|
|
Post by joeyself on Oct 7, 2010 11:35:22 GMT -5
IMAGINE, Side 1 vs. THIRTY THREE AND 1/3, Side 1
IMAGINE, Side 1
1. "Imagine" 3:01
2. "Crippled Inside" 3:47
3. "Jealous Guy" 4:14
4. "It's So Hard" 2:25
5. "I Don't Want to Be a Soldier" 6:05
THIRTY THREE AND 1/3, Side 1
1. "Woman Don't You Cry For Me" – 3:18
2. "Dear One" – 5:08
3. "Beautiful Girl" – 3:39
4. "This Song" – 4:13
5. "See Yourself" – 2:51
The luck of the draw puts the first side of 33 1/3 right after the second one, this time facing a Lennon side.
JcS
|
|
JCV
Very Clean
Posts: 545
|
Post by JCV on Oct 7, 2010 12:11:23 GMT -5
THIRTY THREE AND 1/3, Side 1Seriously hard to pick this one. But here's my vote.  JCV 
|
|
|
|
Post by stavros on Oct 7, 2010 13:36:19 GMT -5
 Right I'm off out for more Guinness .........
|
|
|
|
Post by joeyself on Oct 7, 2010 14:34:58 GMT -5
Right I'm off out for more Guinness ......... I did not intend to contribute to liver failure by starting this game... JcS |
|
Joseph McCabe
Very Clean
A rebel to his last breath ...
Posts: 912
|
Post by Joseph McCabe on Oct 7, 2010 15:00:25 GMT -5
Right I'm off out for more Guinness ......... Yes, this is certainly at least a four-Guinness decision. Here's to your cogitations, Stavros. McCabe |
|
|
|
Post by coachbk on Oct 7, 2010 15:03:27 GMT -5
I think I'll score this one like a Cross-Country meet by putting them in order:
1.Imagine
2. Jealous Guy
3. Beautiful Girl
4. This Song
5. Crippled Inside
6. Dear One
7. See Yourself
8. It's So Hard
9. Woman Don't You Cry For Me
10. I Don't Want To Be A Soldier
Score is 26-29 in favor of Imagine
|
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Oct 7, 2010 15:47:45 GMT -5
IMAGINE, Side 1 1. "Imagine": A forever classic. I once thought it overrated and overplayed. I was wrong. It is a song that forever keeps John Lennon in the hearts of Rock fans and other Rock artists. On our syndicated local Oldies radio station, the DJ from wherever said this before the song was played (just two weeks ago), "John Lennon asks us to imagine some things that aren't very good." The song is still controversial to some in 2010! 2. "Crippled Inside": I love this song. When I first played this album at the age of 14 this song closed the deal on my lifetime love of this album. I have read that this was a jab at Paul but I wonder if John was looking in a mirror? 3. "Jealous Guy": A gorgeous song but this is the one I think is overrated if not overplayed. As a family law lawyer, I have represented and opposed many "jealous guys." You can spot them a mile away and they are wound tighter than a spinning top! 4. "It's So Hard": Lennon rocks here. I love this live but the studio version here is nice even with John's vocal filtered or whatever they've done to it. I prefer "stripped down" John vocals(a plug for the new DF) but even the altered vocal here is cool. 5. "I Don't Want to Be a Soldier": Well, I don't wanna be a lawyer mama, I don't wanna lie and it would be a lie if I said that I didn't like this song. I think that it hypnotic and curiously seductive. THIRTY THREE AND 1/3, Side 1 1. "Woman Don't You Cry For Me": A great start and George rocks here even if there are hints of a disco shuffle. Good guitar lead from Hari. George is a bad-ass in this song and there are not many times one can say George Harrison is a bad-ass. 2. "Dear One": Okay here is where the album loses me and this song costs my vote for Hari here. As a red blooded 14 year old in 1976, how could I be expected to get into this song? I hated being forced to go to church on Sundays and this song reminded me of church. The song sounds so fruity to me: George shouldn't blow Macca crap for Oh-Bla Di or Maxwell when George does his mock Jamaican(or is it Italian? ;D ) accent on this, "Dear a one I love a you."  3. "Beautiful Girl": Great song, long lost Help! or Rubber Soul gem. This alone almost wins back my vote. 4. "This Song": I was never really hip or square to this song. I was delighted to hear it nonstop on WLS that Fall of 1976 but too jokey for me and I did realize, even at 14, that it is supposed to be jokey or sarcastic. I love George's short but sweet lead guitar lick in this song. 5. "See Yourself": Another vote coster for me. Hmm, did George buy a bag of fortune cookies, pull out the fortunes and write these lyrics. Damn straight it is easier to kill a fly than it is to turn it loose! That fly you don't kill is the fly that goes and lands in the stinky wet dog poop outside then lands on your nose or on your juicy, perfectly grilled steak(or supreme veggie creation for our veggie friends). I do like the bit of, "I got tired of fooling around with other peoples' lies...." My friend Snookeroo will disagree with me on this song but that's cool, and I do like some of it. My vote though goes to Imagine-1. These are two great Sides though and both John and George could, and did, do much worse elsewhere but seldom did better. |
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Oct 7, 2010 17:06:34 GMT -5
IMAGINE, Side 1. I like every song on it, and IMAGINE is not only one of John's greatest albums, but one of the very best of all Solo Beatles LPs as well.
