He should have sang "Imagine" the way it was written and intended to be performed. If he was going to prematurely change those lyrics, he should have sought Yoko Ono's permission, first! Who knows if she would have granted him permission or not? No matter what the outcome would have been, it still would draw the outrage of fans as it is now. I respect freedom of speech,but, there is a time and a place to do it. Cee Lo for messing up a beautiful and revered song as "Imagine" is the equivalent of forgetting the words or changing the words of the Nation Anthem. You screwed up big time! Cee Lo, you have just sunken to a new LOw!Under no circumstances does anyone EVER ask Yoko Ono for permission on ANYTHING! Beatle fans complaining about this word change (and it's not just here) give Beatle fans a bad name ...and, as always, it's the Yoko supporters.
Under no circumstances does anyone EVER ask Yoko Ono for permission on ANYTHING! Beatle fans complaining about this word change (and it's not just here) give Beatle fans a bad name ...and, as always, it's the Yoko supporters.
my take on this is that, Johns lyrics were a huge part of his songs and very integral to what the song was portraying so he should not have changed them.
BUT......am I the only one thinking this is a publicity stunt to get his name in the press big time ?
famously anti-religious song
This is why the song sucks. The fact that humanity idolizes the song due to its message, and the person who wrote it, paints a clear picture as to why the world is so f***ed up. John could of wrote it as a positive tune, but as usual that was too hard for him. Now we have somebody who did display it in a positive light and he's getting berated for it. Whats wrong with this picture? People suck. A little piece of positive energy being crushed for that very reason.
I used to have a problem with this song myself but I look at it differently now than I used to; still within the context of my faith. As far as Cee Lo Green goes, I don't disagree with his sentiment but I think he should have written his own song to express it. This was a lot like plagarism.
This is why the song sucks. The fact that humanity idolizes the song due to its message, and the person who wrote it, paints a clear picture as to why the world is so f***ed up. John could of wrote it as a positive tune, but as usual that was too hard for him. Now we have somebody who did display it in a positive light and he's getting berated for it. Whats wrong with this picture? People suck. A little piece of positive energy being crushed for that very reason.
I have to disagree here.
Lennon is basically saying that the world would be a better place if there were fewer things to fight about, such as countries, possessions, and - yes - religion.
Whatever your views of religion, it can't be denied that it has been behind much trouble on this planet over the years - as have struggles between countries over borders, or fighting centered on assets ("possessions") such as oil or whatever.
He is advocating peace - what is not positive about that? I don't think that the song "sucks" in the slightest. Yes, it's a very simplistic message, and yes, he is "a dreamer", but I don't think it is a cynical attack on religion - I see it as a pro-peace song.
And getting back to Cee-Lo Green, I still think he should have left the lyrics alone or else left the song alone altogether and performed something that did suit what he wanted to say.
John could of wrote it as a positive tune, but as usual that was too hard for him. Now we have somebody who did display it in a positive light and he's getting berated for it.
Who is this Green guy?
I suppose that the question if it's a positive song or not depends on your personal view on religion.
Whatever your views of religion, it can't be denied that it has been behind much trouble on this planet over the years - as have struggles between countries over borders, or fighting centered on assets ("possessions") such as oil or whatever.
He is advocating peace - what is not positive about that?
I don't think that the song "sucks" in the slightest. Yes, it's a very simplistic message, and yes, he is "a dreamer", but I don't think it is a cynical attack on religion - I see it as a pro-peace song.
And getting back to Cee-Lo Green, I still think he should have left the lyrics alone or else left the song alone altogether and performed something that did suit what he wanted to say.
The song sucked so much its been voted best single ever quite few times in polls, wish I could write such a bad song ha2ha
... people are stupid... the human race is just too dumb to live in peace... people suck...
... I cant fathom how people love the song so much (the sheep are followers though).
Instead of thinking there is no heaven, how about we all believe that there is one. Wonder how people would react to that?
I believe in God, but not as one thing,
not as an old man in the sky.
I believe that what people call God
is something in all of us.
I believe that what Jesus and Mohammed and Buddha
and all the rest said was right.
It's just that the translations have gone wrong.
- John Lennon
Around this John wrote both Imagine and God. It is really clear.
It is funny how tkitna calls people sheep (followers) for liking this song (while talking about religion), and then he wants to beliave in one heaven. Seems the only sheep here tkitna is you. That is something about John spoke. People who follow religion like blind awating for some kind of after life reward are sheep. Find heaven in yourself.
