|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Dec 10, 2010 9:51:26 GMT -5
I've never really had any problem with May Pang, but I've often played "Devil's Advocate" on occasion by pointing out things about her in order to balance the scales with regard to things fans were saying against Yoko Ono.
But in recent years I really think May is trying to make too much out of her association with John Lennon. Just today I listened to a link which Old Fred provided, to an interview with May on the Joe Crummey radio show (from NY). She was on there with a rather defiant attitude at times, saying things like: "I loved John - and you know what? He was in love with ME". Now, I know that John wrote SURPRISE, SURPRISE for May, where he says "I think I love her", etc.. but really, May Pang carries on as though she was John's "real true love", or something. Maybe he loved her like a sister or dear friend. There is a feeling I am constantly getting from this groupie that she wants everyone to know that "My time with John was his BEST! And his so-called 'Lost Weekend' was NOT 'lost'!! He was more productive than ever!!" (etc..)
At one point, the radio host states how long May knew John, and May is quick to correct him to get it down to the precise number of months, and tell him it was actually longer, just to give her situation with John "more weight".
John may have been fond of May, but it was Yoko he was a soulmate with, and who he constantly loved and missed and wanted back. He would have dropped Pang like a hot potato ASAP when Yoko was ready to reconcile. Ms. Pang was merely a temporary thing, and even though she and John may have kept up friendly contact till the end of Lennon's life, she is really overstating her importance. She was just a relative child at this time, who got off on being with a famous rock star and liked meeting other celebs like Ringo, Paul, Keith Moon, etc., and enjoyed partying around LA. She loved the night life with boyfriend John, going to clubs and watching John record the ROCK N ROLL album getting smashed on booze, and she's claiming these were actually "good times!".
I never really got these feelings about May in past years, but in recent ones she seems to want to really assert her influence and importance in John's story. On the radio show she's saying things like: "Everyone else thinks they know everything, but they weren't there and we were" (I believe this is something old Fred has often pointed out). Well, the same thing holds true for YokoandJohn.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Dec 10, 2010 12:14:06 GMT -5
I've never really had any problem with May Pang, but I've often played "Devil's Advocate" on occasion by pointing out things about her in order to balance the scales with regard to things fans were saying against Yoko Ono. Now wait a minute Joe! You used a constant funny and/or offensive(depending on one's point of view) nickname for May that sounded as if you were more than a little annoyed with her! ;D You have spoken better of May than Cynthia based on your own encounters with the two women, I'll give you that! You know what, I agree with most of what you write! May Pang seems like a potentially nice lady who had some really good times with John(and some really bad times) but she is not content with that. She is yet another "mistress" wanting all the limelight, wanting to scream to the world, "I was the "One" who John loved most. Her efforts to leapfrog over Yoko in terms of John's affections make here look downright silly. Oh she's clever and subtle about it, "I just want to set the record straight that the so-called 'Lost Weekend' was really over a year and John wasn't always drunk and had in this period his most commercial musical success." All of that is true but it doesn't elevate May over Yoko in the longterm scheme of things. I like May Pang when she just tells of her adventures with John as she did live that. I don't like when she ventures off and pontificates on John's life when she wasn't there. I do want to buy her book with all of the cool photos as John does look really neat in those. John undoubtedly loved May but he loved Yoko much more(including respect).
|
|
|
Post by ReturnToPepperland on Dec 10, 2010 12:35:30 GMT -5
I heard that interview when it aired Wednesday. I wasn't completely impressed with the way she came off though I'm not sure why. But it was more than brother/sister love, Joe. They went into something beyond that.
At the end of the interview she was saying something about the Yoko camp vs. her camp and how they want to keep her (May) out of the story and its getting to be more obvious. I think there is some truth there, though I don't know if its a good idea to publicly highlight this fact. Maybe she doesn't have any chance to reconcile if that is her aim. I assumed she is not Yoko's favorite person though Yoko started the relationship. Yoko probably thinks it was taken too far, but that was up to John.
|
|
|
Post by theman on Dec 10, 2010 13:41:06 GMT -5
May was HOT; Yoko was NOT!