I like 33&1/3 and feel it's one of George's better LPs. And I think Side 1 is more consistent than Side 2. However, just like JSD, I am not very keen on "This Song". It never really appealed to me musically or vocally. It's kind of awkward. However, I did like the sarcasm in its message.
I like the other 4 songs on this side quite a bit, though.
|
|
|
|
Post by mikev on Oct 7, 2010 17:20:10 GMT -5
Thought this was a no brainer for John, but I have to score it the way I do:
IMAGINE, Side 1
1. Imagine *****
2. Crippled Inside****
3. Jealous Guy*****
4. It's So Hard***
5. I Don't Want to Be a Soldier**
19
THIRTY THREE AND 1/3, Side 1
1. Woman Don't You Cry For Me***
2. Dear One***
3. Beautiful Girl****
4. This Song*****
5. See Yourself***
18
Imagine is a rock solid five, Jealous Guy close, This Song is around 4.5
|
|
Joseph McCabe
Very Clean
A rebel to his last breath ...
Posts: 912
|
Post by Joseph McCabe on Oct 7, 2010 19:06:36 GMT -5
Imagine, side 1You have to count me as one of those whom Imagine, the song, leaves cold. The sentiments are examples of (if I can quote myself, heh) Lennon's "slogan thinking". Crippled Inside I like: it has a nice "groove". Jealous Guy: I have always wondered exactly what he was jealous of! Something to do with his woman, yes, but no details at all. Great tune though, and well sung (as usual for Lennon). For me, it is ultimately an empty song. It's So Hard is OK, but is really filler. I Don't Want To Be A Soldier is very listenable despite its length, but not a song I think of until I "come across" it when I play the album. 33 1/3, side 1I actually didn't like 33 1/3 much on its release! But it grew on me, and is now a favorite. I think a lot of Harrison's music requires thought - it needs to be listened to. For me, all the songs on Side 1 are fine, but Beautiful Girl is a major standout. I am on George's sense-of-humor wavelength generally, so I appreciate This Song a lot. George's guitar is nicely prominent throughout the side. A very enjoyable LP side. 33 1/3 gets my vote, and my friend Mr Guinness agrees. McCabe
|
|
|
|
Post by joeyself on Oct 7, 2010 20:46:54 GMT -5
Imagine, side 1You have to count me as one of those whom Imagine, the song, leaves cold. The sentiments are examples of (if I can quote myself, heh) Lennon's "slogan thinking". I know we come at this song from different directions, and thus our reasons for not being too impressed with "Imagine" would vary, but we arrive at the same point. I wrote this in a thread on www.crf2.com a few years ago: I see the core substance of the message of that song--no God to answer to but ourselves, no individual rights to property, no nations. Save the first one, Lennon was describing the Christian view of heaven, where the inhabitants are spiritually minded (in fact, spirits themselves) and unconcerned with borders and things. I can imagine such a realm--I yearn for it--but I know it's not of this world, and never can be. Efforts to impose it by force have proven to be failures, and Lennon rejected the clearest way of getting volunteers to do it now--religion.
Bottomline for me: Lennon said "imagine all these things." When I imagine how good life could be if all mankind acted out of selfless love for one another, I make the leap to the next level--"how do we do this?" It's at the second level that I find Lennon's philosophy here to be shallow--he hasn't thought that far in advance to know it can't work. A brief daydream is far different that a philosophy.