This is kind of stupid. If you're not behind the message of the original song, then don't sing it.
I also think you are extremely negative and cynical yourself. I don't mean that to insult you.
As far as religion goes, nothing in human history has caused more bloodshed, violence, greed and all things bad. I do not believe that there is good in all religion. I believe that the true God has one religion he favors. That one is the religion that follows what he has layed out for mankind. If you want to know which one it is... Go on a search, ask humbly in your heart, you will find. I can't answer the question here. Not the place for it, nor is this the place for a religious debate. Enough said... on that.
Three chords, a negative message and there you go. Shouldnt be very hard.
..To the guy who said "if this is all you have to worry about" I have to completely agree...Lighten up people..This is a non-incident!
I think the singer, who I've never heard of, wanted all religions to get along...
Big deal?
Whatya' say we sentence him to four months of Paul's granny music?
now come on Todd, this is one of THE most positive songs ever written, of course its a dream but just imagine....no countries etc etc
good idea ha2haI think just the opposite...If John were alive, he would have applauded the guy since he was saying pretty much the same thing...He also would have told you all to quit being ridiculous before he went back to ignoring you all...
Ive thought more about this though and to sum up I think its disrespectful, I mean if John was still alive he couldve asked him if he'd minded the new lyric but as Johns long dead its disrespectful to change his words, Im sure those words were carefully chosen and important to John
I think just the opposite...If John were alive, he would have applauded the guy since he was saying pretty much the same thing...He also would have told you all to quit being ridiculous before he went back to ignoring you all...
Please, more of you need to read Seamann's "The Final Days of John Lennon."
He was NOTHING as Yoko would have you believe he was!
Yes but Johns NOT alive is he ?Tony Bramwell says this is one of the best Beatle books ever written...Seamann's description of how Lennon lived the last year of his life would have been echoed by several of Lennon's friends, Mick Jagger, Paul McCartney, George Harrison among others, and was echoed by others who lived in that home or were among the few visitors that Yoko would allow either in or to talk on the phone...
and its your opinion that he wouldve applauded the guy, you dont know that..your purely surmising based on a trashy book you just read (yes Ive read it, and I dont believe much of what Fred says to be honest)
I still say its disrespectful to change a songs lyrics after the writer has died....should we start changing Shakespeare's plays also ? maybe some textspeak so young 'peeps' can dig it more..
But if you want to keep believing that John baked a lot of bread while raising his kid, you go right ahead.
I'll take that to mean you think Im stupid and in that case I'll back out of this debate :)Nobody said you were stupid....I'm just wondering where your critical thinking was.
He definitely wasnt the hero everybody thinks he was. I laugh at all the idolization.
I don't look at him as a hero, nor do I idolize him. I do think he was a very talented man who was possibly one of the most interesting people I've ever read about.
Just wanted to point out that the lyric is "IMAGINE" there's no heaven, not simply "there's no heaven". Food for thought.
Just wanted to point out that the lyric is "IMAGINE" there's no heaven, not simply "there's no heaven". Food for thought.
Just wanted to point out that the lyric is "IMAGINE" there's no heaven, not simply "there's no heaven". Food for thought.
Its the same message.
I disagree. "There's no heaven" would be an atheist statement. "Imagine there's no heaven" isn't. That's just asking people, "Hey, even if you believe that there's a heaven, just pretend for a minute that there isn't a heaven, would that change the way you look at life?".
Ok, so instead of him telling us to do something, he's asking us to to do it.
Believe in what you want but respect others. Religion should be something personal.
I don't think he's asking anyone to change their religious beliefs. He's just asking the listener to imagine it for a minute, that's all.
Why would he ask though? Heaven is the embodiment of happiness and peace and yet, he's asking us to forget about it. I cant see anything positive about that.
Why would he ask though? Heaven is the embodiment of happiness and peace and yet, he's asking us to forget about it. I cant see anything positive about that.
I think i'm just going to imagine that John Lennon was an a**hole and leave it at that.
ha2ha
my view is that whether you think John was an a**hole or not (and I think we are all capable of that) I liked the fact that he used his fame to constantly promote love & peace and not war......even his xmas song is anti war.
