thought was garbage -- to show the world that the band was really a fraud of sorts. At least, a "fraud" in comparison to the level of adulation they were getting.

He wanted to show that they were just four guys who played music that was pretty good. Nothing more, nothing less.

Later, he wrote the song with the line "I don't believe in Beatles."

Obviously, he thought "enough is enough!" with the hero-worship stuff.

But when you have a musical track record like the Beatles, it's hard to convince people that you're only ordinary.

Mike Winter · Post by **Mike Winter** » 10 Dec 2006 7:28 pm

Tucker - I actually said the "movement" was instrumental in ousting Nixon, not Lennon. He was a voice in the movement, nothing more.

It (the movement) was a big factor, together with the media and of course the Watergate cover-up.

I don't think anyone is sanctifying anyone, just looking at the historical perspective and recognizing his part. Thankfully, his musical contributions vastly outweigh his other offerings.

[This message was edited by Mike Winter on 10 December 2006 at 07:29 PM.]

Chris LeDrew · Post by **Chris LeDrew** » 10 Dec 2006 8:09 pm

The FBI had a 100-page file on him, so somebody thought he was important.

Edited to remove political comments.

[This message was edited by Chris LeDrew on 10 December 2006 at 08:13 PM.]

Tucker Jackson · Post by **Tucker Jackson** » 10 Dec 2006 8:21 pm

Sorry, Mike, I should have read your post a little closer. I should have written:

"As influential as the anti-war movement was, I don't think it can take credit for ousting Nixon."

Good catch.

When Nixon resigned in 1974, the war was already over, so the anti-war movement was a moot point. It was 100% Watergate scandal that brought him down. He resigned the day after he lost the court case to retain control of the secret tapes where he discussed the cover-up.

Anyway, back to Lennon. I've been a fan ever since seeing the Beatles play in 1965. Of course, at the time, I was into Ringo. That launched me on a career as a drummer which lasted until I was 18 or so. So, yes, I was a drummer turned steel player. Just like you, Mike.[This message was edited by Tucker Jackson on 10 December 2006 at 08:37 PM.]

Mike Neer · Post by **Mike Neer** » 10 Dec 2006 8:50 pm

I was in a band with a kid at the time who idolized Lennon. His friend Paul was a photographer who knew John and had been in the Dakotas apartment a few times. He invited my friend to accompany him to see if they could meet up with John that day.

They waited outside for John and when he finally arrived there was some autograph signing and Paul snapped a pic of John signing someone's record. That someone happened to be Mark David Chapman and he later sold that photo to the Daily News, I think, for a lot of money. Anyway, my friend said they even spoke with Chapman.

As you can guess, he was very deeply affected by the events of that day. [This message was edited by Mike Neer on 10 December 2006 at 08:58 PM.]

Rick McDuffie · Post by **Rick McDuffie** » 11 Dec 2006 9:26 am

What Roger Rettig said. Lennon was a GREAT singer-songwriter.

There are millions of people today who are quietly working just as hard as he ever did (and some much harder) to make the world a better place...

Chris LeDrew · Post by **Chris LeDrew** » 11 Dec 2006 9:44 am

Interesting story, Mike.......thanks for sharing.

Bill Hatcher · Post by **Bill Hatcher** » 11 Dec 2006 5:05 pm

I personally find it is better for me to keep Lennons politics as far away from his music as possible.

I do find his loss to be tragic.

As much as I want to, I cannot find as much enjoyment in the ex Beatles music as I do in the Beatles music.

Mike Winter · Post by **Mike Winter** » 11 Dec 2006 5:39 pm

Bill H...your third point...me, too. I do, however, have a soft spot for George's "All Things Must Pass," which in my opinion was head and shoulders above anything else the others ever put out in their solo offerings. [This message was edited by Mike Winter on 11 December 2006 at 08:10 PM.]