JcS |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 8, 2010 4:00:12 GMT -5
THIRTY THREE AND 1/3, Side 1
yep..surprise surprise.....i voted for George... ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by ursamajor on Oct 8, 2010 5:10:43 GMT -5
Imagine S1 for me, every song is a winner and you have arguably the greatest song of all time to start proceedings.
33.3 repeater S1 is a good album side by George but there are no classic songs to match those on Imagine.
|
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Oct 8, 2010 5:43:21 GMT -5
I see the core substance of the message of that song--no God to answer to but ourselves, Just for the record, the song IMAGINE does not say "Imagine No God ", and that was not John's meaning in the "and no religion, too" line. He specifically clarified in the RKO interview of 1980, when explaining the meaning of the song: "Not Imagine there's 'No God' ". He said that straight out. And then he continued to name all various types of religions, saying that this type of division among specific religions was his meaning. The song may be a bizarre concept, but that's why it's just "Imagination". If, in fact, it's a dream which can never realistically occur here on Earth, that's all the better for the power of the song and its hope will always live eternally. |
|
|
|
Post by ursamajor on Oct 8, 2010 5:52:13 GMT -5
I see the core substance of the message of that song--no God to answer to but ourselves, Just for the record, the song IMAGINE does not say "Imagine No God ", and that was not John's meaning in the "and no religion, too" line. He specifically clarified in the RKO interview of 1980, when explaining the meaning of the song: "Not Imagine there's 'No God' ". He said that straight out. And then he continued to name all various types of religions, saying that this type of division among specific religions was his meaning. The song may be a bizarre concept, but that's why it's just "Imagination". If, in fact, it's a dream which can never realistically occur here on Earth, that's all the better for the power of the song and its hope will always live eternally. Well said Joe. |
|
|
|
Post by joeyself on Oct 8, 2010 10:40:41 GMT -5
I see the core substance of the message of that song--no God to answer to but ourselves, Just for the record, the song IMAGINE does not say "Imagine No God ", and that was not John's meaning in the "and no religion, too" line. He specifically clarified in the RKO interview of 1980, when explaining the meaning of the song: "Not Imagine there's 'No God' ". He said that straight out. And then he continued to name all various types of religions, saying that this type of division among specific religions was his meaning. The song may be a bizarre concept, but that's why it's just "Imagination". If, in fact, it's a dream which can never realistically occur here on Earth, that's all the better for the power of the song and its hope will always live eternally. I didn't say "Imagine no God" was in the song. I said "I see the core substance of the message of that song--no God to answer to but ourselves, no individual rights to property, no nations." The other two--property ownership and national boundraries-- are also not specifically in the song, but I did no violence to what was expressed in the song by my summary of it. And while Lennon may have tried to explain that he meant something other than he said, unless one was familiar with the interview 9 years later--and NOT familiar with "God" from the POB album, and the interviews from that time frame--the message in the song is what I said it was. Imagine there's no heaven
It's easy if you try
No hell below us
Above us only sky
Imagine all the people
Living for today..
This is the part about not answering to a Higher Power. If there is no punishment or reward, then we are accountable only to ourselves. Imagine there's no countries
It isn't hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion too
Imagine all the people
Living life in peace...No nations or religions to fight for, or against. History shows us that many have died in the name of their country and their religion, so Lennon's "imagination" includes the part about living in peace.
You may say I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one
I hope someday you'll join us
And the world will be as oneYes, he was a dreamer, alone or in a group, but to quote a rocker from 3 years earlier "We'd all love to see the plan." Imagine no possessions
I wonder if you can
No need for greed or hunger
A brotherhood of man
Imagine all the people
Sharing all the world...