Thats wonderful and thats how John wanted everybody to see him as the promoter of peace and love, when in truth, he was a horrible human being and manipulator. I dont buy his disguise.
Thats wonderful and thats how John wanted everybody to see him as the promoter of peace and love, when in truth, he was a horrible human being and manipulator. I dont buy his disguise.
So Im guessing Todd that if you won my imaginary competition and the prize was dinner and an evening at the Dakota with John you would turn it down ?
At this stage in my life, yes. I dont care if you believe me or not, but its true. 10 or even 5 years ago, I would have went.
Maybe he did, Todd. You can't have a revolution without Madame Defarge! ha2hanor can you have a proper revolution without zombies!
It is really clear that John got it wrong. I think what John was trying to go for was to explain the Holy Spirit, but thats not the whole picture. He never did get the whole picture.
You are the one who never gets the whole picture.
You are the one who never gets the whole picture.
I think i'm just going to imagine that John Lennon was an a**hole and leave it at that.for my money that's a pretty corrupt, self-serving, insensible, awful and delusional statement to make. imagine is a powerful track with powerful lyrics and a powerful message of world peace. John Lennon was an angel, his music changed the world.
If I didnt know any better, i'd almost swear that your comment was personal.
The sad thing is that your right a good bit of the time. Sorry about my tangents lately.
for my money that's a pretty corrupt, self-serving, insensible, awful and delusional statement to make. imagine is a powerful track with powerful lyrics and a powerful message of world peace. John Lennon was an angel, his music changed the world.
for my money that's a pretty corrupt, self-serving, insensible, awful and delusional statement to make.
John Lennon was an angel, his music changed the world.
Without spelling to much out for you, you do realize he was a womanizer, horrible father, herion junkie, drunk and an all around prick to most people he knew right?
Yeah, what a saint.
ha2ha
are you a journo Todd ?
That description could fit most rock stars out there
Womanizer = name me a rock star who hasnt bedded a few groupie's (and dont say Paul, he's shagged more women than Ive had hot dinners ha2ha)
Horrible Father = I take it you mean to Julian, he certainly wasnt to Sean, he was a great father, as far as Julian is concerned, unlucky for him he was a child in an unhappy marriage, his father suddenly became one of the most famous men in the world, who had bigger demands on his time than me or you will ever come to know, his presence was suddenly reqd in every country in the world......how could he be with Julian as a full time father, non of the others had that problem..........anyway whether he was that bad, you'd have to ask Julian, only he knows, Im not gonna believe what people write in books/newspapers, Ive seen loads of pictures of John with Julian. (even in Fred Seamans book)
Heroin Junkie/Drunk = again the excesses of many many rock/Jazz musicians over the years, hendrix/Clapton/Joplin/Morrison/Townsend/Miles Davis/Charlie Parker/Jaco Pastorius/John Coltrane etc etc ..........were they all pricks?
I dont think you or I could even begin to imagine the pressures of mega stardom, not until youve been there and done that.
John might have been an Angel, but he could also be a theif, a bully and a selfish bas---- too.
I think Albert Goldman summed John up very well, he said he could be anything basically, a very complex character who could write a song as beautiful as Love and next day be quite nasty..
Ive certainly never thought he was any sort of angel ha2ha
Im thinking though that if your asked to choose between Mum & Dad at a very young age and then brought up by your strict aunt while Mum doesnt want you .....it would have a quite a lasting and damaging effect on your mind
I agree, but is that excuse enough to give him a free pass? I know some awesome people that have come from worse.
Im thinking though that if your asked to choose between Mum & Dad at a very young age and then brought up by your strict aunt while Mum doesnt want you .....it would have a quite a lasting and damaging effect on your mind
As far as Julian is concerned, unlucky for him he was a child in an unhappy marriage, his father suddenly became one of the most famous men in the world, who had bigger demands on his time than me or you will ever come to know, his presence was suddenly reqd in every country in the world......how could he be with Julian as a full time father, non of the others had that problem..........anyway whether he was that bad, you'd have to ask Julian, only he knows, Im not gonna believe what people write in books/newspapers, Ive seen loads of pictures of John with Julian. (even in Fred Seamans book)
such mindless, irrelevant and impotent speculation. i'll give you half-credit for the real John Lennon being a bully.
John might have been an Angel, but he could also be a thief(sic), a bully and a selfish bas---- too.
