|
Post by Panther on Aug 5, 2011 12:03:29 GMT -5
And let me make the point that though Davis was found innocent of smuggling in that machine gun, I personally feel she was heavily involved in the incedent as well as being partially responsible for the ensuing deaths and riots. Respect your opinion, of course, but I completely disagree! As I explained before, I just cannot see it even being plausible that such an intelligent person (with absolutely no history, before or since, of militarism or violence) would even consider such a hare-brained scheme, let alone help a 17-year-old try to pull off what amounted to certain suicide. I think it's beyond obvious that the Reagan-gov't (of California) were desperate to do anything to get Davis in trouble, after it fired her for the crime of being a Communist and faced the wrath of the public and human rights' groups. Once they saw a convenient way to frame her by linking her in the public's eye to a "nigger-with-guns" Black Panther figure, they jumped at it.
|
|
|
Post by Panther on Aug 5, 2011 12:05:26 GMT -5
Could anything be funnier than that Chuck Berry appearance with John, where Yoko is wailing her head off while Chuck is trying to sing? There comes a point where John should have said, "You know, Yoko, not a single person on earth wants to hear you at the microphone right now...".
|
|
|
Post by acebackwords on Aug 5, 2011 12:12:05 GMT -5
The point being that people like John-and-Yoko and Bob Dylan and many many other of these '60s radical activists obviously COULDN'T tell the difference back then. That may be true. Let's all bear in mind, however, that the song in question is about ANGELA DAVIS, not about George Jackson. I was also referring to the song "Attica State" -- which had also come up in the discussion. And John and Yoko's press conferences urging the release of all the "politica prisoners" at Attica State -- many, many, many of whom also happened to be cold-blooded murderers who needed to be kept in cages for the good of society. As well as the subsequent point that John-and-Yoko (in my opinion) were doing a grave disservice to society by petitioning for their freedom (I guess they figured it worked once with the John Sinclair case, and then -- typical John Lennon -- they went complete overboard in the wrong direction). And I was also pointing out the irony -- and yes the downright hypocricy -- of Yoko's position. I doubt very much she's petitioning to get murderers let out of Attica today considering that Mark David Chapman is one of the inmates. But isn't that how it often is with people? They have one standard when it happens to them, but quite another standard when its happening to somebody else.
|
|
|
Post by acebackwords on Aug 5, 2011 12:13:11 GMT -5
And let me make the point that though Davis was found innocent of smuggling in that machine gun, I personally feel she was heavily involved in the incedent as well as being partially responsible for the ensuing deaths and riots. Respect your opinion, of course, but I completely disagree! Respect your opinion as well. You made for a very interesting thread.
|
|
|
Post by acebackwords on Aug 5, 2011 12:22:11 GMT -5
And let me make the point that though Davis was found innocent of smuggling in that machine gun, I personally feel she was heavily involved in the incedent as well as being partially responsible for the ensuing deaths and riots. Respect your opinion, of course, but I completely disagree! As I explained before, I just cannot see it even being plausible that such an intelligent person (with absolutely no history, before or since, of militarism or violence) would even consider such a hare-brained scheme, let alone help a 17-year-old try to pull off what amounted to certain suicide. I think it's beyond obvious that the Reagan-gov't (of California) were desperate to do anything to get Davis in trouble, after it fired her for the crime of being a Communist and faced the wrath of the public and human rights' groups. Once they saw a convenient way to frame her by linking her in the public's eye to a "nigger-with-guns" Black Panther figure, they jumped at it. I also invite you to read Angela Davis's Wikepedia page where it states: "Angela Davis purchased the firearms used in the attack, including the shotgun used to kill Judge Haley." As well as researching the actual life of Angela Davis -- as opposed to her flowery rhetoric on social justice. Read some of the inflammatory things she was actually saying back then, which were very much in line with the "Kill the pigs" line of reasoning. What can I say, I'm against that stuff. Violent revolution and all that . Hell, I've lived in Berkeley off and on for almost 35 years. I've heard more than enough of that stuff. And though I was a little too young for the Angela Davis/George Jackson period, when I first came to Berkeley in 1974 my sister lived right down the street from Patty Hearst. So I caught the '70s version of that revolutionary horsecrap with the SLA and the Hearst kidnapping and all that. My sister actually became friends with Bill and Emily Harris -- two of the SLA kidnappers -- and regularly visited them in prison. So I got to see that 60s lunancy play out to its logical extreme.
