|
Post by Panther on Mar 12, 2010 23:03:14 GMT -5
About Badham's book -- well, are we going to trust him over George's memory? I mean, George himself clearly states that he hadn't seen John for a couple of years before the murder. Paul has also stated many times that George and John had not patched up their relationship before John departed. I'd be curious to know Badham's sources.
|
|
|
Post by billycakes on Mar 12, 2010 23:46:37 GMT -5
The "you never give me your money" book covers the fragile relationships between the 4 of them since 69 and it's a painful read. none of them come out too good. but there's some interesting stuff like the story of John and Paul very nearly working together again towards the end of the "long weekend" but those plans were scuppered when Yoko summoned him back to her (maybe this was the actual time she split the Beatles up!) even though John was getting himself (and a house with May) together. Working with Bowie, the soulfullness of walls and bridges, and John singlehandedly making the rock and roll album decent were some of the reasons Paul was inspired to to ask John to work with him again - and maybe they were wise enough at this time to know they needed each other. And poor George (literally!) was so hard up having lost so much with his Handmade company that he had to (reluctantly) do the Anthology project. But sadly he still wasn't over his Beatle/Paul loathing. and never was. (my wife thinks he owed so much to Paul that he should have been more grateful and tolerant)
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Mar 13, 2010 0:28:00 GMT -5
...My guess as to when the first evidence of real friction began between Paul & George had to have it's genesis around the Revolver sessions, when George had problems coming up with a lead guitar riff for his own composition "Taxman", and Paul wound up putting down the lead guitar on that track. That had to have had an effect on George.... I've always wondered how George felt when Paul played a lot of the lead guitar solos on the Help! album. George did say on Anthology that Rubber Soul and Revolver were pleasant sessions for him. I agree though that by mid-1965 or so, Paul seems to have grown dissatisfied with George's lead guitar work. In fairness to Paul, George became immersed in Eastern Music in this period and let his guitar playing suffer. I think George has admitted as much. Meanwhile, other guitarists in this period were breaking new ground. I also agree that Paul and George's relationship is fascinating. I really lament that these two men didn't work together more after John's murder. That should have driven home to them how fleeting life is.
|
|
|
Post by ursamajor on Mar 13, 2010 3:54:11 GMT -5
The greatest friendship that existed between the Beatles post breakup was between John and Ringo. There is a book about this and I will try and find the title, it talks about all the correspondence between John and Ringo in the 70's. John would always send him gifts, letters, postcards etc ..
|
|
nine
Very Clean
Posts: 840
|
Post by nine on Mar 13, 2010 5:01:11 GMT -5
...My guess as to when the first evidence of real friction began between Paul & George had to have it's genesis around the Revolver sessions, when George had problems coming up with a lead guitar riff for his own composition "Taxman", and Paul wound up putting down the lead guitar on that track. That had to have had an effect on George.... I've always wondered how George felt when Paul played a lot of the lead guitar solos on the Help! album. George did say on Anthology that Rubber Soul and Revolver were pleasant sessions for him. I agree though that by mid-1965 or so, Paul seems to have grown dissatisfied with George's lead guitar work. In fairness to Paul, George became immersed in Eastern Music in this period and let his guitar playing suffer. I think George has admitted as much. Meanwhile, other guitarists in this period were breaking new ground. I also agree that Paul and George's relationship is fascinating. I really lament that these two men didn't work together more after John's murder. That should have driven home to them how fleeting life is. The following is from George's 2001 webchat.... mike_n_tex asks: this is for george: George, do you ever see a reunion tour with you and Paul and Ringo? george_harrison_live: but stranger things have happened.
