|
Post by Steve Marinucci on Nov 9, 2011 0:01:45 GMT -5
Steve, Ok, I finally got a response from Frank D. Badenius, the guy who responded to your examiner article on the Stuart recording and said Astrid had heard the recording and did not think it was Stu. I wrote him through Facebook after he joined your new Facebook Beatles site and he responded to me. You can see my note to him below and his response. If you accept his response, then it appears Astrid has stated her opinion through Klaus. And things don't look good for this record being the geniune article Pauline says it is. Lowbasso Frank, Your comment above says Astrid has indeed heard this alleged Stuart recording. What was the source of that information? There is a lot of buzz about this issue, and so far, you are the only one who has information that Astrid has indeed heard and commented on the recording. So I was curious where that news on Astrid's opinion came from? Yesterday at 12:34pm · Like. Frank D. Badenius I'm running a german Beatles-website, where we are also discussing this topic. One of us asked Klaus and he said he's sure that Astrid has also listened to that recording some time ago. They both don't think it's Stu.Case closed. I'm going with the ones who really should know. Also: If he had recorded that song for Astrid - as someone has already guessed - why did she never tell anybody? I can't believe that Astrid should deny any knowledge of a recording like that. I mean ...! And on the other hand, if it's a bloody fake, why should she refuse to listen one more time? Because she already knows. Closed case closed again. And again. Let's all look out for that Top Ten rehearsal that Frank Dostal has locked in his safe. Or "September Song". Or that infamous - and really boring - 26-minutes-version (it is NOT 27 minutes!) of "Helter Skelter". ;o) Yesterday at 12:55pm · Like I'd seen his statement, but he didn't go into detail about how he knew that. Interesting. Supposedly, there is still more coming on the song. I'm shrugging my shoulders at this point.
|
|
|
Post by ReturnToPepperland on Nov 9, 2011 15:31:56 GMT -5
I stand corrected. So does RTP, because it was a stabbed undressed elephant. It definitely was not a stabbed elephant. I would have remembered that. This is from Wikipedia--not that it is infallable. Early that year (1973), Paul McCartney included a note on the back cover of his Red Rose Speedway album encouraging fans to join the "Wings Fan Club" by sending a "stamped addressed envelope" to an address in London. Later that year, both Harrison's Living in the Material World and Starr's Ringo contained a similar note encouraging fans to join the "Jim Keltner Fun Club" by sending a "stamped undressed elephant" to an address in Hollywood.
|
|
|
Post by ReturnToPepperland on Nov 9, 2011 15:34:37 GMT -5
OK, let me throw this out to you all: Is whether it's Stu interesting or not? There are things that can be in play here if it's not him -- Pauline got conned or, as many seem to believe, she's the one doing the conning. I don't think it's good to let it die. Am I chasing a dead issue? Maybe, but that happens sometimes. Hopefully, it'll resolve itself. That issue is as dead as Herman Cain's campaign.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Nov 9, 2011 15:51:10 GMT -5
OK, let me throw this out to you all: Is whether it's Stu interesting or not? There are things that can be in play here if it's not him -- Pauline got conned or, as many seem to believe, she's the one doing the conning. I don't think it's good to let it die. Am I chasing a dead issue? Maybe, but that happens sometimes. Hopefully, it'll resolve itself. That issue is as dead as Herman Cain's campaign. I didn't think that there was a verdict yet on the alleged Stu song. Steve has gotten some major statements but only Klaus seems definitive(that's a pretty good authority though).
|
|
|
Post by Steve Marinucci on Nov 9, 2011 20:35:06 GMT -5
That issue is as dead as Herman Cain's campaign. I didn't think that there was a verdict yet on the alleged Stu song. Steve has gotten some major statements but only Klaus seems definitive(that's a pretty good authority though). I'm told more is coming from the Sutcliffe camp. I think there are a lot of details they held back because they figured everyone would accept the explanation. We'll see what comes out.