|
|
|
Post by acebackwords on Aug 5, 2011 12:37:23 GMT -5
As for John Lennon's official position on violent revolution, he was famously ambiguous, re "And when you talk about destruction / Don't you know that you can count me out. In."
But this much is obvious. Many, many people that Lennon was hanging out with and actively supporting during his STINYC period -- Jerry Rubin, Abbie Hoffman, Black Panthers, etc -- were in fact STRONG advocates of violent revolution.
|
|
|
Post by Panther on Aug 5, 2011 17:35:36 GMT -5
But this much is obvious. Many, many people that Lennon was hanging out with and actively supporting during his STINYC period -- Jerry Rubin, Abbie Hoffman, Black Panthers, etc -- were in fact STRONG advocates of violent revolution. Yes, you're right. There's no doubt that Lennon was (if briefly) a tool of various left-of-mainstream groups that wanted a moneyed-Beatle as a fundraiser/spokesman. Don't forget Michael X, whom John funded with wads of cash, prior to his brutal murders in the Caribbean. There's also considerable evidence (though Yoko's denied it) that John funded the I.R.A. About Angela Davis, I recall reading in her autobiography that she did indeed purchase a firearm for self-protection, circa 1971, which was understandable given that she was under surveillance in her home, and driving to and from UCLA (I mean 'understandable' in the context of a black person at that time, in that place). I am not aware of conclusive evidence that she purchased the weapon that the younger Jackson used. (Wikipedia does not count as factual evidence, though it could be the case that the gun she purchased was taken from her by a Black Panther affiliate.)
|
|
|
Post by Jason I on Aug 7, 2011 6:43:31 GMT -5
'Luck Of The Irish' is a GREAT song imo. What a pity it had to be recorded in these godawful sessions. Beautiful lyric, gorgeous melody. I appreciate your other points, but do you really consider these lyrics (written by a middle-class British guy living in New York with help from a rich Japanese, no less) to be "beautiful"?: If we could make chains with the morning dew The world would be like Galway Bay Let's walk over rainbows like leprechauns The world would be one big Blarney stone
Why the hell are the English there anyway? As they kill with God on their side Blame it all on the kids and the IRA As the bastards commit genocide! Aye! Aye! Genocide!
If you had the luck of the Irish You'd be sorry and wish you was deadI'm sure the Irish appreciated John's telling the world that if people were them, they'd rather be dead. And don't get me started on Yoko and the blarney stone... Well perhaps some of the Yoko sections could be picked apart. But the marriage of the lyric and the melody as a whole I've always found quite nice. Obviously John wasn't literally meaning people would wish they were dead. It's just a nice bit of poetic license taken to the extreme to make a point.
|
|
|
Post by Jason I on Aug 7, 2011 6:47:48 GMT -5
That may be true. Let's all bear in mind, however, that the song in question is about ANGELA DAVIS, not about George Jackson. I was also referring to the song "Attica State" -- which had also come up in the discussion. And John and Yoko's press conferences urging the release of all the "politica prisoners" at Attica State -- many, many, many of whom also happened to be cold-blooded murderers who needed to be kept in cages for the good of society. As well as the subsequent point that John-and-Yoko (in my opinion) were doing a grave disservice to society by petitioning for their freedom (I guess they figured it worked once with the John Sinclair case, and then -- typical John Lennon -- they went complete overboard in the wrong direction). And I was also pointing out the irony -- and yes the downright hypocricy -- of Yoko's position. I doubt very much she's petitioning to get murderers let out of Attica today considering that Mark David Chapman is one of the inmates. But isn't that how it often is with people? They have one standard when it happens to them, but quite another standard when its happening to somebody else. I could be wrong, but I believe the general gist of Attica State is more against the prisoner conditions that led to the riots during that period, including the shooting of a prisoner.
|
|
|
Post by acebackwords on Aug 7, 2011 17:30:30 GMT -5
I don't know if you guys know the story of how Lennon's radical political period came to an end, but thats a fascinating story (as most of Lennon's life is, in my opinion).