And here we have communism--which isn't necessarily a dirty word. Most of us have lived in a communism system--it's called "the family" (Lennon used "brotherhood" to express the same idea). My parents earned and shared with each other and their offspring. We contributed our labors around the house to make it work. The problem with communism arises when it is forced upon those that don't want to be sharing, and when those in charge of it aren't playing by the same rules as everyone else. Lennon may have tried to explain in 1980 that he meant something other than he said, which is sort of a self-indictment about his inability to convey a message through his lyrics, but I'll leave that for now. Regardless, the message in the song as presented is what I said it was. JcS |
|
|
|
Post by ReturnToPepperland on Oct 8, 2010 14:13:33 GMT -5
Just for the record, the song IMAGINE does not say "Imagine No God ", and that was not John's meaning in the "and no religion, too" line. He specifically clarified in the RKO interview of 1980, when explaining the meaning of the song: "Not Imagine there's 'No God' ". He said that straight out. And then he continued to name all various types of religions, saying that this type of division among specific religions was his meaning. The song may be a bizarre concept, but that's why it's just "Imagination". If, in fact, it's a dream which can never realistically occur here on Earth, that's all the better for the power of the song and its hope will always live eternally. I didn't say "Imagine no God" was in the song. I said "I see the core substance of the message of that song--no God to answer to but ourselves, no individual rights to property, no nations." The other two--property ownership and national boundraries-- are also not specifically in the song, but I did no violence to what was expressed in the song by my summary of it. And while Lennon may have tried to explain that he meant something other than he said, unless one was familiar with the interview 9 years later--and NOT familiar with "God" from the POB album, and the interviews from that time frame--the message in the song is what I said it was. Imagine there's no heaven
It's easy if you try
No hell below us
Above us only sky
Imagine all the people
Living for today..
This is the part about not answering to a Higher Power. If there is no punishment or reward, then we are accountable only to ourselves. Imagine there's no countries
It isn't hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion too
Imagine all the people
Living life in peace...No nations or religions to fight for, or against. History shows us that many have died in the name of their country and their religion, so Lennon's "imagination" includes the part about living in peace.
You may say I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one
I hope someday you'll join us
And the world will be as oneYes, he was a dreamer, alone or in a group, but to quote a rocker from 3 years earlier "We'd all love to see the plan." Imagine no possessions
I wonder if you can
No need for greed or hunger
A brotherhood of man
Imagine all the people
Sharing all the world...
And here we have communism--which isn't necessarily a dirty word. Most of us have lived in a communism system--it's called "the family" (Lennon used "brotherhood" to express the same idea). My parents earned and shared with each other and their offspring. We contributed our labors around the house to make it work. The problem with communism arises when it is forced upon those that don't want to be sharing, and when those in charge of it aren't playing by the same rules as everyone else. Lennon may have tried to explain in 1980 that he meant something other than he said, which is sort of a self-indictment about his inability to convey a message through his lyrics, but I'll leave that for now. Regardless, the message in the song as presented is what I said it was. JcS Joey you weren't really trying to compare communism as practiced in the USSR and China with how a mother and father take care of helpless children until they come of age? I suppose you could use that term, but the family microcosm isn't precisely described with that word. There are so many other dire intended consequences of communism. The real problem is not just the forced part of it. When a government treats adults like children that is when we have problems because it is against the nature of man. I say forced or not because its happening slowly now in the US. We have a soft tyranny, not forced. But that situation can be just as dangerous. I think the lyrics of Imagine are incredibly naive. I'd use the word silly if they weren't so offensive. The lyrics of that song are sillier than any "silly" love song Paul ever wrote. The word stupid comes to mind. John backtracked on it because they not only came off as "do what I say, not what I do" hypocritical, but just wrong minded. In addition, the words undermine the spirit in which our country (USA) was founded. The tune is beautiful--well sung and played by John. But please, we don't need its false and poorly thought through sentiments. |
|
|
|
Post by stavros on Oct 8, 2010 15:21:17 GMT -5
Well I must say the widget was a great invention. Guinness is so smooth. Which sort of describes the flow of these two album sides.
I listened to George's 33⅓ first - Very good. I'm not sure about 'Dear One' but 'Beautiful Girl' is an awesome track and I don't think I've really ever noticed that before. 'This Song' is full of George's dry wit and "Woman Don't You Cry for Me" is a suitable opener as is "See Yourself" to close the side.
I really thought Imagine was going to win this one. But maybe not so after that pleasant 20 minutes?
So Imagine. It's title track has become almost a representation of John Lennon's music, beliefs and idealism in one short song. It's a great tune but has been elevated to a utopian anthem. Or maybe I am just over familiar with it from constant airplay for 30 years? 'Crippled Inside' sounds like something that belongs on the White Album. It's neither a classic nor a duff track as it flows into 'Jealous Guy'. One of John's best solo tracks. A song I think he is singing to a number of people in his past. Maybe Cynthia, Julian and Paul and no one in particular as well? I think 'It's So Hard' is a bit of a filler really and very formulaic. And "I Don't Wanna Be A Soldier" drifts off and may as well be the start to "SINYC".
