Is this a case of  "Macho Posturing " ??? Between John and Paul .

Just John being a prick as usual.

John was just having a laugh!

John being a prick ? f*ck dat

[/quote

Nah..I think this was John's parody of a phony-a** urban-Liverpool "lad" trying to pass himself off as some agrarian sheep herder..but then you probably wouldnt get that, would ya ?

geeez  

Hee! Best answer yet, MMM!  

Quoted from harihead

Hee! Best answer yet, MMM!  

thx, but I wasnt trying to be funny. I was dead serious. Some ppl cant see the obvious even if you stick it in their face

Quoted from 829

thx, but I wasnt trying to be funny. I was dead serious. Some ppl cant see the obvious even if you stick it in their face

What the f*** are you talking about? The only thing obvious about the pictures is that John did that as a rebuttal towards Paul. Why are you having issues with it?

Quoted from 829

John being a prick ? f*ck dat

[/quote

Nah..I think this was John's parody of a phony-a** urban-Liverpool "lad" trying to pass himself off as some agrarian sheep herder..but then you probably wouldnt get that, would ya ?

geeez  

The fact that John felt the need to parody his old friend in such a way sort of does make him a bit prickish. Sorry, but it's true. He didn't do it to be artistic he was trying to get a rise out of Paul. Again. I can't imagine how a person can miss that. And why can't an urban born person develop a interest in rural living? What's phony about that? It isn't as if he went around pretending he was some working class hero when in reality he was raised comfortably middle class. Oh, wait...

I like the fact John choose a clever animal to get his dig in , my expereience of sheep is there a bit dim .
Agree Sandra you can take to the country life if you grow up in a town , my mum's sister married a farmer and she's been farming over 50 years now .
Also Liverpool is surrounded by some lovely country side and when the Beatles were growing up it would have only been a bike ride away as it still is like most places in England .
Paul still lives in the country side ,although i think the farm in Scotland was more a retreat than a working farm.
Maybe John read the Ram as a devil jibe as the Ram is also linked to witchcraft ?

I always thought (probably 'coz I read it somewhere as opposed to an original thought) that it was John expressing his anger at Paul in the way he knew best ... sardonic mockery. I think Paul actually started this battle of the album covers, with 2 beetles copulating on the back of his. Ironically, John looks as happy in that photo as in any photos of the era (or since?) that I can recall, none of that serious "I am ... John" stuff.

Remember, he also put "How Do You Sleep" on the Imagine album ("So Seargant Pepper caught you by surprise" - which always mystified me because I thought John had previously said he wasn't that enamored of the album ...), and "The only thing you done was Yesterday", and the amazing double slicing to bits "... and since you're gone it's just Another Day!").

I can definitely Imagine that John did NOT like that last song!

John seems to have been rather paranoid at that time, seeing references to himself in everything Paul wrote. Though Paul never wrote anything about John that was as damning as 'How Do You Sleep'. And this picture makes him an even more flawed character in my eyes. I don't think it's funny at all, I think it's pathetic.

Quoted from BlueMeanie

John seems to have been rather paranoid at that time, seeing references to himself in everything Paul wrote. Though Paul never wrote anything about John that was as damning as 'How Do You Sleep'. And this picture makes him an even more flawed character in my eyes. I don't think it's funny at all, I think it's pathetic.

Yes, but just because one is paranoid doesn't mean people aren't out to get them!

I think it would be reasonable for John to have thought that Paul's song "Too Many People" was a jab at him, especially in light of the beetles on the album's back cover. He responded, it seems, by mocking Paul's "gentleman farmer" presentation. Very John IMO, and understandable given what was going on relationship-wise (I'm embarassed writing that word, afraid Harihead, writer supreme, may come upon this thread one day).

I bet George and Ringo laughed it up when they saw that!

Quoted from alexis

Very John IMO, and understandable given what was going on relationship-wise (I'm embarassed writing that word, afraid Harihead, writer supreme, may come upon this thread one day).

You're right, Alexis. This kind of word use definitely marks you down to become a member of Congress or the CEO of a major corporation. *promotes you*

Quoted from harihead

You're right, Alexis. This kind of word use definitely marks you down to become a member of Congress or the CEO of a major corporation. *promotes you*

Ackkk! Busted, and right away!

Quoted from alexis

Ackkk! Busted, and right away!

Really? I didn't realize you had been in office long enough to get up to much.

Quoted from alexis

I always thought (probably 'coz I read it somewhere as opposed to an original thought) that it was John expressing his anger at Paul in the way he knew best ... sardonic mockery. I think Paul actually started this battle of the album covers, with 2 beetles copulating on the back of his. Ironically, John looks as happy in that photo as in any photos of the era (or since?) that I can recall, none of that serious "I am ... John" stuff.