After performing at a John Sinclair benefit concert (with Sinclair being released from prison virtually the next day!) Lennon was filled with revolutionary fervor. He started making big plans to go on a national barnstorming tour with Elephant's Memory and Jerry Rubin, as well as giving platforms on the show to all the local radical leaders in all the towns where they performed. The plan was to keep it as low-rent as possible, with no big light shows or anything like that, real spontaneous where they could randomly hit towns guerilla-style, rent halls and do it up. With all the profits going back to the radical communities in the different cities. And the tour would peak with a big concert/demonstration at the Republican convention in 1972 in Florida. Jerry Rubin, Abbie Hoffman and all them Yippies had big plans to disrupt the convention, just as they had previously disrupted the Democratic convention in 1968 in Chicago, which sparked massive rioting all over town. But when the Nixon Whitehouse got wind of Lennon's plans they were naturally alarmed. Nixon (who was one of the most odious Blue Meanies of that period) sicced the FBI on Lennon, and they did everything they could to deny him his Green Card and get him deported back to England. Lennon was convinced that his phone was bugged and that FBI agents were following him. And I don't doubt him. Lennon could be extremely bold and confident, but he was also an extemely scared and paranoid person (one of the many strange contradictions in the Lennon character). So he caved in and canceled the Elephant's Memory tour.
The whole period culminated on the eve of the Nixon vs McGovern presidential election in 1972. They all convened at Rubin's hip New York pad to watch the election returns, which Nixon won by a landslide, of course. This inspired Lennon to go berzerk on yet another one of his alcohol and cocaine-fueled rampages (Lennon was not going to get his revolution after all -- darn darn darn). According to Rubin's girlfriend, Lennon denounced the whole lot of them as "uptight middle-class Jews." Then he totally humiliated Yoko by fucking some chick in Rubin's bedroom practically right in front of Yoko. Shortly afterwards, Yoko kicked him out of the Dakota, set him up with May Pang, and sent him off to Los Angeles, mostly to get him out of her hair.
And that was pretty much the end of Lennon's career as a radical political leader.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Aug 7, 2011 21:10:59 GMT -5
'Born In A Prison' is one of my favourite Yoko tracks. And one of the few times where Johns voice fits so well with her with his chorus harmonies. One of my all time favorite lines is: "Wood becomes a flute when it's loved, Reach for yourself and your battered mates."
|
|
|
Post by sayne on Aug 7, 2011 22:28:47 GMT -5
. . . Wood becomes a flute when it's loved, My flute becomes wood when it is loved. ;D
|
|
|
Post by Panther on Aug 7, 2011 22:30:46 GMT -5
I don't think John was an artist who really had the level of commitment and "objective" view required to be an activist. However, he was just the right kind to write anthems that inspired people -- "Give Peace a Chance" and "Imagine" highest among them. In retrospect, you'd have to say that the mid-1971 to late-1972 period was probably a bad one for John, and kicked off his American years in a bad way. He probably should have concentrated more on his songwriting craft (as Bob Dylan did in early 1974 -- he actually attended an art/philosophy class with Norman Raeben for months, resulting in Blood on the Tracks) instead of trying to be an "authentic" artist. John seemed excited by how seriously music-artists were taken in the USA as opposed to Britain, where sincerity in pop music is generally frowned upon. What John forgot is that history judges the music you made, not the interviews you gave or trendy causes you supported.