|
|
lowbasso
A Hard Day's Knight
Posts: 2,776
|
Post by lowbasso on Nov 9, 2011 23:31:36 GMT -5
OK, let me throw this out to you all: Is whether it's Stu interesting or not? There are things that can be in play here if it's not him -- Pauline got conned or, as many seem to believe, she's the one doing the conning. I don't think it's good to let it die. Am I chasing a dead issue? Maybe, but that happens sometimes. Hopefully, it'll resolve itself. That issue is as dead as Herman Cain's campaign. So do we now have Paul's comment on Stuart's recording?? ;D
|
|
|
Post by vectisfabber on Nov 10, 2011 7:11:34 GMT -5
So does RTP, because it was a stabbed undressed elephant. It definitely was not a stabbed elephant. I would have remembered that. This is from Wikipedia--not that it is infallable. Early that year (1973), Paul McCartney included a note on the back cover of his Red Rose Speedway album encouraging fans to join the "Wings Fan Club" by sending a "stamped addressed envelope" to an address in London. Later that year, both Harrison's Living in the Material World and Starr's Ringo contained a similar note encouraging fans to join the "Jim Keltner Fun Club" by sending a "stamped undressed elephant" to an address in Hollywood. I won't argue about the stabbed/stamped on LITMW because it is a long time since I got ride of my vinyl, and my memory is not what it was. I would welcome seeing a blow up of the rear of the UK vinyl sleeve, though! Incidentally, the RRS sleeve invited you to join the Wings Fun Club, not "Fan" Club.
|
|
|
Post by ReturnToPepperland on Nov 10, 2011 9:10:23 GMT -5
It definitely was not a stabbed elephant. I would have remembered that. This is from Wikipedia--not that it is infallable. Early that year (1973), Paul McCartney included a note on the back cover of his Red Rose Speedway album encouraging fans to join the "Wings Fan Club" by sending a "stamped addressed envelope" to an address in London. Later that year, both Harrison's Living in the Material World and Starr's Ringo contained a similar note encouraging fans to join the "Jim Keltner Fun Club" by sending a "stamped undressed elephant" to an address in Hollywood. I won't argue about the stabbed/stamped on LITMW because it is a long time since I got ride of my vinyl, and my memory is not what it was. I would welcome seeing a blow up of the rear of the UK vinyl sleeve, though! Incidentally, the RRS sleeve invited you to join the Wings Fun Club, not "Fan" Club. Maybe the UK sleeve was different and they thought better of the image of a stabbed elephant.
|
|
|
Post by ReturnToPepperland on Nov 10, 2011 9:12:06 GMT -5
That issue is as dead as Herman Cain's campaign. I didn't think that there was a verdict yet on the alleged Stu song. Steve has gotten some major statements but only Klaus seems definitive(that's a pretty good authority though). I thought it was Klaus who conveyed Astrid's opinion and it was negative regarding the recordings authenticity in her opinion. And I would take her opinion over most anyone.
|
|
|
Post by Steve Marinucci on Nov 10, 2011 14:09:58 GMT -5
I didn't think that there was a verdict yet on the alleged Stu song. Steve has gotten some major statements but only Klaus seems definitive(that's a pretty good authority though). I thought it was Klaus who conveyed Astrid's opinion and it was negative regarding the recordings authenticity in her opinion. And I would take her opinion over most anyone. There's been no direct opinion from Astrid. Any statements said to be her opinion were relayed third hand. Klaus did not tell me Astrid didn't think it was Stu.
|
|
lowbasso
A Hard Day's Knight
Posts: 2,776
|
Post by lowbasso on Nov 10, 2011 17:24:37 GMT -5
I thought it was Klaus who conveyed Astrid's opinion and it was negative regarding the recordings authenticity in her opinion. And I would take her opinion over most anyone. There's been no direct opinion from Astrid. Any statements said to be her opinion were relayed third hand. Klaus did not tell me Astrid didn't think it was Stu. Why do you think Klaus did not tell you what he supposedly told this fella, Frank, who runs a German Beatles website? I would think Astrid's opinion would be paramount in this controversy. Even more so than his own. Seems strange he neglected to tell you if it is true... Can you confirm with Klaus one way or the other if Astrid did indeed comment on the recording?
|
|
|
Post by Steve Marinucci on Nov 10, 2011 21:34:01 GMT -5
There's been no direct opinion from Astrid. Any statements said to be her opinion were relayed third hand. Klaus did not tell me Astrid didn't think it was Stu. Why do you think Klaus did not tell you what he supposedly told this fella, Frank, who runs a German Beatles website? I would think Astrid's opinion would be paramount in this controversy. Even more so than his own. Seems strange he neglected to tell you if it is true... Can you confirm with Klaus one way or the other if Astrid did indeed comment on the recording? I agree, but I'm hearing Klaus has responded to other inquiries by saying he doesn't want to be bothered any more about the song. And I don't know Frank and can only take him at his word.