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Dec 10, 2010 14:42:09 GMT -5
May was HOT; Yoko was NOT! I didn't think either one of them could be described as "hot", IMO. Though at times when Yoko would wear her hot pants, like when she was doing the GRAPEFRUIT signing thingie, it could be a surprise.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Dec 10, 2010 14:52:29 GMT -5
Now wait a minute Joe! You used a constant funny and/or offensive(depending on one's point of view) nickname for May that sounded as if you were more than a little annoyed with her! ;D You have spoken better of May than Cynthia based on your own encounters with the two women, I'll give you that! Oh yes, it's true that I have used that nickname for May. This revelation of mine here is not something I've just been noticing as of TODAY or anything; it's been coming for a few years already. But something about the way she sounded on this radio show really sealed the deal for me, somehow! And yes, when I met May at a Beatlefest in 1981 she was a real doll. She was not on the guest list though; she just showed up there... which again makes me wonder about her being an opportunist! May was more than happy to greet fans and sign autographs, for nuthin'. I had her sign an LP bootleg I'd bought, which was an LP of the MAN OF THE DECADE special. I still have it. Just to recap -- with Cynthia, at the same convention she wouldn't smile or talk to anyone as she sat at a table trying to hawk her own artwork. If you didn't buy, she wasn't interested in knowing you. Now, I'm not basing the entire demeanor of either of these two women based solely on this one encounter, but it's just one observation. Glad you and I are on the same page with regard to this one! Yes, I agree. In fact, I did love a story she told on this Joe Crummey show, where she and John snuck into a lousy Sean Connery movie in 1974, and John said something like "I'm glad I didn't have to PAY to see that!!" May did not recall the name of this movie, but I'd bet it was a terrible thing called ZARDOZ she is talking about! And I concur -- that movies SUCKS! I'll buy that.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Dec 10, 2010 15:04:39 GMT -5
But it was more than brother/sister love, Joe. They went into something beyond that. Don't forget in those interviews John has always said: "I wanted someone to love me, and there was nobody to love me and I just fell apart!" So how much "in love" were these two? John felt all alone, felt out of it, felt lonely and unloved. We've also heard the stories of John in a drunken mess yelling out Yoko's name consistently, through all this. Maybe he did fall in love with her somewhat in 1974, but I'd say that once he reunited with Yoko that brief fling then became the more generic kind of 'love". When John wrote and sang SURPRISE, SURPRISE for May, it sounded like he was singing of lust and that he 'thinks' he loves her. Heck, maybe he did. Sweet sweet sweet sweet love! Well, I don't think there's anything wrong with this at all because May Pang is basically a footnote in John's entire life story. Now, if there was ever a documentary made called JOHN LENNON: LA,then I could see May being the One to ask and talk to extensively. I mean, they don't even talk to Cynthia much at all in these documentaries, and Cyn was there way more a length of time than May was, right? Yeah, maybe Yoko didn't like that it went as far as it did. Maybe she regretted setting it up in the long run, too. But I don't see that much evidence that she doesn't like May or anything; May still gets her time to speak. If anything, I've heard May say some unflattering things about Yoko rather than the other way around.
|
|
|
Post by acebackwords on Dec 10, 2010 15:59:11 GMT -5
May Pang was basically an assistant that the Lennons hired and fired when they were done with her. I'm sure John and Yoko never considered her as any kind of equal. She was Lennon's babysitter and punching bag more than a girlfriend. Lennon had long talks with Fred Seaman where he debunked the notion of "friends." "I don't have any friends" he'd insist over and over. He thought most relationships were bound by mutual self-using. I think thats how he viewed Pang. But you know those musicians with all those love songs -- I'm sure Pang inspired deep sexual/romantic feelings in Lennon, at least for moments, at least for long enough to write a 3 minute pop song.