Without spelling to much out for you, you do realize he was a womanizer, horrible father, herion junkie, drunk and an all around prick to most people he knew right?wait a minute. you are holding the real life john lennon and the mythical Beatle john lennon to a sloppy and ridiculous collection of mediocre double standards. besides that is the film noir version of john lennon, probably a very poor reflection of the truth. unbelievable.
Yeah, what a saint.
I think Albert Goldman summed John up very well, he said he could be anything basically, a very complex character who could write a song as beautiful as Love and next day be quite nasty..i don't know about the quite nasty the next day-shapeshifter thing, but many have said that goldman overdid it and was inaccurate. in some many distinct places.
Ive certainly never thought he was any sort of angel ha2hajust wondering outloud, isn't that a big part of the teddy boy image.
Im thinking though that if your asked to choose between Mum & Dad at a very young age and then brought up by your strict aunt while Mum doesnt want you .....it would have a quite a lasting and damaging effect on your mindmy thoughts exactly. and how he was treated in school, nobody is perfect.
wait a minute. you are holding the real life john lennon and the mythical Beatle john lennon to a sloppy and ridiculous collection of mediocre double standards. besides that is the film noir version of john lennon, probably a very poor reflection of the truth. unbelievable.
john lennon was a flesh and blood human being just like the rest of us, but most of what you have stated is bogus, colorless and irrelevant speculation. and you don't bother to explain the whys, hows or wherefores of this and how this supposedly makes john lennon a good or a bad person.
Yeah, John Lennon spent his whole life complaining how he was abandoned at 6, only to do the exact same thing to his son Julian.
Nice.
Are you trying to say that my descriptions of him are not true? If so, you better pick up a book and do a lot of homework. John was indeed everything I said.that's exactly what i'm saying. you can't seem to separate the real john lennon from the mythical beatle john lennon, and you seem quite content to holding him to incomplete and obtuse doublestandards, moral relativism, womanizer, etc.
Just don't buy this baking bread every day while raising Sean. He did none of that.
that's exactly what i'm saying. you can't seem to separate the real john lennon from the mythical beatle john lennon, and you seem quite content to holding him to incomplete and obtuse doublestandards, moral relativism, womanizer, etc.
;sorry
Anyways, all of these things seem to be pushed aside by Beatle fans.
of course John wasn't saint, and everybody here knows that but when somebody writes something like when in truth, he was a horrible human being and manipulator that is something offensive for a lot of people here. I don't understand you tkitna. I guess you were brainwashed by some stupid book or something.
Just like i said, i think he was a great guy. He made some mistakes but we all do. But reading your posts tkitna i cant but not to see some deep hatred for him. Seems like you are just waiting for something to hear and drop it here with words i don't know but i believe it true. Drinking or taking drugs doesn't make somebody horrible person - those problems were John's personal demons not ours.
I love after all that post full of hatred (horrible person, junkie, wife beater, jerk, homosexual, got Stu killed,... ) how you mentioned the most important thing John was singing about giving peace a chance. And that is a fact. You may think whatever you want but John sang and fought for peace. And nobody can't take that from him.
thank you. well said nimrod.
what do you mean by that ?
I dont push anything aside.... I dont care if he had an affair, I dont care if he got drunk etc etc and why do you choose to believe that he had an affair with Brian ? why do you believe somebody like Albert Goldman over Paul George & ringo, and even if he did I dont care, Im not the oracle of all thats moral, I believe in live & let live, all I know is he was originally the leader of a band I absolutely loved and still love 40 years on, I will be forever and eternally grateful to John & Paul for the brilliant songs they wrote which have been the soundtrack to my early life - and millions of others, I feel really blessed that I grew up listening to them..
Ive no idea why posters come on here talking about what a horrible lousy prick of a human being John was because Fred Seaman said so or Elliot Mintz or Goldman or whoever, Ive no idea what they hope to achieve, is it supposed to make me no longer a fan of Johns ?, cos if thats your agenda then forget it, Its not gonna happen, I really couldnt give a flying feck whether he baked bread or not......if there is a different reason then please explain.
I love the guy and his great songs have given me so much pleasure and I hope they play A Day In The Life at my funeral.
Thats my last words on that and I hope people will now please stop treating the guy like he was a mass murderer
...but yet the real John Lennon was not a great personor so you say. seems to me you are just hating upon john lennon, and little else, your extremely dull and haphazardous moralizations knows no bounds. and are hardly reflective of the truth.