|
|
nine
Very Clean
Posts: 840
|
Post by nine on Mar 13, 2010 5:15:59 GMT -5
Joe: I will add, since this subject seems to keep coming up in our posts: You've made it clear that you have a distaste for the gossipy kind of tell-all books. And its certainly your perogative not to read them. Or not to read my posts (they're pretty easy to skip over and avoid, and I suspect many people do). Just as its the perogative of the moderator of this site to define the standard of discourse however he sees fit (we're all guests in his home is how I look at it). Its a tricky subject. Like with Tiger Woods. He's a GOLFER. His sex life is none of my business and I could care less. But I put the Beatles in a little different category. To me, the Beatles were important historical figures who had a profound cultural impact. For that reason, like with most important historical figures, their personal lives goes beyond that of mere celebrity gossip, and are worthy of a bit more scrutiny. The Beatles were icons, and symbols, of an unprecedented period of social change. How they lived out those social changes in their personal lives is an intruiging question to me. Sort of along the lines of: "They talked the talk, so you want to see how they walked the walk." Thats my take anyways. I agree with you ace. May's book shed a lot of important light on John's frame of mind in the mid-70's when he was briefly out of Yoko's control, and we finally got some insight into the guy we hadn't had since 1968 when he hooked up with Yoko. Flippancy is a common occurance on this board. I appreciate your comment. He looked far healthier during the Lost Weekend.... well the part after ditching Nillson etc... You've only gotta see his interviews from this period.... this is something else I came across today that I guess you gotta take with a grain of salt ... but IMO I reckon it's on the mark.... Although Lennon would publicly lament this period, he did not do so in private. Journalist Larry Kane, who befriended Lennon in 1964, wrote a comprehensive biography of Lennon which detailed the "Lost Weekend" period. In the interview with Kane, Lennon explained his feelings about his time with Pang: "You know Larry, I may have been the happiest I've ever been... I loved this woman (Pang), I made some beautiful music and I got so fucked up with booze and shit and whatever." Lennon also saw Julian more during this period. “We had a lot of fun, laughed a lot and had a great time in general when he was with May Pang. My memories of that time with Dad and May are very clear - they were the happiest time I can remember with them.”
|
|
nine
Very Clean
Posts: 840
|
Post by nine on Mar 13, 2010 5:25:41 GMT -5
About Badham's book -- well, are we going to trust him over George's memory? I mean, George himself clearly states that he hadn't seen John for a couple of years before the murder. Paul has also stated many times that George and John had not patched up their relationship before John departed. I'd be curious to know Badham's sources. Well a fault with that book is a lack of references and an index!
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Mar 13, 2010 6:30:33 GMT -5
May's book shed a lot of important light on John's frame of mind in the mid-70's when he was briefly out of Yoko's control, JOHN LENNON: "Nobody controls me. I'm uncontrollable. If somebody's gonna impress me, whether it be a Maharishi or a Janov or a Yoko, there comes a point when the emperor has no clothes. Because I do stupid things, I've done stupid things. I am naive but I'm also not stupid. So there comes a point where I will see. And nobody can pull the wool that long. So for all you folks out there who think that I'm having the wool pulled over my eyes, well, that's an insult to me. Not that you think less of Yoko, because that's your problem; what I think of her is what counts. But if you think you know me or you have some part of me because of the music I've made, and then you think I'm being controlled like a dog on a leash because I do things with her, then screw you. You know, fuck you, brother, OR sister... you don't know what's happening. I'm not here for you. I'm here for me and her and now the baby. Anybody who claims to have some interest in me as an individual artist or even as part of the Beatles has absolutely misunderstood everything I ever said if they can't see why I'm with Yoko. And if they can't see that they don't see anything. They're just jackin' off to anybody... Mick Jagger, okay? Let them go and jack off to Mick Jagger. I don't need it. Just forget about me if that's what you want, and go after Paul or Mick - I ain't here for that. Go chase the Rolling Wings. Nobody ever said anything about Paul having a spell over me, or me having a spell over Paul. Why didn't anybody ever say: 'why don't those guys split up, I mean what's going on backstage? How can they be together so long? What is this 'Paul and John business' ''...? We spent more time together, the four of us in the early days, than John and Yoko, doing everything together, sleeping together in the same bed, in the same truck, nobody ever said a damn thing. Oh, maybe they said we were under the spell of Brian Epstein or George Martin, right? There always has to be someone 'doing' something to you. I just wanted to clear that up because, Jesus, nobody ever says