Remember, he also put "How Do You Sleep" on the Imagine album ("So Seargant Pepper caught you by surprise" - which always mystified me because I thought John had previously said he wasn't that enamored of the album ...), and "The only thing you done was Yesterday", and the amazing double slicing to bits "... and since you're gone it's just Another Day!").

I can definitely Imagine that John did NOT like that last song!

yep, exactly my point...I'm glad John picked a "dim-witted" animal to make his point...nice jab

Quoted from harihead

Really? I didn't realize you had been in office long enough to get up to much.

How do you know it's not the business executive option?

Or simply a cry for ... bail?

Personally I think it's rather petty.

Quoted from alexis

Or simply a cry for ... bail?

*gives the pig $5 to bust you out*

Mairi, what happened to your icon?  

huh? what do you mean?

Quoted from Sandra

The fact that John felt the need to parody his old friend in such a way sort of does make him a bit prickish. Sorry, but it's true. He didn't do it to be artistic he was trying to get a rise out of Paul. Again. I can't imagine how a person can miss that. And why can't an urban born person develop a interest in rural living? What's phony about that? It isn't as if he went around pretending he was some working class hero when in reality he was raised comfortably middle class. Oh, wait...

No kidding that he was trying to get a rise out of Paul. Around the time Ram came out, John was tackling large human issues like the Vietnam War, poverty, racism, sexism..and what was Paulie doing?...writing trivial love odes and ruminating on the relative merits of Scottish livestock. Look, I think Macca is a musical genuis just like everybody else does, but he doesnt have the social conscience of a John Lennon by any means. He (J.L., that is)was more thoughtful and philosophical about life and world events than macca ever was. Did Paul and Linda sit in  bed for peace ?? Dont think so. How many books of poetry or self-examining essays did Paul write ?? Dont make me laugh. John wrote "A Spaniard In The Works", "In His Own Write"..etc.. Need I say more ? While John is singing "Gimme Some Truth" Paul was up to his neck in sheep sh*t. I love Macca's talent for melody, but that doesnt cloud the fact that he's still a pompous a** a lot of the time. Try reading his bio--half that thing is an attempt to show the world how important he is--something he didnt need to do--and dont even get me started on how he treated George...
You have your opinions, I have mine. Macca is a musical genuis..but he's also a self-serving d*ckhead a lot of the time. Apart from music, Paul McCartney compared to JOHN WINSTON LENNON is a featherweight.

and for your comment, that John "went around pretending he was some working class hero when in reality he was raised comfortably middle class.."
WHAT THE HELL ??....he wasnt speaking for himself, he was making an artistic statement about the plight of the working class and how they got a raw deal....( ..he was a poet, and a social reformer ..he was speaking in generalities John was more LITERATE..that doesnt always mean literal..
As far as I'M concerned (and I know a lot of ppl who feel the same way), John didnt knock Paul down ENOUGH..

Quoted from Mairi

huh? what do you mean?

You don't have an icon, just a red x, with "Your ad here- $5.00". I thought you were making a social statement about the lack of an icon...

Since when does rock music have to be about politics to be deep? In fact, since when does rock music have to be deep?

That aside, I have to speak up about the obvious canonization of John in your post. Yeah, John sat in bed and planted acorns for peace, but did he ever donate any of his own money? Pretty ironic that a guy who sang about "no possessions" lived in a huge mansion and drove a Rolls Royce, that the guy who sang about "a brotherhood of man" ignored his own son so badly that Paul had to write Hey Jude about it.
Last time I checked, Paul is out there donating money for landmine relief, War Child, and PETA (not an organization I agree with, but he seems to think they're doing some good). He also performs in charity concerts like Live 8.
George spearheaded Concert For Bangladesh, the first charity rock concert. I don't know too much about his or Ringo's other charitable contributions, so I can't really speak about them on that subject, but as it stands Paul has done a whole lot more than John ever did. What good is talking about peace if you never do anything about it?

Quoted from Mairi

Since when does rock music have to be about politics to be deep? In fact, since when does rock music have to be deep?

That aside, I have to speak up about the obvious canonization of John in your post. Yeah, John sat in bed and planted acorns for peace, but did he ever donate any of his own money? Pretty ironic that a guy who sang about "no possessions" lived in a huge mansion and drove a Rolls Royce, that the guy who sang about "a brotherhood of man" ignored his own son so badly that Paul had to write Hey Jude about it.
Last time I checked, Paul is out there donating money for landmine relief, War Child, and PETA (not an organization I agree with, but he seems to think they're doing some good). He also performs in charity concerts like Live 8.
George spearheaded Concert For Bangladesh, the first charity rock concert. I don't know too much about his or Ringo's other charitable contributions, so I can't really speak about them on that subject, but as it stands Paul has done a whole lot more than John ever did. What good is talking about peace if you never do anything about it?