Was he a terrible person all the time, no, but i'm betting it was way more often than people want to believe.you don't really know, you certainly weren't there, so your incongruent, sloppy and vapid opinions merit little concern. and if you would be so kind, stop playing the he-said-she-said game, it is IMHO counterproductive. ;)
I don't think that tkitna has any problems with John as a person,
I think i'm just going to imagine that John Lennon was an a**hole and leave it at that.
Without spelling to much out for you, you do realize he was a womanizer, horrible father, herion junkie, drunk and an all around prick to most people he knew right?
Yeah, what a saint.
your drunken and shapeless ad hominem ([url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem[/url]) strawmen aside, you do continue to make careless, colorless and irrelevant generalizations, this is incredible nonsense.
;yes
of course John wasn't saint, and everybody here knows that but when somebody writes something like when in truth, he was a horrible human being and manipulator that is something offensive for a lot of people here.
what do you mean by that ?
I dont push anything aside.... I dont care if he had an affair, I dont care if he got drunk etc etc and
why do you choose to believe that he had an affair with Brian ?
why do you believe somebody like Albert Goldman over Paul George & ringo,
and even if he did I dont care, Im not the oracle of all thats moral, I believe in live & let live, all I know is he was originally the leader of a band I absolutely loved and still love 40 years on, I will be forever and eternally grateful to John & Paul for the brilliant songs they wrote which have been the soundtrack to my early life - and millions of others, I feel really blessed that I grew up listening to them..
Ive no idea why posters come on here talking about what a horrible lousy prick of a human being John was because Fred Seaman said so or Elliot Mintz or Goldman or whoever, Ive no idea what they hope to achieve,
is it supposed to make me no longer a fan of Johns ?, cos if thats your agenda then forget it, Its not gonna happen, I really couldnt give a flying feck whether he baked bread or not......if there is a different reason then please explain.
I love the guy and his great songs have given me so much pleasure and I hope they play A Day In The Life at my funeral.
Thats my last words on that and I hope people will now please stop treating the guy like he was a mass murderer
of course John wasn't saint, and everybody here knows that but when somebody writes something like when in truth, he was a horrible human being and manipulator that is something offensive for a lot of people here. I don't understand you tkitna. I guess you were brainwashed by some stupid book or something.
Just like i said, i think he was a great guy.
He made some mistakes but we all do. But reading your posts tkitna i cant but not to see some deep hatred for him. Seems like you are just waiting for something to hear and drop it here with words i don't know but i believe it true. Drinking or taking drugs doesn't make somebody horrible person - those problems were John's personal demons not ours.
I love after all that post full of hatred (horrible person, junkie, wife beater, jerk, homosexual, got Stu killed,... ) how you mentioned the most important thing John was singing about giving peace a chance. And that is a fact. You may think whatever you want but John sang and fought for peace. And nobody can't take that from him.
your extremely dull and haphazardous moralizations knows no bounds. and are hardly reflective of the truth.
you don't really know, you certainly weren't there, so your incongruent, sloppy and vapid opinions merit little concern. and if you would be so kind, stop playing the he-said-she-said game, it is IMHO counterproductive. ;)
your drunken and shapeless ad hominem ([url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem[/url]) strawmen aside, you do continue to make careless, colorless and irrelevant generalizations, this is incredible nonsense.
;yes
I don't think that tkitna has any problems with John as a person, but with the fact that people see him as a "god" rather than a succesful musician. Of course he wasn't perfect but that's not the point of this debate. I think he made himself pretty clear in his previous posts. :)
yeah I think your right Lennon93, I got a bit offended yesterday at all the anti John stuff so I apologize for my rant earlier 2ch
Should everybody say and look at just the positive things? Thats kind of one sided dont you think?
And your constant habit of dismissing absolutely everything that you personally don't agree with as complete nonsense is getting a bit annoying, if you ask me. No offense meant, that's just the way I see it.remote offtopic blather = the fail. roll:) roll:) roll:)
;sorry
Besides the delusional 7 of 13 saying he was an angel and still defending him saying he did nothing wrong in his lifetimeZOMG! the delusional con artist is you tkitna. what you have stated is arbitrary, irrelevant and total nonsense. you take my simple statements out of context, i never said john lennon ever did anything right nor did i say he did anything wrong, stop making things up. roll:) i am merely pointing out the hypocritical nature of your moral sermonizing here, the doublestandards you seek to employ, the out and out biases of your ridiculous assortment of paperthin assertions, cleverly disguised as hating upon john lennon. *sigh*
As a human being Ive always regarded John as damaged goods, through no fault of his own, I cant imagine being asked to choose between your parents as a kid, in your small immature mind it would mean never seeing one of them again.....massive massive psychological damage. I dont think any of us should underestimate the effect it could have.