|
|
lowbasso
A Hard Day's Knight
Posts: 2,776
|
Post by lowbasso on Nov 10, 2011 22:43:58 GMT -5
Why do you think Klaus did not tell you what he supposedly told this fella, Frank, who runs a German Beatles website? I would think Astrid's opinion would be paramount in this controversy. Even more so than his own. Seems strange he neglected to tell you if it is true... Can you confirm with Klaus one way or the other if Astrid did indeed comment on the recording? I agree, but I'm hearing Klaus has responded to other inquiries by saying he doesn't want to be bothered any more about the song. And I don't know Frank and can only take him at his word. Well, Klaus and Astrid were as close to Stuart as anybody (besides John) in those days, so if they are both not interested in any further inquiries on this matter, that would tell me this recording is not Stuart. Otherwise they would both certainly be promoting it for the sake of Stuart's memory. The song is so well done vocally, it would show off how talented Stuart was as a vocalist. Going forward, can't see how anyone is going to prove it authentic. Too bad. I was really hoping somehow it was him. I have always wondered how he really sounded in the band ever since I first saw the movie Backbeat. I so wanted to ask Astrid what his voice sounded like when she was a guest at Beatlefest, but we were told we could not ask her any personal questions about Stuart while she was there or we would be ejected from the fest. I did get her to autograph two copies of her famous Hamburg shots of the band however which I treasure.
|
|
lowbasso
A Hard Day's Knight
Posts: 2,776
|
Post by lowbasso on Dec 24, 2011 11:13:24 GMT -5
The current issue of BeatleFan Magazine has an in-depth article on this subject, but is not as up to date as Steve's site. If you just read about it in the magazine, you would think that Astrid has not commented on the recording. But according to Steve's information, especially on facebook, that we all contributed to, she has!
BeatleFan needs to update on this subject!
|
|
|
Post by Zander on Dec 26, 2011 19:59:42 GMT -5
I'm extremely skeptical that this is Stuart. I'd only be convinced if Astrid confirmed it, and even then I'd have doubts. As for John kicking Stu in the head, since I don't read all the scandalous books I'm not sure, but I thought I recall reading somewhere that John felt some kind of guilt over it... but I don't know how true that actually is. I've always believed that Stu was injured in a brawl with a gang -- but I seem to recall hearing "somewhere" that John felt he was responsible. (Or am I mixing that "tell-all book" memory with another fairytale about John killing someone else at one time?). The Lives of Lennon by Albert Goldman is where that anecdote is from - from memory I believe either Yoko's psychic (Marnie?) or Fred Seaman discuss it, I reckon it was just a little bit of controversary added to an already very controversial book...
|
|
lowbasso
A Hard Day's Knight
Posts: 2,776
|
Post by lowbasso on Jan 23, 2012 20:41:07 GMT -5
Has anyone on this forum seen the DVD "Stuart Sutcliffe - The Lost Beatle"??
I've just ordered it on Amazon after reading Pauline Sutcliffe's Interview that Ace posted.
Just wondered if someone who's seen it can enlighten me as to what they thought of it.
|
|
|
Post by acebackwords on Jan 24, 2012 19:53:43 GMT -5
“John was taken over by one of his uncontrollable rages,” wrote Pauline Sutcliffe, Stu’s sister, repeating what Stu had told her shortly after the attack. “He kicked at Stu again and again and kicked him in the head. There was blood streaming down from Stuart’s head when John finally came to his senses. John looked down at Stuart and fled, disgusted and terrified. Paul McCartney was with them when the fight began but could do nothing to stop the instant insane burst of violence. Paul helped Stuart, who was bleeding from face and ear, and took him to their room . . I’m convinced that kick was what eventually led to Stuart’s death. I know John always held himself responsible for Stuart dying. Yoko Ono told a friend, Marnie Hair, what I had said about his guilt at losing control with Stuart and punching and kicking him. John told Yoko that he was wearing his gold and silver cowboy boots with pointed toes.”