try John & Yoko donating money to get the NYPD bullet-proof vests for starters...um, I think that pre-dates macca's vain-glorious attempts to call attention to himself..besides, wasnt it the infamous Heather Mills who GOT HIM INTO landmine relief?? ..AND Linda who made him a vegan ? He never initiates these things himself the way J&Y did w/ things like "grow an acorn 4 peace" "shave your hair 4 peace" ..OR "Bag-Peace"....when it comes to charitable pursuits, macca imitates --as long as the charity is in vogue and it makes him look good. Like JOHN said in "How Do You Sleep" (aimed directly at Macca) "A pretty face may last a year or two, but pretty soon they'll see what you can do.." (not too much, ay Macca ?)

John "never did anything for peace"??? huh??? are you KIDDING?

I didn't know that about the bullet-proof vests, so I stand corrected. But seriously? PAUL picking fashionable causes? Um, was there a cause any more fashionable in the 60s/70s than Vietnam?

Quoted from Mairi

I didn't know that about the bullet-proof vests, so I stand corrected. But seriously? PAUL picking fashionable causes? Um, was there a cause any more fashionable in the 60s/70s than Vietnam?

I wouldnt call it fashionable...it just was so all-encompassing in the 60's. Mairi, I know you must love Dylan & Baez as I do...can we ever accuse these two of picking a fashionable cause ?  lol...Bob Dylan of ALL ppl would spew poison adjectives at the very thought of backing something phony or incidental...so by that token, Lennon is thoroughly vindicated in my estimation. George, as you astutely mentioned, has "Bangladesh" under his belt--an admirable accomplishment by any standard (and Ringo quickly lent his hand to that).
It's just my personal opinion that Paul's charitable efforts seem forced and rather disingenuous.

Well I just think that as long as someone is doing something charitable, that is a good thing. If John in fact did lend his wallet to organizations or his time to productive protests, then that's great. Paul is doing this and I think it's great too. Don't get me wrong, I love John and I think his heart was in the right place. I just don't seee how tearing down what Paul has done will make John's accomplishments any better.

In any case, what theyt both did was better than the load of self-absorbed rock stars *coughcough*Stones*coughcough* who never do ANYTHING.

Quoted from tkitna

What the f*** are you talking about?  

John's jab was right on. *sings to myself* "Oh McCartney had a farm, e-i, e-i, o..and on that farm he had a sheep e-i , e-i o"..

Look, if you can drag yourself away from your wussy-Wings crap for two seconds, you'll realize that Macca (circa 1971) was actively engaged in livestock beastiality (when not laying down tracks for his sophomore solo Lp, he was also laying Doris the sheep ) You want proof ? what..you think the "Ram" cover is the only indication? Try the "Mary Had A Little Lamb" single and lyrics to "Dragonfly" on Red Rose Speedway...---all further evidence of his clandestine debauchery. Derek Taylor was under strict orders not to devulge this info to the public. The truth is out now.

John had him pegged alright...



(tongue planted firmly in cheek)

-MMM

Quoted from Mairi

Well I just think that as long as someone is doing something charitable, that is a good thing.
.

well I totally agree w/ this.. I just wish Paul (and some others) wouldnt do it for the "look at me, aint I charitable" factor.

Quoted from Mairi

In any case, what theyt both did was better than the load of self-absorbed rock stars *coughcough*Stones*coughcough* who never do ANYTHING.

Really ? I thought Mick Jagger was planning to donate his lips to Angelina Jolie in case she ever needs a spare set.

Good onya, Mick you're all heart.

Actually pigs are much smarter than sheep.  Even a ram.  So John was showing his superior intellect in his choice of the smart pig vs. Paul's stupid ram.  

John [in Liverpudlian accent]: "Looook, Pawl, Ay've gawt me a peeeg!  'n he's a smawrt wun tooo."

Quoted from adamzero

Actually pigs are much smarter than sheep.  Even a ram.  So John was showing his superior intellect in his choice of the smart pig vs. Paul's stupid ram.  

John [in Liverpudlian accent]: "Looook, Pawl, Ay've gawt me a peeeg!  'n he's a smawrt wun tooo."

correctamundo!

(that's why I loved John...he was one cheeky sum b*tch

Brilliant sometimes this forum really comes alive , ive enjoyed reading these posts .
Mean Mr Mustard there is much truth in some of what you say , ive always felt Paul trys to hard to live upto the Lennon mantle , when he should just be himself and let his genius  for writing great melodies do the talking .
Having said that i wish Lennon had shut up sometimes and got in the studio and made at least two more great albums instead of spending his time sat in a bag looking ridiculous ,truth is he changed very little , even though i think his heart was in the right place.
Paul's best thing outside writing is his involvement in The Liverpool Institute for Performing Art , thats a good thing he's done ?
He could'nt match Lennon on all the peace stuff and should'nt have tried to .
How Do You Sleep and Here Today sum it up they both missed the boat with each other and thats the sad truth of  Lennon v McCartney a friendship lost .
But at least we have the music .