Pang's mostly interesting to me because she spent all that time together living intimately alongside Lennon behind the media screen. She kind of reminded me of a blank screen, she was so far removed from the world Lennon and Ono lived in that she could see it with sort of a naive objectivity.
|
|
|
Post by ursamajor on Dec 10, 2010 22:43:44 GMT -5
Elliot Mintz said that when Yoko kicked John out and he moved to LA with May Pang, the first 3 weeks were full on party party party, girls, booze, drugs you name it, John was having a blast. After the 3rd week he told Elliot to call Yoko because he wanted to go back to Yoko but Yoko said that John was not ready yet.
I think Yoko wanted John to get all this out of his system but obviously did not want to be anywhere near it and if they were still meant to be together it would happen and eventually that's what happened.
No doubt May Pang provided great companionship for John and was an emotional and physical support to him and John appreciated having her around but ultimately he really wanted to be with Yoko.
|
|
|
Post by Panther on Dec 18, 2010 18:16:52 GMT -5
Am I the only one a bit disturbed by Joe's thread and comments (above)?
First, he starts off by criticizing May Pang for daring to talk loudly about her own subjective perspective on John's life and relationship with Yoko -- and he does so by stating, as fact, his own subjective perspective on John's life and relationship with Yoko. May wasn't there so she isn't allowed to talk about it, says Joe, who then proceeds to write exactly what happened, set in stone (and this from a guy who wasn't there either). Call the kettle black much?
Then, he labels May Pang a "groupie". Nice. May Pang was a receptionist, working a job professionally, when she was told (by her boss) to spend time with John during his trip west. She was 20 years old, and had been shocked (not titillated by the prospect of drugs or money) when Yoko said John might make a pass at her.
Having got his digs in (regarding a minority woman, technically still in her teens at the time, that he's never met) Joe then decides that neither she nor Yoko is "hot", but then one post later calls May a "doll", about the most sexist word imagineable.
In short, you have some issues.
The way I see it, May is 100% entitled to talk/write/make public appearances about whatever she wants to regarding John. Obviously, if she was just blowing smoke up people's asses, people would all just ignore her until she went away. Unlike all those early to mid-70s vultures like Mintz, the producers, hangers-on, DJs and so on, May was actually side-by-side with John, traveling with John, spending time with John's son and the ex-Beatles, and in bed with John, for 18 months or more. If anyone is entitled to talk about that period of his life, it's her.
Also, her two books are very interesting and have a lot to recommend to them. Much appreciated by Lennon fans.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Dec 19, 2010 6:42:32 GMT -5
First, he starts off by criticizing May Pang for daring to talk loudly about her own subjective perspective on John's life and relationship with Yoko -- and he does so by stating, as fact, his own subjective perspective on John's life and relationship with Yoko. I am not talking about May's perspective or even my own perspective. I am going by John and Yoko themselves, what they have told us is the truth and the Real Deal. I am not making up my own determinations and "faux facts". Where did I write "May wasn't there so she isn't allowed to talk about it"? If I wrote this and forgot, I will own up. All I meant was that she overstates her part in John's life. And I believe others here have agreed with this, that John really wanted Yoko. I stand by "groupie" only in the loose sense that this was ultimately how she began to interact with John once she accepted. May could have refused to go out with John and be his mistress and have sex with him, if she didn't feel "right" about the whole thing. But once she got started in the permitted affair, she loved the whole "party life" and sleeping with A Beatle. She considers this period of John's life as one big fun-filled adventure in her eyes (as I'd imagine most of us would, being with someone like John Lennon) while Lennon himself and all others around him maintained he was miserable during this period. May had rose- colored glasses on, like some sort of obsessed fan just thrilled to be with John Lennon, Ex-Beatle. Please. Don't tell me about "throwing digs at a woman that he's never met" when the entire world bashes Yoko Ono on a daily basis, and they have never met Yoko! And actually, I DID meet May and Yoko both, though this is just a mere technicality to counter your remark; I am