Shortly after the attack, Stu Sutcliffe started suffering from terrible, violent headaches, and died of a brain hemorrhage at age 21.
“A postmortem revealed Stuart had a dent in his skull, as though from a blow or kick,” wrote Pauline Sutcliffe.
* * * * *
The only direct source about John beating up Stu that I've ever heard is from Pauline.
If I remember right, the story in Goldman's book is a strange one from Jesse Ed Davis, who said that John confessed to him that he had once beaten a man possibly to death while in Hamburg. But Lennon claimed it was a drunken sailor that he beat up while attempting to rob him.
As for Lennon's "guilt" -- for whatever reason, Lennon seemed tormented by guilt all of his life.
|
|
lowbasso
A Hard Day's Knight
Posts: 2,776
|
Post by lowbasso on Jan 24, 2012 20:11:13 GMT -5
“John was taken over by one of his uncontrollable rages,” wrote Pauline Sutcliffe, Stu’s sister, repeating what Stu had told her shortly after the attack. “He kicked at Stu again and again and kicked him in the head. There was blood streaming down from Stuart’s head when John finally came to his senses. John looked down at Stuart and fled, disgusted and terrified. Paul McCartney was with them when the fight began but could do nothing to stop the instant insane burst of violence. Paul helped Stuart, who was bleeding from face and ear, and took him to their room . . I’m convinced that kick was what eventually led to Stuart’s death. I know John always held himself responsible for Stuart dying. Yoko Ono told a friend, Marnie Hair, what I had said about his guilt at losing control with Stuart and punching and kicking him. John told Yoko that he was wearing his gold and silver cowboy boots with pointed toes.” Shortly after the attack, Stu Sutcliffe started suffering from terrible, violent headaches, and died of a brain hemorrhage at age 21. “A postmortem revealed Stuart had a dent in his skull, as though from a blow or kick,” wrote Pauline Sutcliffe. * * * * * The only direct source about John beating up Stu that I've ever heard is from Pauline. If I remember right, the story in Goldman's book is a strange one from Jesse Ed Davis, who said that John confessed to him that he had once beaten a man possibly to death while in Hamburg. But Lennon claimed it was a drunken sailor that he beat up while attempting to rob him. As for Lennon's "guilt" -- for whatever reason, Lennon seemed tormented by guilt all of his life. I don't doubt Pauline said this, but I don't recall Yoko ever said anything about it publicly, and Paul hasn't either to my knowledge. After reading the interview you earlier posted on Pauline, Ace, she rubs me the wrong way big time. That's a big thing to accuse John of contributing to killing her brother. I just will not accept it happened unless Yoko or Paul will corroborate what she claims. PS Who is Marnie Hair?
|
|
|
Post by Zander on Jan 25, 2012 3:29:34 GMT -5
“John was taken over by one of his uncontrollable rages,” wrote Pauline Sutcliffe, Stu’s sister, repeating what Stu had told her shortly after the attack. “He kicked at Stu again and again and kicked him in the head. There was blood streaming down from Stuart’s head when John finally came to his senses. John looked down at Stuart and fled, disgusted and terrified. Paul McCartney was with them when the fight began but could do nothing to stop the instant insane burst of violence. Paul helped Stuart, who was bleeding from face and ear, and took him to their room . . I’m convinced that kick was what eventually led to Stuart’s death. I know John always held himself responsible for Stuart dying. Yoko Ono told a friend, Marnie Hair, what I had said about his guilt at losing control with Stuart and punching and kicking him. John told Yoko that he was wearing his gold and silver cowboy boots with pointed toes.” Shortly after the attack, Stu Sutcliffe started suffering from terrible, violent headaches, and died of a brain hemorrhage at age 21. “A postmortem revealed Stuart had a dent in his skull, as though from a blow or kick,” wrote Pauline Sutcliffe. * * * * * The only direct source about John beating up Stu that I've ever heard is from Pauline. If I remember right, the story in Goldman's book is a strange one from Jesse Ed Davis, who said that John confessed to him that he had once beaten a man possibly to death while in Hamburg. But Lennon claimed it was a drunken sailor that he beat up while attempting to rob him. As for Lennon's "guilt" -- for whatever reason, Lennon seemed tormented by guilt all of his life. I don't doubt Pauline said this, but I don't recall Yoko ever said anything about it publicly, and Paul hasn't either to my knowledge. After reading the interview you earlier posted on Pauline, Ace, she rubs me the wrong way big time. That's a big thing to accuse John of contributing to killing her brother. I just will not accept it happened unless Yoko or Paul will corroborate what she claims. PS Who is Marnie