it. You know, the boys is alright, but you go with a woman and it's something abnormal." I've always been grateful that John managed to say all of this here, which really nails everyone in one shot and puts the lid over that topic once and for all, or should. It's his actual voice - nobody writing it somewhere and claiming its authenticity - and it's straight off the LP called "HEARTPLAY" which came out in 1983 and are rough, unedited excerpts from the 1980 PLAYBOY interviews. I don't believe for a second that John was actually truly happy during that 'Lost Weekend' period, and I don't believe he ever said "I may have been the happiest I've ever been". What year was that Kane interview done? But once again, I think people are expecting that everything's always got to be "either/or", thinking that either John was 100% miserable or 100% happy. I have no doubts that he was more relaxed at some ways during the May period, and even had some fun, which is obvious. But he was really hurting on the inside and wanted Yoko back desperately. What do Julian's feelings have to do with John's? Of course Julian would be happier when Yoko (who he hates) was not around. So too would be the Beatles fans, and even I myself for all my defense of their relationship enjoyed John most in that batchelor period of 1974. It would have been just fine with me if John had never reunited with Yoko (and I presume most fans and Julian Lennon too) but it was John's life. May Pang loves to go on and on about how "The 'Lost Weekend' wasn't really as lost as everyone claims... John did this and this and that and that...", but it was John himself who called it his "Lost Weekend", not "everyone else". No matter what May or any other outsider may have observed, John's the one feeling what he's feeling alone on the inside, and it's his word I will go by. If he overall felt that period was overall dismissable and unhappy for him, I believe him.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Mar 13, 2010 6:35:08 GMT -5
About Badham's book -- well, are we going to trust him over George's memory? I mean, George himself clearly states that he hadn't seen John for a couple of years before the murder. Paul has also stated many times that George and John had not patched up their relationship before John departed. I'd be curious to know Badham's sources. Thank you, panther - and well said. I guess some fans may claim that George was just "doing a PR job" or "building false illusions". These various books can sometimes provide interesting things we never knew, but more often than not it's just a load of mistaken information, exaggerations, personal bias or misinterpretation or re-writing history, or in cases of people with axes to grind against the Lennon(s), an effort to cast a false negative shadow on people to make a buck and somehow get personal satisfaction from doing so.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Mar 13, 2010 6:53:29 GMT -5
But there is an element of mystery to their relationship in these periods; the mid-70's and 80's. It is the most difficult period to ascertain how they really felt about each other. As late as 1988, when The Beatles were inducted into the R&R Hall of Fame, Paul refused to attend the ceremony alluding to the fact he felt it would be hypocritical of him to appear with George & Ringo in public when the lawsuits were still pending a resolution at that point. Anyone care to offer opinions? Only that I always thought Paul came off badly by not attending the R&RHOF ceremony with George and Ringo. He could and should have made it, even with their resolution problems pending. He said he wanted to go, and I have no doubt about that. It's right up his alley. Too bad he let the crap stand in his way.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Mar 13, 2010 7:05:02 GMT -5
Joe: I will add, since this subject seems to keep coming up in our posts: You've made it clear that you have a distaste for the gossipy kind of tell-all books. And its certainly your perogative not to read them. Or not to read my posts (they're pretty easy to skip over and avoid, and I suspect many people do). No, ace - I try to read everyone's posts and don't believe in skipping. I just think everyone tends to file each and every tidbit they read from those books inside their brains forevermore as "indisputable truth". I'm sure some of it is. Maybe some of it isn't. I don't think that every word in all of every one of those books is "untrue". But with so many "stories" floating around, what's right and what's wrong? Same here, except in the case of John Lennon I feel he was his very own "gossip book". The man wore his life and feelings openly on his sleeve. That's why he appeals to me, and so many other fans who identify more with him as "real" than, say, Paul McCartney. To use your Tiger Woods analogy -- I think John provided his own Tiger Woods dirt. I would think that Paul's private life would be the one that will explode in the gossip books and espose all the frauds and pretense, once he dies ... not John's. Do you know what I'm getting at? We get precious little about Paul's feelings and what's inside his head and behind his closed doors much moreso than with John. So of course as a fan I am interested in these guys as PEOPLE, and what made them tick, and so on. But with John, he let us know.