not in any way, shape, or form trying to claim that I "know" either of these women just based on a couple of pleasant fan encounters. And consider this -- I always give May Pang nothing but KUDOS based on our meeting. I have nothing but good things to say about her solely based on when I talked with her. So you're wrong in saying I've never met her, and also wrong in saying I am giving digs to a woman I never met. And I really would like you to explain what you mean about "a minority woman"? Are you referring to May's Asian ethnicity? Or are you referring to May having been a "minor" in age at the time she got together with John? Because she was not a minor. No, there are far more "sexist" words imagineable. And you know it. And I don't believe that my complimenting May Pang based on how sweet she was during our encounter (oops -- is the word "sweet" okay with you, Panther? Gee, I wouldn't want to use a word you deem "Politically Incorrect"...) by me calling her a "doll" is in any way offensive. I meant she was a "doll" in the sense that she was very nice, kind, sweet. That sort of thing. It is the first word that came to mind to describe my feelings and was in no way meant to insult her in that description. Quite contrarily, I only wanted to praise her there. And I was not the first one to use the word "hot" here. It was theman, who wrote: "May was hot, Yoko was not". I was just responding to his own "hot" comments. Why didn't you jump on him the way you jumped on me for using that word? Could it be because you share his observation in that case, and of course Yoko Bashing is always in style, and so it was okay with you? I have always said it was a great thing when John stuck up for women with WOMAN IS THE N OF THE WORLD, and I have always said it was a great step of maturity that he reached when he began to apprecaite and respect women, and dedicated WOMAN to "all women". So spare me your accusatory "sexist" bull. I have some issues with May Pang, yes. I called them a "beef". But I do not have any "issues" in the way I believe you have intended that meaning in this quote here. If you want to start getting personal between you and I, I will counter by saying that I think YOU have issues. You are afraid to even mention your gender in your profile! Talk about "issues"! I do not appreciate you trying to change my thoughts into some sort of "anti-woman, sexist thing". I personally believe that anyone who objects like you are to is the one with "issues". So touche. Except that most fans hate Yoko, and so they love to hear May Pang touting herself as John Lennon's #1 Gal. They love to partake in that fantasy; it's much easier for them to digest than the reality. Again, I don't believe that I've said May could not/should not write books about her period with John, or that she was unqualified to speak about her relationship with John. Of course there is nothing really to stop ANYONE from writing a book. I have often said -- and will say here -- that I DO enjoy when May speaks on the air or writes about some of the things she and John did in this time (I recently wrote somewhere that I loved to learn that May and John snuck in a theater to see the 1974 movie ZARDOZ with Sean Connery, and that John said "I'm glad I didn't have to pay for that!" -- just a wonderful story, since I am a movie buff and I agree that ZARDOZ is a rotten movie!). It's just that I believe May puts a spin on the "Lost Weekend" ( a positive spin that benefits her time with John) and tries to ignore the fact -- that's right, FACT -- that Lennon himself said he was basically longing for Yoko back, and while he was content to an extent to be with May for some companionship, John still said "I needed to be loved and there was nobody to love me". Don't tell me these are "my" opinions -- these are John's own words. And other friends at the time have underscored that feeling about John at this time. And I imagine John's longing words for Yoko still drive May Pang crazy, when she wants to feel that her time with John was so much more than this. Agreed. So what's the problem? You should also own up to the fact that as this thread has progressed, I have given May more compliments as others have stated their cases.
|
|
|
Post by Panther on Dec 19, 2010 17:49:00 GMT -5
You can defend your position all you like, but the fact remains that you labelled a woman a "groupie" because she had an intimate relationship with your hero. If she chose to get intimate with John, and was a starstruck young woman enjoying her time with a Beatle, good for her. She was not a groupie, who by definition approaches famous people purely for sex or money.
Further, I highly doubt that May or any self-respecting woman would thank you for calling her a 'doll'.