Hair? Pauline also believed Stuart & John had a full blown gay affair - is there anything she's not an expert in? Her Stuart book was a tough read. But Stuart's mother Millie has contradicted Pauline's version of events for years. Millie "he lived for 10 months with a fractured skull pressing his brain. His skull was featured that night and that's what killed Stuart. I shall say that to my dying day" So John, Pete Best, Jim Gretty and a bouncer called Frank were witnesses on the night of the attack in January 1961. Least we forget, John broke his wrist too... Marnie "the Barn" Hair was Yoko's only true friend and confidante who had a child the same age as Sean. They met through a predication that Yoko's tarot card reader John Green gave. I knew mysticism was in the equation somewhere.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Jan 25, 2012 8:58:27 GMT -5
The only direct source about John beating up Stu that I've ever heard is from Pauline. If I remember right, the story in Goldman's book is a strange one from Jesse Ed Davis, who said that John confessed to him that he had once beaten a man possibly to death while in Hamburg. But Lennon claimed it was a drunken sailor that he beat up while attempting to rob him. As for Lennon's "guilt" -- for whatever reason, Lennon seemed tormented by guilt all of his life. Pauline's story about John beating Stu is not enough to make me believe it happened. And Stu was a true friend of John's, and John supposedly ran away? I don't think he would have fled, even if he HAD beat Stu. I'd have to hear more verification from Paul or Yoko on this, though admittedly this would not be the kind of revelation they'd want to get out about Lennon. You know, I'm not saying John Lennon didn't beat any people up (John himself admitted to doing this in school). But when I look at John's form in those early years, he doesn't exactly look like the type of guy who could handle himself in a fight. He isn't this strong, muscular bully or anything. When I watch him clumsily running in A HARD DAY'S NIGHT with his arms flailing all about, he runs more like a little girl. But if it DID really happen, I think that only makes John's later peace movements and his classic song IMAGINE all the more poignant. Because John tried to rectify all this turmoil within himself as the years went on. Yes, a most interesting and complex man and life story.
|
|
|
Post by Zander on Jan 25, 2012 9:45:08 GMT -5
You know, I'm not saying John Lennon didn't beat any people up (John himself admitted to doing this in school). But when I look at John's form in those early years, he doesn't exactly look like the type of guy who could handle himself in a fight. He isn't this strong, muscular bully or anything. When I watch him clumsily running in A HARD DAY'S NIGHT with his arms flailing all about, he runs more like a little girl. That'll explain why John broke his wrist in the attack on Stu - he must have had a crap punch or bad technique to break his wrist. Obviously not a good fighter in the physical way...
|
|
|
Post by acebackwords on Jan 25, 2012 13:25:49 GMT -5
[Pauline's story about John beating Stu is not enough to make me believe it happened. And Stu was a true friend of John's, and John supposedly ran away? I don't think he would have fled, even if he HAD beat Stu. I'd have to hear more verification from Paul or Yoko on this, though admittedly this would not be the kind of revelation they'd want to get out about Lennon. You know, I'm not saying John Lennon didn't beat any people up (John himself admitted to doing this in school). But when I look at John's form in those early years, he doesn't exactly look like the type of guy who could handle himself in a fight. He isn't this strong, muscular bully or anything. When I watch him clumsily running in A HARD DAY'S NIGHT with his arms flailing all about, he runs more like a little girl. Who knows what really happened. The Beatles story is so clouded with myth (many of them perpetrated by them fabs) and self-serving accounts, as well as faulty memories. And I personally doubt Pauline's story about John and Stu having homosexual relationships. People can believe what they want, but the beating story is absolutely plausible to me. And hell, just a year later, in a well-documented public attack, John went berzerk on Bob Wooler in an attack remarkably similar to Pauline's account. People at the party said that John would have very well killed Wooler if they hadn't pulled John off of him. As for Paul's reaction (typically) he continued on at the party all night, acting as if nothing had happened. So I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for his comments on the Stu beating. P.S. I don't know if any of you guys have done much speed (I have, unfortunately), but the come-down from speed is enough to make anyone go berzerk, let alone a high-strung, emotionally volatile guy like Lennon, who spent much of his time in Hamburg tweeking on speed.