There are music artists who -- like any regular people -- are quite skilled at being activists and tying it in with their career. But I don't think John was one of them.
|
|
|
Post by sayne on Aug 8, 2011 10:34:19 GMT -5
. . . There are music artists who -- like any regular people -- are quite skilled at being activists and tying it in with their career. But I don't think John was one of them. I think that I would amend your comment by referencing a thesis I proposed awhile back. Perhaps why John messed up was because no one had written the "how to" book on how to be the biggest star in the world and be an activist at the same time. John sort of had to wing it. Hence, his mistakes. I say this because it's easy for a Joan Baez or some painter or poet or novelist that is not part of the mainstream to put it all on the line because no one knows them. If one looks at all the artist activists in the 60s and 70s, no one was as big as John. John had the most to lose and was willing to lose it. He also had the most to give and was willing to give it. I think if John and Yoko had had a team or at least a guide in how to use the bully pulpit, how to use the mainstream and not alienate them in order to get one's points across and make change, things would have turned out much differently. We might have even gotten a different Sometime in New York City. I think John began to learn it when he did Imagine. He did say something like if you sugar-coat things, you can get people to listen. I think his impatience and lack of marketing skills hurt him. I think Bono learned from John's mistakes.
|
|
|
Post by Panther on Aug 8, 2011 11:33:18 GMT -5
Good points by Sayne, although I don't think it's right to say that Joan Baez wasn't of the mainstream! I mean, she was on the cover of Time magazine before The Beatles came to America. By being (a) popular and (b) a woman, she had A LOT to lose by being an activist. She made mistakes too, though. But yes, it was a somewhat "naive" time in terms of celebrity activism, and John was the biggest of them all.
|
|
|
Post by mikev on Aug 8, 2011 14:13:56 GMT -5
. . . There are music artists who -- like any regular people -- are quite skilled at being activists and tying it in with their career. But I don't think John was one of them. I think that I would amend your comment by referencing a thesis I proposed awhile back. Perhaps why John messed up was because no one had written the "how to" book on how to be the biggest star in the world and be an activist at the same time. John sort of had to wing it. Hence, his mistakes. I say this because it's easy for a Joan Baez or some painter or poet or novelist that is not part of the mainstream to put it all on the line because no one knows them. If one looks at all the artist activists in the 60s and 70s, no one was as big as John. John had the most to lose and was willing to lose it. He also had the most to give and was willing to give it. I think if John and Yoko had had a team or at least a guide in how to use the bully pulpit, how to use the mainstream and not alienate them in order to get one's points across and make change, things would have turned out much differently. We might have even gotten a different Sometime in New York City. I think John began to learn it when he did Imagine. He did say something like if you sugar-coat things, you can get people to listen. I think his impatience and lack of marketing skills hurt him. I think Bono learned from John's mistakes. Yeah but Bono was a republican! Ohhhhh...I thought you meant Sonny Bono ;D ;D
|
|
|
Post by ReturnToPepperland on Aug 8, 2011 16:15:22 GMT -5
The subject matter is far left However, I don't consider that a bad thing! The "preachiness" is not debatable, though. You're right about that. And how "dated" it is... hmm, because all the songs were topical, the album was already dated by the time it was released! However, this "datedness" is actually part of its appeal now. Angela Davis was a Communist as well as a terrorist. She was tried for her involvement in the Soledad brothers' August 1970 abduction and murder of Judge Harold Haley in Marin County, California. A 17-year old high school student gained control over a courtroom in Marin County, California, armed the black defendants and took Judge Harold Haley, the prosecutor, and three female jurors as hostages. As the 17-year old transported the hostages and two black convicts away from the courtroom, the judge, one of the jurors, the prosecutor, and the three other men were killed. Davis had purchased the firearms used in the attack, including the shotgun used to kill Haley, which had been purchased two days prior and sawed-off. She had also written numerous love letters found in the prison cell of one of the murderers that proved she know about the plot. She was acquitted by a very left leaning jury even though California considered all persons concerned in the commission of a crime, whether they directly commit the act constituting the offense principals in any crime so committed. San Marin County Superior Judge Peter Allen Smith charged Davis with “aggravated kidnapping and first degree murder" in the death of Judge Harold Haley. I can't even stand listening to a song about such a person. I consider that a bad thing.