And my gender is irrelevant to my points raised here.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Dec 20, 2010 6:01:02 GMT -5
You can defend your position all you like, but the fact remains that you labelled a woman a "groupie" because she had an intimate relationship with your hero. If she chose to get intimate with John, and was a starstruck young woman enjoying her time with a Beatle, good for her. She was not a groupie, who by definition approaches famous people purely for sex or money. Further, I highly doubt that May or any self-respecting woman would thank you for calling her a 'doll'. And my gender is irrelevant to my points raised here. Very, very weak response to all the points I've made to debunk your charges against me. You have avoided acknowledging many points, such as the fact that I was not the one to first use the word "hot"; it was another member, and you did not ball him out for that. Also, that I did in fact give May more props as this thread continued and other fans have brought up other points. No, I called a woman a 'groupie' only because this is how she comes off with her nightclub partying, championing the wacky recording sessions laced with cocaine & alcohol over-indulgence, and her excited fan worship of the arrivals of Paul/Ringo/David Bowie/Keith Moon, etc. Other than her seeking sex or money, I think these days she really comes off that way because of her seeking notoriety for her time spent with John. Now, the fact that I happen to like John Lennon too has zero to do with my observations, and they are completely objective from that. I would feel the same way about anyone latching onto any celeb, whether I liked the star or not. And I would call the person on it as well. (By the way -- since May was employed and getting PAID to go to LA and basically be John's mistress and have sex with him, that's kinda close to your own definition! ) Yes, the fact that you are afraid to disclose your gender here does matter. Only because you had the nerve to say that I have "issues", and so I have pointed out in return that I think YOU are the one with issues. And if you get so upset about complimentary words that I am using to describe May Pang like "doll" (intending only that she was a kind and sweet person when I met her) then YOU are the one with serious "issues", not I.
|
|
|
Post by ReturnToPepperland on Dec 20, 2010 16:39:56 GMT -5
You can defend your position all you like, but the fact remains that you labelled a woman a "groupie" because she had an intimate relationship with your hero. If she chose to get intimate with John, and was a starstruck young woman enjoying her time with a Beatle, good for her. She was not a groupie, who by definition approaches famous people purely for sex or money. Further, I highly doubt that May or any self-respecting woman would thank you for calling her a 'doll'. I don't know this for sure because I am not a woman but I don't agree that any self-respecting woman would not thank you for calling her a 'doll'. It could be a complement. What's so bad about physical complements? It might not even be a physical complement depending on how it is used. It might be a complement to her personality or temperment.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Dec 20, 2010 16:46:11 GMT -5
You can defend your position all you like, but the fact remains that you labelled a woman a "groupie" because she had an intimate relationship with your hero. If she chose to get intimate with John, and was a starstruck young woman enjoying her time with a Beatle, good for her. She was not a groupie, who by definition approaches famous people purely for sex or money. Further, I highly doubt that May or any self-respecting woman would thank you for calling her a 'doll'. And my gender is irrelevant to my points raised here. I don't agree that any self-respecting woman would not thank you for calling her a 'doll'. It could be a complement. What's so bad about physical complements? It depends on the woman, I suppose. See Yoko Ono on a NYC street and yell, "Hey Doll!" and Yoko may kick you in the balls! Dolly Parton, for instance, might wink and hug you! Different strokes for different folks.
|
|
|
Post by OldFred on Dec 20, 2010 17:22:32 GMT -5
Last time I saw May Pang I called her sweetie and we hugged. True. P.S.: She is a sweetie.
|
|
|
Post by acebackwords on Dec 20, 2010 19:11:25 GMT -5
Last time I saw May Pang I called her sweetie and we hugged. True. P.S.: She is a sweetie. Oh thats great. I always thought May Pang was a sweetie, too. John was lucky to have her there at his moment of need. But lest anyone interpret this as anti-Yoko, it was Yoko's idea in the first place, and she stayed in touch with John constantly by telephone during the whole period. So you can't even really look at it as a split-up from Yoko. May seemed so innocent and naive. I think she honestly portrayed John as she saw him, warts and all. She described him as basically a "very frightened person." And she easily accepted his shortcomings because she felt he was "so special." Which he was. John's nickname for her was Fung Yee. One of those gobble-de-gook Lennonisms. But sounds vaguely obscene.
|
|
|
Post by vectisfabber on Dec 21, 2010 4:37:07 GMT -5
I always thought May was mega cute (patronising of me, I know). And while there have been times when Yoko looks very attractive, and many more times when she looks very sexual, I've never thought of her as cute.