John was no angel, John could be cruel, imo a result of the above.
Calling the guy an angel is offensive to me. Speaking of being brainwashed by books or something, how did you get to know John so well to form your opinion?
Well of course you do. Most people do. Maybe he was. Do any of us really know for sure?
As a human being Ive always regarded John as damaged goods, through no fault of his own, I cant imagine being asked to choose between your parents as a kid, in your small immature mind it would mean never seeing one of them again.....massive massive psychological damage. I dont think any of us should underestimate the effect it could have.
John was no angel, John could be cruel, imo a result of the above.
ZOMG! the delusional con artist is you tkitna. what you have stated is arbitrary, irrelevant and total nonsense. you take my simple statements out of context, i never said john lennon ever did anything right nor did i say he did anything wrong, stop making things up. roll:) i am merely pointing out the hypocritical nature of your moral sermonizing here, the doublestandards you seek to employ, the out and out biases of your ridiculous assortment of paperthin assertions, cleverly disguised as hating upon john lennon. *sigh*
;yes
I don't know John well - only though his songs, videos, interviews, some well known facts about his life etc.
And i can say that he was a good guy.
And my opinion is not extreme ( saint / terrible ) like yours -
so i would like to see your answer to this question. Did you know John really well to wrote stuff like you did. I know John wasn't saint but when i see/hear somebody write/say that i will not say to him that he was horrible person, jerk, wife beater, junkie etc.
I don't know. It's a personal thing - do you see someone as a good person until proven bad, or otherwise.
Once again, sidestepping my wish for you to tell me the things I said about John werent true. I know you cant so its fun watching you duck the truth. I mentioned a few negative things about John and you replied with a statement of those things being nonsense and you called him an angel. I ask you again, come on here for all to see and tell me the things I said werent the truth. You cant.once again tkitna, it is in fact you that is routinely making the most unobjective statements here, and of course your trademark boatload of obscene, outrageous and childish assertions. and obviously, it's up to you to prove them. you talking in circles and relying upon secondhand information is bogus, your comical assertions and insanely unrealistic "cornfed" moralizations, the icing on the cake. your pc distortions are no substitute for the truth. totally. fecking. irrelevant.
I mentioned a few negative things about John and you replied with a statement of those things being nonsense...you can't be serious. it is nonsense, for many and manifold reasons. roll:) first and foremost, you cannot prove a single thing you have said, that much is extremely obvious. you are relying upon kiss and tell, glitz and glam style books that seem to make the convenient error of spotlighting Johns youthful arrogance in a bad light. that is criminal. your irrelevant, spotty and derelict pseudo-conjecture is bogus and only serves to paint John, the beatles, and everything that goes with it in a bad light. and this is going nowhere fast.
you can't be serious. it is nonsense, for many and manifold reasons. roll:) first and foremost, you cannot prove a single thing you have said, that much is extremely obvious. you are relying upon kiss and tell, glitz and glam style books that seem to make the convenient error of spotlighting Johns youthful arrogance in a bad light. that is criminal. your irrelevant, spotty and derelict pseudo-conjecture is bogus and only serves to paint John, the beatles, and everything that goes with it in a bad light. and this is going nowhere fast.
;yes
How did you learn anything about John Lennon (i'm beginning to think you havent)? Did you pal around with him when he was in the Beatles? Did you stop off at the Dakota for tea once in awhile?whole lotta' nothing there tkitna. never said i did, even so your drunken strawmen tell a sad tale. one that indicates that intelligent debate about these issues is next to impossible, that is, without first demonizing john lennon the human being and in the process criticizing john the beatle. minus the improper behavior he displayed towards Cynthia in his youth, i have no reason to believe he was a bad apple. many here have said precisely the same thing. and your lukewarm, mawkish statements and "too little too late" "cornfed" assertions lead nowhere. John was a peace activist and brutally honest to others, something that apparently you refuse to acknowledge.
your irrelevant, spotty and derelict pseudo-conjecture is bogus and only serves to paint John, the beatles, and everything that goes with it in a bad light.