|
|
|
Post by ReturnToPepperland on Aug 8, 2011 16:19:52 GMT -5
That may be true. Let's all bear in mind, however, that the song in question is about ANGELA DAVIS, not about George Jackson. I was also referring to the song "Attica State" -- which had also come up in the discussion. And John and Yoko's press conferences urging the release of all the "politica prisoners" at Attica State -- many, many, many of whom also happened to be cold-blooded murderers who needed to be kept in cages for the good of society. As well as the subsequent point that John-and-Yoko (in my opinion) were doing a grave disservice to society by petitioning for their freedom (I guess they figured it worked once with the John Sinclair case, and then -- typical John Lennon -- they went complete overboard in the wrong direction). And I was also pointing out the irony -- and yes the downright hypocricy -- of Yoko's position. I doubt very much she's petitioning to get murderers let out of Attica today considering that Mark David Chapman is one of the inmates. But isn't that how it often is with people? They have one standard when it happens to them, but quite another standard when its happening to somebody else. Yeah, free the prisoners, jail the judges, that is what the song says. No wonder John looked back at that period with revulsion and embarrassment.
|
|
|
Post by acebackwords on Aug 8, 2011 16:42:37 GMT -5
However, I don't consider that a bad thing! The "preachiness" is not debatable, though. You're right about that. And how "dated" it is... hmm, because all the songs were topical, the album was already dated by the time it was released! However, this "datedness" is actually part of its appeal now. Angela Davis was a Communist as well as a terrorist. She was tried for her involvement in the Soledad brothers' August 1970 abduction and murder of Judge Harold Haley in Marin County, California. A 17-year old high school student gained control over a courtroom in Marin County, California, armed the black defendants and took Judge Harold Haley, the prosecutor, and three female jurors as hostages. As the 17-year old transported the hostages and two black convicts away from the courtroom, the judge, one of the jurors, the prosecutor, and the three other men were killed. Davis had purchased the firearms used in the attack, including the shotgun used to kill Haley, which had been purchased two days prior and sawed-off. She had also written numerous love letters found in the prison cell of one of the murderers that proved she know about the plot. She was acquitted by a very left leaning jury even though California considered all persons concerned in the commission of a crime, whether they directly commit the act constituting the offense principals in any crime so committed. San Marin County Superior Judge Peter Allen Smith charged Davis with “aggravated kidnapping and first degree murder in the death of Judge Harold Haley. I can't even stand listening to a song about such a person. I consider that a bad thing. Pepperland: You got it exactly right in my opinion. And, needless to say, its just my opinion.
|
|
|
Post by ReturnToPepperland on Aug 8, 2011 17:59:46 GMT -5
And let me make the point that though Davis was found innocent of smuggling in that machine gun, I personally feel she was heavily involved in the incedent as well as being partially responsible for the ensuing deaths and riots. Respect your opinion, of course, but I completely disagree! As I explained before, I just cannot see it even being plausible that such an intelligent person (with absolutely no history, before or since, of militarism or violence) would even consider such a hare-brained scheme, let alone help a 17-year-old try to pull off what amounted to certain suicide. I think it's beyond obvious that the Reagan-gov't (of California) were desperate to do anything to get Davis in trouble, after it fired her for the crime of being a Communist and faced the wrath of the public and human rights' groups. Once they saw a convenient way to frame her by linking her in the public's eye to a "nigger-with-guns" Black Panther figure, they jumped at it. There was no evidence she was framed. If they really had intentions to frame her she would have been convicted.