Jane Asher - cute and sexy.
<vectisfabber makes determined effort to sidetrack thread elsewhere>
|
|
|
Post by Panther on Dec 21, 2010 4:50:51 GMT -5
I stand by "groupie" only in the loose sense that this was ultimately how she began to interact with John once she accepted. May could have refused to go out with John and be his mistress and have sex with him, if she didn't feel "right" about the whole thing. But once she got started in the permitted affair, she loved the whole "party life" and sleeping with A Beatle. Okay, now tell me how this is one iota different from what Yoko Ono did when she met John? Certainly if either acted more like a "groupie", it was Yoko. Unprompted, she pestered and peppered John for over a year until he relented and let her into the kitchen. He was also married when she did this. And she slept with him on their first date. Certainly, neither deserves to be labelled a "groupie", but no less May than Yoko.
|
|
|
Post by Panther on Dec 21, 2010 4:55:24 GMT -5
I would feel the same way about anyone latching onto any celeb, whether I liked the star or not. And I would call the person on it as well. So, why don't you feel the same way about Yoko, who threw herself at Beatle John???
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Dec 21, 2010 5:47:21 GMT -5
I would feel the same way about anyone latching onto any celeb, whether I liked the star or not. And I would call the person on it as well. So, why don't you feel the same way about Yoko, who threw herself at Beatle John??? I can (and have) asked the same thing about you and others who constantly do a double standard regarding everything against Yoko. But your question here is just so absurd. According to John, he and Yoko really "connected" during their meeting at the Indica Gallery. Read John's quote below in my signature, and start learning about the JohnandYoko relationship as being true love. I do not believe Yoko was in this to be a groupie and "sleep and party with a Beatle". And if you're still believing such nonsense about J&Y at this extended point in their long history -- I have nothing else to say to you on it. It's just being ridiculous.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Dec 21, 2010 5:53:07 GMT -5
I don't know this for sure because I am not a woman but I don't agree that any self-respecting woman would not thank you for calling her a 'doll'. It could be a complement. What's so bad about physical complements? It might not even be a physical complement depending on how it is used. It might be a complement to her personality or temperment. And as I have said a couple of times at least already, that's how I meant it (the latter) -- her personality. It's just more PC Gone Berserk.
|
|
nine
Very Clean
Posts: 840
|
Post by nine on Dec 21, 2010 8:36:55 GMT -5
I stand by "groupie" only in the loose sense that this was ultimately how she began to interact with John once she accepted. May could have refused to go out with John and be his mistress and have sex with him, if she didn't feel "right" about the whole thing. But once she got started in the permitted affair, she loved the whole "party life" and sleeping with A Beatle. Okay, now tell me how this is one iota different from what Yoko Ono did when she met John? Certainly if either acted more like a "groupie", it was Yoko. Unprompted, she pestered and peppered John for over a year until he relented and let her into the kitchen. He was also married when she did this. And she slept with him on their first date. Certainly, neither deserves to be labelled a "groupie", but no less May than Yoko. And she jumped into the limo with John and Cynthia.... a tad bold I would think....
|
|
|
Post by scousette on Dec 21, 2010 10:57:05 GMT -5
I always thought May was mega cute (patronising of me, I know). And while there have been times when Yoko looks very attractive, and many more times when she looks very sexual, I've never thought of her as cute. Jane Asher - cute and sexy. <vectisfabber makes determined effort to sidetrack thread elsewhere> Thank you!
