In Reply to: Re: one thing posted by J on November 29, 2006 at 10:17:23:
I can't remember any longer if Yoko was or wasn't successful, or even if she needed to be when she met Lennon, but I think your "If she was poor at marketing herself, then explain how she got Lennon to buy into what she did, and who she was; maybe she learned from years of mistakes, as many do, and had a plan that finally worked once she was in" line is a bit extreme. So in your opinion Lennon only "bought in" because of how she sold herself? If you assume her art is mere self promotion then I guess you could see that but a lot of people have considered her talented in her own right. I have no idea how half a century and more after Pollock, Warhol, yes particularly that New York down town loft set that kind of runs through from the abstract expressionists, the collective East Coast Beat writers and maybe Moondog to the post-punks still seems in some people's eyes to have to justify itself.
If someone wants to say Ono caused Lennon to become more mundane lyrically then what do they have to say about the twin influences of Dylan and drugs wearing off? Lennon's own comment was that his records were like newspapers put out quickly but if one is looking for another reason to get at Ono then I guess there's no reason to let Lennon get in the way. He was just a pawn in her hands after all. (just a woman he "was having sex with".
I am afraid that this thread is getting like to guys getting drunk at a bar and trying to work out what went wrong with relationships that finished when they were kids. As the Beatles never sang "Its all TOO LATE".
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- it was 40 years ago... - dave c 12:03:38 11/29/06 (0)