|
|
|
Post by Panther on Aug 8, 2011 19:49:45 GMT -5
Oh boy, here we go!! My nemesis and I meet again... Angela Davis was a Communist as well as a terrorist. Being a Communist is not a crime (indeed, I might call it a virtue) unless you don't believe in free speech (which, knowing you, you probably don't). (Angela Davis has since split with the Communist Party, if anyone cares.) Your statement that "[she was] a terrorist" is based on what, exactly?? She was never even accused of any terrorist activities, and she was acquitted of all charges in relation to the Jonathan Jackson prison-break attempt. The (supposed) fact that she owned the gun that the boy used does not make her a terrorist. According to your logic, if you legally own a gun, and I steal it away from you and use it to kill 10 people, then you are a terrorist. Does this make sense? She was tried for her involvement in the Soledad brothers' August 1970 abduction and murder of Judge Harold Haley in Marin County, California. ... and, as I said, was acquitted of all charges. Davis had purchased the firearms used in the attack That's according to the state of California, the same state that fired her (temporarily) for the crime of being a Communist party member. She may indeed have purchased a gun (as I said, above, I believe she states this in her autobiography), but no evidence was found that she was aware of the planned prison-break. She had also written numerous love letters found in the prison cell of one of the murderers that proved she know about the plot. I would like to know your source for this, other than out of your ass. I refer to the "proved she know [sic] about the plot" part. No evidence of this, whatsoever. She was acquitted by a very left leaning jury You'll have to explain to us why the (right-wing) state of California, which had made every attempt already to fire Davis, would elect a "left leaning" jury. Please support this statement with factual evidence, or it's garbage.
|
|
|
Post by Panther on Aug 8, 2011 19:50:51 GMT -5
There was no evidence she was framed. More to the point, there was no evidence she was guilty.
|
|
|
Post by sayne on Aug 8, 2011 20:47:57 GMT -5
Good points by Sayne, although I don't think it's right to say that Joan Baez wasn't of the mainstream! I mean, she was on the cover of Time magazine before The Beatles came to America. By being (a) popular and (b) a woman, she had A LOT to lose by being an activist. She made mistakes too, though. But yes, it was a somewhat "naive" time in terms of celebrity activism, and John was the biggest of them all. You're right, I didn't mean to suggest that Joan Baez wasn't popular. I guess what I meant for her was that she could afford to be vocal because she didn't have THAT much to lose. She was perfectly fine singing in coffee houses and folk festivals. She didn't have multi-million dollar tours or contracts to deal with. She didn't have the pressure of suits expecting a new song every 6 months and album every 9. If she was never in the charts, she still would have had some sort of career with no precipitous drop in fortune or fame.
|
|
|
Post by Panther on Aug 8, 2011 21:33:27 GMT -5
You're right, I didn't mean to suggest that Joan Baez wasn't popular. I guess what I meant for her was that she could afford to be vocal because she didn't have THAT much to lose. She was perfectly fine singing in coffee houses and folk festivals. She didn't have multi-million dollar tours or contracts to deal with. She didn't have the pressure of suits expecting a new song every 6 months and album every 9. If she was never in the charts, she still would have had some sort of career with no precipitous drop in fortune or fame. Sayne, I think we agree more than we disagree, but I do think you're underestimating the amount of risk and sacrifice Joan Baez made. She was ostracized by a lot of people for refusing to pay part of her taxes (that which supported the Vietnam war effort), for singing peacenik songs consistently for decades (not just as a brief fad, like Lennon), and for being a pacifist and marching for civil rights. She was made fun of in the national press by that right-wing bastard Al Capp (see: Imagine John Lennon for more of him), who did the "Joanie Phony" cartoon as a parody. I would guess that Joan Baez might have lost millions of record sales due to her activism, which has been unabated for decades. There was a wonderful PBS doc about Joan Baez recently, btw, which can be seen in full here: www.examiner.com/bob-dylan-in-national/joan-baez-pbs-documentary-featuring-bob-dylan-available-for-viewing-here
|
|
|
Post by sayne on Aug 8, 2011 23:34:27 GMT -5
Sayne, I think we agree more than we disagree, but I do think you're underestimating the amount of risk and sacrifice Joan Baez made . . . As Depeche Mode sang, "Everything counts in large amounts." Just like the woman in the Bible who "only" gave a penny and was mocked by the rich man, only to be put in his place by Jesus who said that her gift was greater because it was all she had, I agree that Joan Baez made sacrifices and suffered for her politics. And, for her, these loses were great.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Aug 9, 2011 6:34:27 GMT -5
Yeah, free the prisoners, jail the judges, that is what the song says. No wonder John looked back at that period with revulsion and embarrassment. Maybe John should have sang his own version of MARY HAD A LITTLE LAMB instead.