|
|
|
Post by scousette on Dec 21, 2010 10:58:30 GMT -5
I stand by "groupie" only in the loose sense that this was ultimately how she began to interact with John once she accepted. May could have refused to go out with John and be his mistress and have sex with him, if she didn't feel "right" about the whole thing. But once she got started in the permitted affair, she loved the whole "party life" and sleeping with A Beatle. Okay, now tell me how this is one iota different from what Yoko Ono did when she met John? Certainly if either acted more like a "groupie", it was Yoko. Unprompted, she pestered and peppered John for over a year until he relented and let her into the kitchen. He was also married when she did this. And she slept with him on their first date. And he didn't even buy her dinner.
|
|
|
Post by vectisfabber on Dec 21, 2010 13:22:10 GMT -5
And he didn't even buy her dinner. He probably bought her one or two subsequently, though.
|
|
|
Post by vectisfabber on Dec 21, 2010 13:32:15 GMT -5
I do not believe Yoko was in this to be a groupie and "sleep and party with a Beatle". Me neither. Never have. But I do believe that she was keen to get a Beatle on board in furtherance of her artistic ambitions, knowing that they were "where it was at" in the world of contemporary art and fashion, and she wasn't too bothered which one of them it was. As it happens, Paul was a good deal less in tune with Yoko's particular brand of artistic utterances (which, in this instance, I shall be charitable enough not to characterise as "pretentious claptrap")(whoops), which leads me to two observations: 1. John's reaction is essentially the same as it was to Magic Alex - he was a sucker for a good salesman selling the Emperor's New Clothes; and 2. Paul's broadly neutral response to Yoko's initial overture to him (which, if I remember right, pre-dated her approach to John?) perhaps says more about his embracing the avant-garde than all his protestations about film loops and music concrete. In any event, John did respond and, notwithstanding some negative elements, it turned out to be the real deal for him - the best thing for himself, personally, that he could have done. More by luck than judgement, maybe, but you can't deny the reality of it.
|
|
|
Post by acebackwords on Dec 21, 2010 14:19:27 GMT -5
I do not believe Yoko was in this to be a groupie and "sleep and party with a Beatle". Me neither. Never have. But I do believe that she was keen to get a Beatle on board in furtherance of her artistic ambitions, knowing that they were "where it was at" in the world of contemporary art and fashion, and she wasn't too bothered which one of them it was. As it happens, Paul was a good deal less in tune with Yoko's particular brand of artistic utterances (which, in this instance, I shall be charitable enough not to characterise as "pretentious claptrap")(whoops), which leads me to two observations: 1. John's reaction is essentially the same as it was to Magic Alex - he was a sucker for a good salesman selling the Emperor's New Clothes; and 2. Paul's broadly neutral response to Yoko's initial overture to him (which, if I remember right, pre-dated her approach to John?) perhaps says more about his embracing the avant-garde than all his protestations about film loops and music concrete. In any event, John did respond and, notwithstanding some negative elements, it turned out to be the real deal for him - the best thing for himself, personally, that he could have done. More by luck than judgement, maybe, but you can't deny the reality of it. Someone correct me if I'm wrong here, but if I'm not mistaken Yoko first approached Paul. She had some idea for a compilation of hand-written song lyrics and asked Paul if the Beatles would donate a song to the cause. Paul was nuetral and passed on the idea to John who I believe agreed to the project.
|
|
|
Post by ursamajor on Dec 21, 2010 15:29:57 GMT -5
I have mentioned this before and while the John and Yoko love story did turn out to be the real deal, Yoko's pursuit of John in the beginning was much like her art, it made no sense, especially since she supposedly didn't know who he was, yeah right !!
That's the part I don't like and I think is spin, the way they got together but then again I think to myself, if I really wanted to be with someone what lenghts would I go to , to get that person, the end sometimes justifies the means.
|
|
|
Post by Panther on Dec 21, 2010 16:50:53 GMT -5
As I already stated ("neither should be called a groupie" -- see above), Yoko was clearly not a groupie in the grand scheme of things (that's rather obvious). My point is that if you're going to call May Pang a groupie based on her initial get-together with John, then you certainly have to call Yoko the same, as her actions were by far the more 'groupie-like' of the two (not to mention Yoko was about 14 years older than May when she did this).
So, can we just resolve to call neither of them a "groupie"?
|
|