|
|
|
Post by stavros on Mar 13, 2010 9:41:13 GMT -5
About Badham's book -- well, are we going to trust him over George's memory? I mean, George himself clearly states that he hadn't seen John for a couple of years before the murder. Paul has also stated many times that George and John had not patched up their relationship before John departed. I'd be curious to know Badham's sources. Well a fault with that book is a lack of references and an index! Tracked this down after a quick skim through 1980! From "The Beatles After the Break Up by Keith Badman" " Sunday September 28........The tenth and final day of Playboy interviews takes place this morning during breakfast............... Following the session with Playboy, John has another haircut and, along with Yoko, boards a plane for Los Angeles where they have arranged to meet George and Derek Taylor at Monty Python's concert at the Hollywood bowl. George gives John a copy, on audio cassette,of his latest album. Following the show George remains in LA while John and Yoko return to New York, arriving back in the early hours" Although the Pythons did play the Hollywood Bowl during this period as it is documented on film. It seems strange that George did not verify this meeting with John on the earlier video. Surely he would know the difference between a couple of years and a couple of months. Maybe Badman's source information is simply factually incorrect.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Mar 13, 2010 11:59:56 GMT -5
About Badham's book -- well, are we going to trust him over George's memory? I mean, George himself clearly states that he hadn't seen John for a couple of years before the murder. Paul has also stated many times that George and John had not patched up their relationship before John departed. I'd be curious to know Badham's sources. Thank you, panther - and well said. I guess some fans may claim that George was just "doing a PR job" or "building false illusions". These various books can sometimes provide interesting things we never knew, but more often than not it's just a load of mistaken information, exaggerations, personal bias or misinterpretation or re-writing history, or in cases of people with axes to grind against the Lennon(s), an effort to cast a false negative shadow on people to make a buck and somehow get personal satisfaction from doing so. The Keith Badman book, The Beatles Diary Volume 2: After The Break-Up 1970-2001, is not a narrative but day by day entries of what the four ex-Fabs were up to on a given day that Badman accumulated from multi-media sources. He probably got that September 28, 1980, entry from a newspaper account or some published interview from one of the Pythons. Badman pieces together his entries from many different sources. I share panther's doubt's about George actually meeting John and Yoko in L.A. in September 1980, and I too base that doubt on George's own post-December 8, 1980 recollections. Badman's source for this entry was either wrong or surprise, surprise, George and John did meet! If they did meet, perhaps it didn't go well so George later chose to ignore it, I don't know, I can only hazard a guess. That would be a question I would ask Yoko if I ever meet her as Badman's entry for September 28, 1980, clearly states that she went with John. That would in no way be a confrontational question to her and if it happened Yoko would probably be happy to confirm it. Yoko and Olivia seem to get on well and it would be comforting to us fans to know that John and George did get to meet and perhaps hug one last time close to the end of John's life if this entry in Badman's book is true. Badman's book is an otherwise invaluable reference book though and it is bound to have some mistakes among thousands of entries.
|
|
lowbasso
A Hard Day's Knight
Posts: 2,776
|
Post by lowbasso on Mar 13, 2010 14:58:59 GMT -5
Well a fault with that book is a lack of references and an index! Tracked this down after a quick skim through 1980! From "The Beatles After the Break Up by Keith Badman" " Sunday September 28........The tenth and final day of Playboy interviews takes place this morning during breakfast............... Following the session with Playboy, John has another haircut and, along with Yoko, boards a plane for Los Angeles where they have arranged to meet George and Derek Taylor at Monty Python's concert at the Hollywood bowl. George gives John a copy, on audio cassette,of his latest album. Following the show George remains in LA while John and Yoko return to New York, arriving back in the early hours" Although the Pythons did play the Hollywood Bowl during this period as it is documented on film. It seems strange that George did not verify this meeting with John on the earlier video. Surely he would know the difference between a couple of years and a couple of months. Maybe Badman's source information is simply factually incorrect. Any chance Eric Idle was in the concert and may have seen John and George together?