|
|
|
Post by Jason I on Aug 9, 2011 14:07:37 GMT -5
Slightly off topic, but related. Always found these quite funny.
John's handwritten credits on the Live Jam inner sleeve:
John Lennon: guitar, vocal Yoko Ono: bag, vocal
For everyone except himself and Yoko, John made up pseudonyms:
Eric Clapton - 'Derek Claptoe': guitar Delaney & Bonnie - 'Bilanie & Donnie': guitar, percussion (and friends, brass, percussion) Jim Gordon - 'Jim Bordom': drums George Harrison - 'George Harrisong': guitar Nicky Hopkins - 'Sticky Topkins': electric piano (overdubbed in N.Y. as organ was lost) Bobby Keyes - 'Robbie Knees': sax Keith Moon - 'Kief Spoon': drums Billy Preston - 'Billy Presstud': organ Klaus Voormann - 'Raus Doorman': base (sic) Alan White - 'Dallas White': drums
|
|
|
Post by acebackwords on Aug 9, 2011 15:12:06 GMT -5
I think one needs to keep in mind the context of the times when all this radical stuff was fomenting. Like the war in Vietnam which was maiming and killing millions of innocent people. Or the state of impending nuclear holocaust that the present society had led us to. "Desparate times warrant desparate measures" was kind of the rationale for a lot of the extreme social engineering that people like John Lennon, Abbie Hoffman, Huey Newton, etc were championing.
I guess one's opinion on the '60s depends on whether you feel 1.) modern society has been improved by all that stuff. Or 2.) it led to a total breakdown of society. I happen to be in the latter camp. But as I said, its just my opinion. But when I look at the state of modern American society circa 2011 it seems a far worse, a far more grim and crazed place than the America I remember from my childhood.
P.S. As far as I know, drummer Jim Gordon is still in prison for murdering his mother. Yet another casualty from those crazy times.
|
|
|
Post by Jason I on Aug 9, 2011 15:59:06 GMT -5
Yeah, free the prisoners, jail the judges, that is what the song says. No wonder John looked back at that period with revulsion and embarrassment. Just noticed this quote. This is definitly not the case as far as I'm aware. In Johns last interviews with Yoko he mentioned how proud he was of this period, especially referring to the famous rally where the crowd sang 'Give Peace A Chance'.
|
|
|
Post by acebackwords on Aug 9, 2011 17:45:09 GMT -5
Yeah, free the prisoners, jail the judges, that is what the song says. No wonder John looked back at that period with revulsion and embarrassment. Just noticed this quote. This is definitly not the case as far as I'm aware. In Johns last interviews with Yoko he mentioned how proud he was of this period, especially referring to the famous rally where the crowd sang 'Give Peace A Chance'. Most of Lennon's comments I've read about the STINYC period are pretty harshly critical. Though Lennon could often be his own harshest critic. He's referred to it as phony radicalism and inspired by white guilt because he was rich, and that the "journalistic" style he used to write the songs nearly killed his poetry, etc. Course I wouldn't be surprised if Lennon reversed his opinion later. And he famously ragged on Jerry Rubin in his Playboy interview, saying: "When you stop and think what the hell was I doing fighting the American government just because Jerry Rubin couldn't get what he always wanted -- a nice cushy job?" (Rubin somewhat renounced his radical past and worked as a Wall Street networker in his later life.)
|
|