So there you have it . Both sides are very well balanced but 33⅓ finishes the stronger. Much to my surprise. The Guinness meanwhile has been well stocked in case another cogitation is required.
|
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Oct 8, 2010 16:04:54 GMT -5
I didn't say "Imagine no God" was in the song. I said "I see the core substance of the message of that song--no God to answer to but ourselves, no individual rights to property, no nations." The other two--property ownership and national boundraries-- are also not specifically in the song, but I did no violence to what was expressed in the song by my summary of it. And while Lennon may have tried to explain that he meant something other than he said, unless one was familiar with the interview 9 years later--and NOT familiar with "God" from the POB album, and the interviews from that time frame--the message in the song is what I said it was. Imagine there's no heaven
It's easy if you try
No hell below us
Above us only sky
Imagine all the people
Living for today..
This is the part about not answering to a Higher Power. If there is no punishment or reward, then we are accountable only to ourselves. Imagine there's no countries
It isn't hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion too
Imagine all the people
Living life in peace...No nations or religions to fight for, or against. History shows us that many have died in the name of their country and their religion, so Lennon's "imagination" includes the part about living in peace.
You may say I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one
I hope someday you'll join us
And the world will be as oneYes, he was a dreamer, alone or in a group, but to quote a rocker from 3 years earlier "We'd all love to see the plan." Imagine no possessions
I wonder if you can
No need for greed or hunger
A brotherhood of man
Imagine all the people
Sharing all the world...
And here we have communism--which isn't necessarily a dirty word. Most of us have lived in a communism system--it's called "the family" (Lennon used "brotherhood" to express the same idea). My parents earned and shared with each other and their offspring. We contributed our labors around the house to make it work. The problem with communism arises when it is forced upon those that don't want to be sharing, and when those in charge of it aren't playing by the same rules as everyone else. Lennon may have tried to explain in 1980 that he meant something other than he said, which is sort of a self-indictment about his inability to convey a message through his lyrics, but I'll leave that for now. Regardless, the message in the song as presented is what I said it was. JcS Joey you weren't really trying to compare communism as practiced in the USSR and China with how a mother and father take care of helpless children until they come of age? I suppose you could use that term, but the family microcosm isn't precisely described with that word. There are so many other dire intended consequences of communism. The real problem is not just the forced part of it. When a government treats adults like children that is when we have problems because it is against the nature of man. I say forced or not because its happening slowly now in the US. We have a soft tyranny, not forced. But that situation can be just as dangerous. I think the lyrics of Imagine are incredibly naive. I'd use the word silly if they weren't so offensive. The lyrics of that song are sillier than any "silly" love song Paul ever wrote. The word stupid comes to mind. John backtracked on it because they not only came off as "do what I say, not what I do" hypocritical, but just wrong minded. In addition, the words undermine the spirit in which our country (USA) was founded. The tune is beautiful--well sung and played by John. But please, we don't need its false and poorly thought through sentiments. "Imagine" is a great song with noble concepts. Man has never been able to handle his and her deities. We kill each other over him, her and/or them. The song is not anti-God, just anti-human nature as displayed by humans' their entire history. I think the sadness and beauty of "Imagine" is that John realizes that what he imagines is a nearly impossible longshot. Everyone fights over singing "Imagine" at big Rock events like Live Aid, Live Eight, Tribute to 9/11 Victims and Survivors, etc. because it is a sure crowd-pleaser at those events. No one is fighting over the right to perform "My Love", My Sweet Lord" or "It Don't Come Easy." Maybe they all fight for "Freedom." ;D |
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Oct 8, 2010 16:21:25 GMT -5
I think the sadness and beauty of "Imagine" is that John realizes that what he imagines is a nearly impossible longshot. I agree with you completely here. You can hear the sadness in this song. Especially the way John sings those very last departing words, as the song ends. He KNOWS this can never really happen. He is in no way "naive", as RTP suggested. Again, it's just imagination. |
|
|
|
Post by joeyself on Oct 8, 2010 16:24:34 GMT -5