|
|
lowbasso
A Hard Day's Knight
Posts: 2,776
|
Post by lowbasso on Mar 13, 2010 15:29:43 GMT -5
And poor George (literally!) was so hard up having lost so much with his Handmade company that he had to (reluctantly) do the Anthology project. But sadly he still wasn't over his Beatle/Paul loathing. and never was. (my wife thinks he owed so much to Paul that he should have been more grateful and tolerant) I never got any impression that George was reluctant to do the Anthology project, and only did it to recoup financial losses on his film company? Is he quoted anywhere saying this? Maybe I missed something? Judging from his filmed interviews for the project and especially the Anthology book, George seemed very forthcoming with his recollections of his Beatle past. And it was George who hosted the other two at his home for the Anthology jam sessions seen on film. And following the Anthology period, it seems Paul and George were getting on quite well. George attended Linda's memorial service in London in 1998, which I personally witnessed having stood out in the rain all day in London and I saw George in his hooded raingear arrive with Olivia and Dhani at the church. And the two socialized as well when they traveled together to Las Vegas in 2000 to see Cirque du Soleil's "O" Show. I think once the lawsuits were settled pre-Anthology, Paul at least, made a concerted effort to patch up his relationship with George, and George appeared quite receptive to the gesture.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Mar 13, 2010 15:51:06 GMT -5
I have e-mailed Keith Badman at his website to ask if he recalls his sources for his September 28, 1980 entry about George and John meeting that date in L.A. I have invited him to respond directly if he would like.
I hope we haven't missed something obvious. Did John mention this in his Playboy interview as it is written that Sept. 28th was his last day of those interviews. It would be embarrassing if we have all missed something like John saying that he was off to see George in L.A. in that interview! ;D
Keith Badman has a new book coming out on Marilyn Monroe that sounds interesting.
|
|
|
Post by vectisfabber on Mar 13, 2010 17:26:20 GMT -5
We have a wealth of film, TV and interviews showing the four men themselves, together and apart - this is mostly stuff they wanted us to see. We have a wealth of 3rd party books, some first hand accounts, some not, and all of them have different levels of credibility.
What we don't have (apart from what they have allowed out) is the private side and, every now and then, we find out little details which we had no idea about - the lost weekend jam, the turning up at the Dakota guitar in hand and being turned away, the ukulele playing at George's, the nearly going to SNL, and so on.
These are the really interesting bits. These are the bits which say to me that these men always - ALWAYS! - recognised that they were family, that they probably got together a lot more than we think they did, and that the rifts were healed.
I firmly believe that, and I think it's the most iportant thing of all.
They didn't work together again as a group after the split except, with the two Anthology singles they did, and I think they are beautifully symbolic for that reason alone.
|
|
nine
Very Clean
Posts: 840
|
Post by nine on Mar 13, 2010 21:06:00 GMT -5
I have e-mailed Keith Badman at his website to ask if he recalls his sources for his September 28, 1980 entry about George and John meeting that date in L.A. I have invited him to respond directly if he would like. I hope we haven't missed something obvious. Did John mention this in his Playboy interview as it is written that Sept. 28th was his last day of those interviews. It would be embarrassing if we have all missed something like John saying that he was off to see George in L.A. in that interview! ;D Keith Badman has a new book coming out on Marilyn Monroe that sounds interesting. Brilliant John. I hope he responds. Cheers, Nine
|
|
nine
Very Clean
Posts: 840
|
Post by nine on Mar 13, 2010 21:10:18 GMT -5
Tracked this down after a quick skim through 1980! From "The Beatles After the Break Up by Keith Badman" " Sunday September 28........The tenth and final day of Playboy interviews takes place this morning during breakfast............... Following the session with Playboy, John has another haircut and, along with Yoko, boards a plane for Los Angeles where they have arranged to meet George and Derek Taylor at Monty Python's concert at the Hollywood bowl. George gives John a copy, on audio cassette,of his latest album. Following the show George remains in LA while John and Yoko return to New York, arriving back in the early hours" Although the Pythons did play the Hollywood Bowl during this period as it is documented on film. It seems strange that George did not verify this meeting with John on the earlier video. Surely he would know the difference between a couple of years and a couple of months. Maybe Badman's source information is simply factually incorrect. Any chance Eric Idle was in the concert and may have seen John and George together? I'm sure if the story is true that John, George and Derek would have met up with the Pythons after the show.... Maybe Palin or Idle can confirm if they were there??? May Pang mentions J,P and G participating in a group hug in 1974. That's a nice one I hope was true. There's also another occasion after the Grammies I think were Paul and John socialised back stage.