|
|
|
Post by acebackwords on Jan 25, 2012 13:28:56 GMT -5
But if it DID really happen, I think that only makes John's later peace movements and his classic song IMAGINE all the more poignant. Because John tried to rectify all this turmoil within himself as the years went on. Yes, a most interesting and complex man and life story. What did Lennon say in the Playboy interview? "Its always the violent ones that are always going on about peace."
|
|
lowbasso
A Hard Day's Knight
Posts: 2,776
|
Post by lowbasso on Jan 25, 2012 13:33:24 GMT -5
[Pauline's story about John beating Stu is not enough to make me believe it happened. And Stu was a true friend of John's, and John supposedly ran away? I don't think he would have fled, even if he HAD beat Stu. I'd have to hear more verification from Paul or Yoko on this, though admittedly this would not be the kind of revelation they'd want to get out about Lennon. You know, I'm not saying John Lennon didn't beat any people up (John himself admitted to doing this in school). But when I look at John's form in those early years, he doesn't exactly look like the type of guy who could handle himself in a fight. He isn't this strong, muscular bully or anything. When I watch him clumsily running in A HARD DAY'S NIGHT with his arms flailing all about, he runs more like a little girl. Who knows what really happened. The Beatles story is so clouded with myth (many of them perpetrated by them fabs) and self-serving accounts, as well as faulty memories. And I personally doubt Pauline's story about John and Stu having homosexual relationships. People can believe what they want, but the beating story is absolutely plausible to me. And hell, just a year later, in a well-documented public attack, John went berzerk on Bob Wooler in an attack remarkably similar to Pauline's account. People at the party said that John would have very well killed Wooler if they hadn't pulled John off of him. As for Paul's reaction (typically) he continued on at the party all night, acting as if nothing had happened. So I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for his comments on the Stu beating. P.S. I don't know if any of you guys have done much speed (I have, unfortunately), but the come-down from speed is enough to make anyone go berzerk, let alone a high-strung, emotionally volatile guy like Lennon, who spent much of his time in Hamburg tweeking on speed. If John had been high on prellies, and went berzerk on Stu, he would have been racked with guilt his whole life after Stu died, and it would have come out in his songs even if he never would have spoken about it in words. I still don't believe Pauline. Or that John did it. He was just drunk on booze when he punched out Bob Wooler, wasn't he? After the Manila debacle at the airport in 1966, John is on record in Anthology saying when the guards at the airport got rough on him he hid behind some nuns to escape the melee.
|
|
lowbasso
A Hard Day's Knight
Posts: 2,776
|
Post by lowbasso on Jan 25, 2012 16:10:21 GMT -5
[Pauline's story about John beating Stu is not enough to make me believe it happened. And Stu was a true friend of John's, and John supposedly ran away? I don't think he would have fled, even if he HAD beat Stu. I'd have to hear more verification from Paul or Yoko on this, though admittedly this would not be the kind of revelation they'd want to get out about Lennon. You know, I'm not saying John Lennon didn't beat any people up (John himself admitted to doing this in school). But when I look at John's form in those early years, he doesn't exactly look like the type of guy who could handle himself in a fight. He isn't this strong, muscular bully or anything. When I watch him clumsily running in A HARD DAY'S NIGHT with his arms flailing all about, he runs more like a little girl. Who knows what really happened. The Beatles story is so clouded with myth (many of them perpetrated by them fabs) and self-serving accounts, as well as faulty memories. And I personally doubt Pauline's story about John and Stu having homosexual relationships. People can believe what they want, but the beating story is absolutely plausible to me. And hell, just a year later, in a well-documented public attack, John went berzerk on Bob Wooler in an attack remarkably similar to Pauline's account. People at the party said that John would have very well killed Wooler if they hadn't pulled John off of him. As for Paul's reaction (typically) he continued on at the party all night, acting as if nothing had happened. So I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for his comments on the Stu beating. P.S. I don't know if any of you guys have done much speed (I have, unfortunately), but the come-down from speed is enough to make anyone go berzerk, let alone a high-strung, emotionally volatile guy like Lennon, who spent much of his time in Hamburg tweeking on speed. Paul stayed at the party because it was his birthday party, and they hadn't brought out the cake yet....... ;D
|
|
|
Post by beatlesattheirbest on Jan 26, 2012 8:31:24 GMT -5
If I remember right, the story in Goldman's book is a strange one from Jesse Ed Davis, who said that John confessed to him that he had once beaten a man possibly to death while in Hamburg. But Lennon claimed it was a drunken sailor that he beat up while attempting to rob him. As for Lennon's "guilt" -- for whatever reason, Lennon seemed tormented by guilt all of his life. Pete Best describes the Hamburg "robbery" in his movie. He says the 4 Beatles went to mug a sailor. Just as they were about to, they noticed McCartney & Harrison chickened out and left. He says he an Lennon went through with the robbery but were stopped in their attempt when the sailor produced some type of gun & fired it just as they were attacking him. They were scared by the flash of the gun & ran. Later Lennon asked Best if he got the wallet. Best told Lennon he thought he had it.