And here we have communism--which isn't necessarily a dirty word. Most of us have lived in a communism system--it's called "the family" (Lennon used "brotherhood" to express the same idea). My parents earned and shared with each other and their offspring. We contributed our labors around the house to make it work. The problem with communism arises when it is forced upon those that don't want to be sharing, and when those in charge of it aren't playing by the same rules as everyone else. Lennon may have tried to explain in 1980 that he meant something other than he said, which is sort of a self-indictment about his inability to convey a message through his lyrics, but I'll leave that for now. Regardless, the message in the song as presented is what I said it was. JcS Joey you weren't really trying to compare communism as practiced in the USSR and China with how a mother and father take care of helpless children until they come of age? I suppose you could use that term, but the family microcosm isn't precisely described with that word. There are so many other dire intended consequences of communism. The real problem is not just the forced part of it. When a government treats adults like children that is when we have problems because it is against the nature of man. I say forced or not because its happening slowly now in the US. We have a soft tyranny, not forced. But that situation can be just as dangerous. I think the lyrics of Imagine are incredibly naive. I'd use the word silly if they weren't so offensive. The lyrics of that song are sillier than any "silly" love song Paul ever wrote. The word stupid comes to mind. John backtracked on it because they not only came off as "do what I say, not what I do" hypocritical, but just wrong minded. In addition, the words undermine the spirit in which our country (USA) was founded. The tune is beautiful--well sung and played by John. But please, we don't need its false and poorly thought through sentiments. Rather than cut-and-paste in your quote, I'll just address the points in the order presented: 1. No, I am not equating a communal system such as the family with the monstrous systems of the countries you named. But then again, neither of those were true commie societies. Think more about the collectives in this country--hippies, often--where all worked together for the common good of the group. There have been some successful communes in this land, and I suspect in other parts of the world. I came to the realization about the family being communistic (in the true sense of the word) when I was teaching a class on Acts 2:44 and 4: 35. I used this provocative statement (with permission of the example)--"Folks, do you know that the Barkers are communists? (The Barkers being a nice young couple with two kids that everyone knew) They pool everything they have for the common good of their commune--their family." The early Church did the same, and I then launched into the point about how we as a church family needed to be generous with each other, as there was need. 2. In a true voluntary system, folks aren't treated like children, but rather are to behave like responsible adults. I agree that the citizens of any country should not expect others to do for them what they can do for themselves, and the "safety net" shouldn't be bigger than the boat itself. Of course, whenever 51% of the people aren't paying into the system, you can expect them to vote for themselves the share of the other 49%. 3. Naive, silly, offensive, whatever label you put on them, the real problem is step two. Lennon had a dream that he thought worthy of public dissemination. As I said earlier, he didn't seem to have any thoughts on implementing it. Much like a politician that says "I want to balance the budget" needs to be challenged on HOW, Lennon should have thought to the next level. In studying him for close to 3 decades now, I come to the inescapable conclusion that he just wasn't that bright in many areas. By discarding the spiritual side of man in the first verse, he doomed any effort to end war, poverty, and other social ills he may have cared about. 4. It is a nice song, and well performed. Unlike some of IMAGINE, it is not overproduced, and is still nice to hear now and then. I just can't take it seriously as some do. And are entitled to, if so inclined. JcS |
|
|
|
Post by ReturnToPepperland on Oct 8, 2010 16:27:20 GMT -5
I think the sadness and beauty of "Imagine" is that John realizes that what he imagines is a nearly impossible longshot. I agree with you completely here. You can hear the sadness in this song. Especially the way John sings those very last departing words, as the song ends. He KNOWS this can never really happen. He is in no way "naive", as RTP suggested. Again, it's just imagination. That is an angle I hadn't thought of. But why doesn't he express that more directly in the lyric? |
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Oct 8, 2010 16:28:57 GMT -5