|
|
nine
Very Clean
Posts: 840
|
Post by nine on Mar 13, 2010 21:22:18 GMT -5
But there is an element of mystery to their relationship in these periods; the mid-70's and 80's. It is the most difficult period to ascertain how they really felt about each other. As late as 1988, when The Beatles were inducted into the R&R Hall of Fame, Paul refused to attend the ceremony alluding to the fact he felt it would be hypocritical of him to appear with George & Ringo in public when the lawsuits were still pending a resolution at that point. Anyone care to offer opinions? Only that I always thought Paul came off badly by not attending the R&RHOF ceremony with George and Ringo. He could and should have made it, even with their resolution problems pending. He said he wanted to go, and I have no doubt about that. It's right up his alley. Too bad he let the crap stand in his way. It would have been great to see Paul up on stage too. What I wouldn't want to have seen though is the three of them performing in one of those super group things like George and Ringo did. It would have to be just the three of them.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Mar 13, 2010 21:39:36 GMT -5
Only that I always thought Paul came off badly by not attending the R&RHOF ceremony with George and Ringo. He could and should have made it, even with their resolution problems pending. He said he wanted to go, and I have no doubt about that. It's right up his alley. Too bad he let the crap stand in his way. It would have been great to see Paul up on stage too. What I wouldn't want to have seen though is the three of them performing in one of those super group things like George and Ringo did. It would have to be just the three of them. But maybe if Paul was there, Mick Jagger and Bruce Springsteen wouldn't have hogged the mikes! I like those guys but it was not their night. George was all but shouted out by them on "I Saw Her Standing There." Macca could have held his own with those boys!
|
|
gloi
Very Clean
Posts: 222
|
Post by gloi on Mar 14, 2010 3:32:25 GMT -5
They also jammed at Eric Clapton's wedding and George joined the party for the release of Venus and Mars which was I believe on a boat. I don't think there were any pics of them taken together at the launch. There are at least two pictures of Paul & George at the Venus & Mars party around www.norwegianwood.org/beatles/images/paul_george_web.jpgi84.photobucket.com/albums/k9/Btlfan/newest/img033.jpgre John & George in 1980, I was always sceptical of this but recently one of the Pythons mentioned them being there in an interview. I've tried to remember where I read that but unfortunately can't.
|
|
nine
Very Clean
Posts: 840
|
Post by nine on Mar 14, 2010 4:11:16 GMT -5
They also jammed at Eric Clapton's wedding and George joined the party for the release of Venus and Mars which was I believe on a boat. I don't think there were any pics of them taken together at the launch. There are at least two pictures of Paul & George at the Venus & Mars party around www.norwegianwood.org/beatles/images/paul_george_web.jpgi84.photobucket.com/albums/k9/Btlfan/newest/img033.jpgre John & George in 1980, I was always sceptical of this but recently one of the Pythons mentioned them being there in an interview. I've tried to remember where I read that but unfortunately can't. Wow... great pics.... Paul looks a bit stunned in one but Linda is beaming. George looks like an old dude... he did a lot in the 70s.... He looks 20 years older in the clip for Blow Away than the one ten years later for Handle Me With Care. And.. great to hear one of the Pythons commenting on the 1980 get together. My guess is that it was either Palin or Idle. What I wanna see now is a giant list of all the ex Fabs meetings after the break.