|
|
|
Post by ReturnToPepperland on Jan 26, 2012 9:53:23 GMT -5
If I remember right, the story in Goldman's book is a strange one from Jesse Ed Davis, who said that John confessed to him that he had once beaten a man possibly to death while in Hamburg. But Lennon claimed it was a drunken sailor that he beat up while attempting to rob him. As for Lennon's "guilt" -- for whatever reason, Lennon seemed tormented by guilt all of his life. Pete Best describes the Hamburg "robbery" in his movie. He says the 4 Beatles went to mug a sailor. Just as they were about to, they noticed McCartney & Harrison chickened out and left. He says he an Lennon went through with the robbery but were stopped in their attempt when the sailor produced some type of gun & fired it just as they were attacking him. They were scared by the flash of the gun & ran. Later Lennon asked Best if he got the wallet. Best told Lennon he thought he had it. You mean McCartney and Harrison wised up and left.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Jan 26, 2012 11:13:10 GMT -5
Pete Best describes the Hamburg "robbery" in his movie. He says the 4 Beatles went to mug a sailor. Just as they were about to, they noticed McCartney & Harrison chickened out and left. He says he an Lennon went through with the robbery but were stopped in their attempt when the sailor produced some type of gun & fired it just as they were attacking him. They were scared by the flash of the gun & ran. Later Lennon asked Best if he got the wallet. Best told Lennon he thought he had it. You mean McCartney and Harrison wised up and left. Paul thought that it would hurt their image and George thought that it would bring bad karma. ;D
|
|
|
Post by joshferrell on Jan 26, 2012 12:02:36 GMT -5
The only direct source about John beating up Stu that I've ever heard is from Pauline. If I remember right, the story in Goldman's book is a strange one from Jesse Ed Davis, who said that John confessed to him that he had once beaten a man possibly to death while in Hamburg. But Lennon claimed it was a drunken sailor that he beat up while attempting to rob him. As for Lennon's "guilt" -- for whatever reason, Lennon seemed tormented by guilt all of his life. Pauline's story about John beating Stu is not enough to make me believe it happened. And Stu was a true friend of John's, and John supposedly ran away? I don't think he would have fled, even if he HAD beat Stu. I'd have to hear more verification from Paul or Yoko on this, though admittedly this would not be the kind of revelation they'd want to get out about Lennon. You know, I'm not saying John Lennon didn't beat any people up (John himself admitted to doing this in school). But when I look at John's form in those early years, he doesn't exactly look like the type of guy who could handle himself in a fight. He isn't this strong, muscular bully or anything. When I watch him clumsily running in A HARD DAY'S NIGHT with his arms flailing all about, he runs more like a little girl. But if it DID really happen, I think that only makes John's later peace movements and his classic song IMAGINE all the more poignant. Because John tried to rectify all this turmoil within himself as the years went on. Yes, a most interesting and complex man and life story. That actually made me laugh really hard ;D
|
|
dbg
Very Clean
Posts: 1
|
Post by dbg on Jun 23, 2020 14:49:35 GMT -5
Just to bring this topic back from the grave one more time, here is pretty conclusive evidence that this recording was not Stu.
Someone just took the Boston Show Band recording and doctored it up a bit.
|
|