And while Lennon may have tried to explain that he meant something other than he said, unless one was familiar with the interview 9 years later--and NOT familiar with "God" from the POB album, and the interviews from that time frame--the message in the song is what I said it was. Lennon may have tried to explain in 1980 that he meant something other than he said, which is sort of a self-indictment about his inability to convey a message through his lyrics, but I'll leave that for now. Regardless, the message in the song as presented is what I said it was. You mean the message in the song as presented is what you interpret it was. I'd think John knows better what he meant to say, though of course any of us are entitiled to our own interpretations. I do not feel that Lennon tried to change the meaning in the 1980 interview. |
|
|
|
Post by joeyself on Oct 8, 2010 16:31:22 GMT -5
"Imagine" is a great song with noble concepts. Man has never been able to handle his and her deities. We kill each other over him, her and/or them. The song is not anti-God, just anti-human nature as displayed by humans' their entire history. I think the sadness and beauty of "Imagine" is that John realizes that what he imagines is a nearly impossible longshot. Everyone fights over singing "Imagine" at big Rock events like Live Aid, Live Eight, Tribute to 9/11 Victims and Survivors, etc. because it is a sure crowd-pleaser at those events. No one is fighting over the right to perform "My Love", My Sweet Lord" or "It Don't Come Easy." Maybe they all fight for "Freedom." ;D Man is not supposed to "handle his deities." The Deity (or if one is not monotheistic, plural) is supposed to handle him. And WE don't kill over God/gods--some do, but you can't lump all of us into it. I refuse any attempt to impose collective guilt upon me. And I LOVE the line "everyone FIGHTS over singing "Imagine"..." Do you do that kind of thing on purpose?!? Fighting over singing an anthem to peace? ;D JcS |
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Oct 8, 2010 16:33:42 GMT -5
I think the lyrics of Imagine are incredibly naive. I'd use the word silly if they weren't so offensive. The lyrics of that song are sillier than any "silly" love song Paul ever wrote. The word stupid comes to mind. "Imagine" a defender of Paul's music calling a song like IMAGINE "stupid"! ;D I tell you, RTP -- much as I think Paul is a great songwriter, that mostly goes for music and not his lyrics. Paul McCartney couldn't write a song as deep and everlastingly meaningful and "anthem worthy" as IMAGINE on his best day. The world obviously thinks it needs it. It's a classic anthem to this day. It will be so forever. What will endure that deeply when Paul dies, maybe ODE TO A KOALA BEAR? |
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Oct 8, 2010 16:36:17 GMT -5
That is an angle I hadn't thought of. But why doesn't he express that more directly in the lyric? What angle, specifically? John keeps saying "Imagine" over and over, so it's repeated that it's just imagination. He also says "I wonder if you can," showing the sadness and futility of it. |
|
|
|
Post by ursamajor on Oct 8, 2010 21:10:30 GMT -5
Anyone who doubts the impact of the song Imagine just click on www.google.comGoogle are paying special tribute to what would have been John Lennon's 70th birthday. As far as the lyrics go, they don't get much better than that. |
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Oct 8, 2010 21:28:02 GMT -5
"Imagine" is a great song with noble concepts. Man has never been able to handle his and her deities. We kill each other over him, her and/or them. The song is not anti-God, just anti-human nature as displayed by humans' their entire history. I think the sadness and beauty of "Imagine" is that John realizes that what he imagines is a nearly impossible longshot. Everyone fights over singing "Imagine" at big Rock events like Live Aid, Live Eight, Tribute to 9/11 Victims and Survivors, etc. because it is a sure crowd-pleaser at those events. No one is fighting over the right to perform "My Love", My Sweet Lord" or "It Don't Come Easy." Maybe they all fight for "Freedom." ;D Man is not supposed to "handle his deities." The Deity (or if one is not monotheistic, plural) is supposed to handle him. And WE don't kill over God/gods--some do, but you can't lump all of us into it. I refuse any attempt to impose collective guilt upon me. "Handle" is the wrong word. We humans as a whole(not every individual as there are the very good among us) let our God down. We constantly let him/her down I imagine. Humans in large part(not all, I agree) have abused their faith in God to the injury of others. That happens to this day. I hear Lennon saying God is not the problem, we are. Lennon actually adopts the "liberation theology" in vogue back then best represented by Gene Hackman's character Reverend Frank Scott in The Poseidon Adventure. That view, very real in the late 60's, early 70's, is that God doesn't want us always suffering, God doesn't want us repressed sexually or emotionally. God helps those who help themselves. And God does not want us killing in his name. The only church we need is in our own soul. George Harrison adopts this radical view in "Awaiting On You All." Far from anti-God, Lennon's song is more New Testament than Old and closer to the original intent of early Christians but the message has got convoluted through the years. A progressive view of God yes, but not atheistic. In short, I believe John on his intent. He is not knocking God but those who pervert the faith which sadly is most believers or at least their spiritual leaders. Exactly! Those who would emulate Lennon by performing his song miss the point he is making and posture to sing this song while ignoring his message. Madonna comes most readily to mind. The song becomes a possession to her and others. |