|
|
|
Post by winstonoboogie on Mar 14, 2010 10:55:06 GMT -5
Wow... great pics.... Paul looks a bit stunned in one but Linda is beaming. George looks like an old dude... he did a lot in the 70s.... He looks 20 years older in the clip for Blow Away than the one ten years later for Handle Me With Care. Yes, and not to be a wet blanket, but neither picture looks like George to me. However, if there is independent confirmation that George was there, then that's good enough for me.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Mar 14, 2010 12:06:29 GMT -5
Wow... great pics.... Paul looks a bit stunned in one but Linda is beaming. George looks like an old dude... he did a lot in the 70s.... He looks 20 years older in the clip for Blow Away than the one ten years later for Handle Me With Care. Yes, and not to be a wet blanket, but neither picture looks like George to me. However, if there is independent confirmation that George was there, then that's good enough for me. One of the old Beatles' books or magazines from the 1970's had the photo of Paul and Linda facing George with their hands on a drink. This same source had the one of George hugging Paul, I think. I have seen those but way back in the 1970's from some printed source. The book might have been the paperback version of The Beatles Lyrics, I can't recall. These images kindly provided by gloi are black and white and look scanned from a book or magazine. Like Winnie, it has never really looked like George to me because the hair is so short and the photos do not give us a frontal of George's face. I am not disputing that it is George, it just didn't look like George to me. If both men were side by side and facing the camera, different story. It would be neat to find May or June 1975 photos of George as Venus And Mars was released in May 1975. Extra Texture(Read All About It) came out in October 1975(right after I had discovered The Beatles that past September as a 12 year old). Interesting stuff. It is great to see Paul and George hugging in 1975 as George had made his, "I would never be in another band with Paul," remark in 1974.
|
|
|
Post by winstonoboogie on Mar 14, 2010 14:59:34 GMT -5
It would be neat to find May or June 1975 photos of George as Venus And Mars was released in May 1975. Extra Texture(Read All About It) came out in October 1975(right after I had discovered The Beatles that past September as a 12 year old). Perhaps the Beatleblog chap can help?
|
|
gloi
Very Clean
Posts: 222
|
Post by gloi on Mar 14, 2010 15:12:35 GMT -5
|
|
lowbasso
A Hard Day's Knight
Posts: 2,776
|
Post by lowbasso on Mar 14, 2010 15:37:15 GMT -5
We have a wealth of film, TV and interviews showing the four men themselves, together and apart - this is mostly stuff they wanted us to see. We have a wealth of 3rd party books, some first hand accounts, some not, and all of them have different levels of credibility. What we don't have (apart from what they have allowed out) is the private side and, every now and then, we find out little details which we had no idea about - the lost weekend jam, the turning up at the Dakota guitar in hand and being turned away, the ukulele playing at George's, the nearly going to SNL, and so on. These are the really interesting bits. These are the bits which say to me that these men always - ALWAYS! - recognised that they were family, that they probably got together a lot more than we think they did, and that the rifts were healed. I firmly believe that, and I think it's the most iportant thing of all. They didn't work together again as a group after the split except, with the two Anthology singles they did, and I think they are beautifully symbolic for that reason alone. I'd have given anything to be a fly on the wall in George's hospital room in Staten Island, NY in Oct. 2001, when Paul and Ringo passed through to spend some time with a very sick George. Especially when Paul & George were alone. They knew it would be the last time they would ever see each other in this world. All we got from Paul was they (paraphrase) "spent some time alone together holding hands and talking."
|
|
|
Post by winstonoboogie on Mar 14, 2010 18:47:14 GMT -5
I need to register to log in. I'll take your word for it, though.
|
|
|
Post by vectisfabber on Mar 15, 2010 6:06:49 GMT -5
I'd have given anything to be a fly on the wall in George's hospital room in Staten Island, NY in Oct. 2001, when Paul and Ringo passed through to spend some time with a very sick George. Especially when Paul & George were alone. They knew it would be the last time they would ever see each other in this world. All we got from Paul was they (paraphrase) "spent some time alone together holding hands and talking." Me too, except at the same time I really wouldn't have wanted to, because it was such a private thing between the two men. It hurts me when I think about it.
|
|