Quoted from 829

John's jab was right on. *sings to myself* "Oh McCartney had a farm, e-i, e-i, o..and on that farm he had a sheep e-i , e-i o"..

Look, if you can drag yourself away from your wussy-Wings crap for two seconds, you'll realize that Macca (circa 1971) was actively engaged in livestock beastiality (when not laying down tracks for his sophomore solo Lp, he was also laying Doris the sheep ) You want proof ? what..you think the "Ram" cover is the only indication? Try the "Mary Had A Little Lamb" single and lyrics to "Dragonfly" on Red Rose Speedway...---all further evidence of his clandestine debauchery. Derek Taylor was under strict orders not to devulge this info to the public. The truth is out now.

John had him pegged alright...



(tongue planted firmly in cheek)

-MMM

I wonder who had gag orders when John had his lips planted around Brian Epstein?

Quoted from DaveRam

Brilliant sometimes this forum really comes alive , ive enjoyed reading these posts .
Mean Mr Mustard there is much truth in some of what you say , ive always felt Paul trys to hard to live upto the Lennon mantle , when he should just be himself and let his genius  for writing great melodies do the talking .
Having said that i wish Lennon had shut up sometimes and got in the studio and made at least two more great albums instead of spending his time sat in a bag looking ridiculous ,truth is he changed very little , even though i think his heart was in the right place.
Paul's best thing outside writing is his involvement in The Liverpool Institute for Performing Art , thats a good thing he's done ?
He could'nt match Lennon on all the peace stuff and should'nt have tried to .
How Do You Sleep and Here Today sum it up they both missed the boat with each other and thats the sad truth of  Lennon v McCartney a friendship lost .
But at least we have the music .

This is a good post. I agree with a lot of this. Here's my take -

Paul - He's an egotistical maniac who is constantly looking for acceptance when its already there in front of him. He always plays to the media portraying himself as the Mr. Goody Twoshoes that can do no wrong while also trying to act as if he's the most important figure ever pass through music. It seems as if he trys to push his music into the 'popular youth hip today' catergory all the time when it doesnt belong there. I just wish he'd let his guard down sometimes and grow some balls. Forget the public for once and tell us whats really on your mind. I cant believe we even got 'Give Ireland Back To The Irish' from him. That was really outside of his norm.

John - Became a hero because he died. Sorry, but its true. Yeah, he attempted to bring some peace with his goofy a** Bed-ins and acorn planting, but the only thing it accomplished was a public portrayal of some nut case. Did anybody take him seriously at the time except for a few strung out hippies? He laid in bed singing songs,,,,,,please. A better person may have tried to fix a broken relationship with their own child. He was a person that did as much bad as good. I'll leave it at that.

I thought most people were over the whole John vs Paul thing. I guess some people still get off on the whole my Beatle is better than your Beatle thing. It's not worth going into again why Paul became so seemingly egotistical and why Lennon became so ridiculously idolized. Most people have already figured it out. Let the last few remaining hold outs live on in ignorance I say.

I think the Beatles were the whole "John vs. Paul thing" (apologies to George and Ringo).  Creative conflict or whatever.  It doesn't have to be something to get over.  I think people are still interested in it--sometimes very emotionally--because it goes to the heart of the mystery of the greatness of the Beatles.  

Even by mocking Paul, John in some way was admitting the connection that was deeper than mere personalities.  If you've ever created anything profound with another person (whether it be a child, work of art, whatever), there is a soul-link that lies deeper than words.  Both these guys were haunted by the break-up far more than George (who got some room to show the world what he could do) and Ringo (who missed the money but could get out and play with Jerry Lee Lewis, members of the Band, etc.--doing what he loved--performing--Ringo may have been the most natural performer in the group).  

Also, Sandra, in your pic, does Paul have his hand on his own throat?  

When I talk about getting over it, I mean the whole feeling the need to denigrate one Beatle to make the other one look better. I find that pointless and often greatly misguided. Of course it's great to explore the relationship and what affect the arguing or whatnot had on the greatness of the music. That's different. But attacking Paul and calling him a hack or whatever just to prove John was some kind of great genius or making John out to be some kind of great hero of peace by saying Paul is shallow or whatever doesn't really have anything to do with the music. Just saying. It's been done to death since Lennon's passing. One of the reasons Paul became so weird about his legacy. So I really feel it had not positive affect. But whatever. It's just my opinion.

As for the pic. I think you're right! I never noticed that before. Just assumed it was George's hand. Ha.