|
|
|
Post by ReturnToPepperland on Oct 9, 2010 0:49:59 GMT -5
Man is not supposed to "handle his deities." The Deity (or if one is not monotheistic, plural) is supposed to handle him. And WE don't kill over God/gods--some do, but you can't lump all of us into it. I refuse any attempt to impose collective guilt upon me. "Handle" is the wrong word. We humans as a whole(not every individual as there are the very good among us) let our God down. We constantly let him/her down I imagine. Humans in large part(not all, I agree) have abused their faith in God to the injury of others. That happens to this day. I hear Lennon saying God is not the problem, we are. Lennon actually adopts the "liberation theology" in vogue back then best represented by Gene Hackman's character Reverend Frank Scott in The Poseidon Adventure. That view, very real in the late 60's, early 70's, is that God doesn't want us always suffering, God doesn't want us repressed sexually or emotionally. God helps those who help themselves. And God does not want us killing in his name. The only church we need is in our own soul. George Harrison adopts this radical view in "Awaiting On You All." Far from anti-God, Lennon's song is more New Testament than Old and closer to the original intent of early Christians but the message has got convoluted through the years. A progressive view of God yes, but not atheistic. In short, I believe John on his intent. He is not knocking God but those who pervert the faith which sadly is most believers or at least their spiritual leaders. Exactly! Those who would emulate Lennon by performing his song miss the point he is making and posture to sing this song while ignoring his message. Madonna comes most readily to mind. The song becomes a possession to her and others. You really think that Imagine is not anti-religion and therefore not anti-God. I know what John said in retrospect. Just because some religions have things like the war-like jihad which is according to the Qur'an and the Hadith, a duty that may be fulfilled in four ways: by the heart, the tongue, the hand, or the sword. That doesn't mean you should wish all religions away. Man is flawed and by removing religion, you remove hope that man will even strive toward the ideal that religion holds. Its not possible to have God without some religious tenants and religious faith. It may be non-denominational or not so. John was just copping out when he excoriateed religion of any and all kinds but claimed to have a pro-God view. |
|
nine
Very Clean
Posts: 840 
|
Post by nine on Oct 9, 2010 5:43:49 GMT -5
"Handle" is the wrong word. We humans as a whole(not every individual as there are the very good among us) let our God down. We constantly let him/her down I imagine. Humans in large part(not all, I agree) have abused their faith in God to the injury of others. That happens to this day. I hear Lennon saying God is not the problem, we are. Lennon actually adopts the "liberation theology" in vogue back then best represented by Gene Hackman's character Reverend Frank Scott in The Poseidon Adventure. That view, very real in the late 60's, early 70's, is that God doesn't want us always suffering, God doesn't want us repressed sexually or emotionally. God helps those who help themselves. And God does not want us killing in his name. The only church we need is in our own soul. George Harrison adopts this radical view in "Awaiting On You All." Far from anti-God, Lennon's song is more New Testament than Old and closer to the original intent of early Christians but the message has got convoluted through the years. A progressive view of God yes, but not atheistic. In short, I believe John on his intent. He is not knocking God but those who pervert the faith which sadly is most believers or at least their spiritual leaders. Exactly! Those who would emulate Lennon by performing his song miss the point he is making and posture to sing this song while ignoring his message. Madonna comes most readily to mind. The song becomes a possession to her and others. You really think that Imagine is not anti-religion and therefore not anti-God. I know what John said in retrospect. Just because some religions have things like the war-like jihad which is according to the Qur'an and the Hadith, a duty that may be fulfilled in four ways: by the heart, the tongue, the hand, or the sword. That doesn't mean you should wish all religions away. Man is flawed and by removing religion, you remove hope that man will even strive toward the ideal that religion holds. Its not possible to have God without some religious tenants and religious faith. It may be non-denominational or not so. John was just copping out when he excoriateed religion of any and all kinds but claimed to have a pro-God view. Religion is what sustained man when he first ventured out and spread him/her self around the globe. Without it we were doomed. It's relevance today I'll leave for others to debate. |
|
Right I'm off out for more Guinness .........