Don't forget tkitna's filthy Eastern ways!
whole lotta' nothing there tkitna. never said i did,
intelligent debate about these issues is next to impossible,
without first demonizing john lennon the human being and in the process criticizing john the beatle.
minus the improper behavior he displayed towards Cynthia in his youth, i have no reason to believe he was a bad apple.
many here have said precisely the same thing. and your lukewarm, mawkish statements and "too little too late" "cornfed" assertions lead nowhere.
John was a peace activist and brutally honest to others, something that apparently you refuse to acknowledge.
([url]http://www.autismlearningfelt.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/ladygaga.jpg[/url])
you are demonizing john lennon the man, your one sided delusional commentary,
hopelessly linear statements and timid and gutless assertions are at best arbitrary nonsense,
your uncritical pc distortions and woefully inept, drunken strawmen tell a very sad tale,
and bear little resemblance to the truth.
you also fail to recognize that john was a peace activist, made the same mistakes we all do, and was a real person underneath the tidal wave known as beatlemania.
you pretending to know john lennon better than most
and foolishly making out john lennon to be a purely evil person is corrupt and unthinkable beyond measure.
;sorry
oh the irony! tkitna you are an incredibly shallow and confused person, your timid and bankrupt pc assertions, drunken strawmen, dimestore commentary and woefully inadequate, imbecilic, meandering conclusions lead nowhere. you talking out of both sides of yer precious little mouth is quite uncourageous, your lukewarm semi-lucid "cornfed" moralizing an obscenity. get it straight.
;sorry
oh the irony! tkitna you are an incredibly shallow and confused person, your timid and bankrupt pc assertions, drunken strawmen, dimestore commentary and woefully inadequate, imbecilic, meandering conclusions lead nowhere. you talking out of both sides of yer precious little mouth is quite uncourageous, your lukewarm semi-lucid "cornfed" moralizing an obscenity. get it straight.
;sorryjohn lennon Plays The Ukulele "its only love " ([url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EcRuunnDW_4#[/url])
and the uncritical, bombastic responses manufactured by tkitna leave little to the imagination.
my belief is he is just trying to derail the image of john lennon the peace activist, which is what he was, and to demonize the real john lennon.
for what possible gain i can only wonder.
possibly engaged in recreational drug use beyond tea,
as others have pointed out this is nothing but unrealistic hating upon john lennon, his personal relationships with others is irrelevant,
and in any event should not take away from his brutal honesty and conviction. it is precisely this type of 20/20 "cornfed" pc tunnelvision biases, and akward and fractured reasoning that i find counterproductive, unobjective and irrelevant.
my belief is he is just trying to derail the image of john lennon the peace activist, which is what he was
Writing a few songs with the word "peace" in it and staying in bed for two weeks hardly makes you an activist.oh puhleeze mr Joost, not today.
Writing a few songs with the word "peace" in it and staying in bed for two weeks hardly makes you an activist.
oh puhleeze mr Joost, not today.
;yes
What's your point? I admire John Lennon for being a musical innovator, a charismatic personality and one of the greatest songwriters that ever lived. But I can't take him seriously as a "peace activist". It's my impression that his "peace activism" was little more to him than a temporary hobby to pass the time and something that he could write songs about.now see here mr Joost, i tried to clean this up the first time. if you seriously understood what plain vanilla peace activism was about, i wouldn't have to qualify anything i said, whether or not you do consider it to be reasonable or unreasonable. so just ignore what i have to say, i just happen to believe this to be truth.
I was trying to make a serious point and I think I'm entitled to my own opinion. If you want to prove me wrong with good arguments, please be my guest. But don't be an ass, please.
so just ignore what i have to say
yeah but it coming up with a melody thats the hard bit (especially one that people will remember and sing) ???you change the lyrics, you change the structure of the song, you change its meaning and you corrupt its value, and in this case the message of love and world peace and harmony. i have to agree with mr Joost, this is kind of stupid. not to mention shallow and insincere.
now come on Todd, this is one of THE most positive songs ever written, of course its a dream but just imagine....no countries etc etc
Glad i'm not an instigator. 8)
I just read through the entire thread. Some of it was pretty heated. Glad i'm not an instigator. 8)