We've all seen it in print, but it's much more stinging to hear his voice:
8th May 2007 12:11 AM
MrPleasant
John liked heroin
8th May 2007 11:00 AM
gimmekeef
Anyone who allowed The Plastic Ono band to exist should not throw Stones....
8th May 2007 12:26 PM
pagey666.6
This is from the "Lennon Remembers" interview in 1971. He was pretty pissed at everyone at that point; and later on ended up regretting a lot of what he said. Always made good copy for interviews, though..........some of what he said made sense, but I always thought he was a little jealous of Mick and the "rebellious" side that the Stones had right from the start - John always hated the fact that Brian Epstein put them in suits and "cleaned" their image. Mick has also made some snarky comments on the Beatles as well, so there was obviously some jealousy on both sides. The thing I always loved about Lennon is that he really never gave a fuck and said what was on his mind, no matter what the subject......whether you beleive it or not it was always interesting............
8th May 2007 12:48 PM
Mel Belli
quote:pagey666.6 wrote:
This is from the "Lennon Remembers" interview in 1971. He was pretty pissed at everyone at that point; and later on ended up regretting a lot of what he said. Always made good copy for interviews, though..........some of what he said made sense, but I always thought he was a little jealous of Mick and the "rebellious" side that the Stones had right from the start - John always hated the fact that Brian Epstein put them in suits and "cleaned" their image. Mick has also made some snarky comments on the Beatles as well, so there was obviously some jealousy on both sides. The thing I always loved about Lennon is that he really never gave a fuck and said what was on his mind, no matter what the subject......whether you beleive it or not it was always interesting............
I don't doubt Mick was jealous of the Beatles' fame, but the thing that bugs me is Lennon's self-serving claim that the Stones copied every Beatles innovation within two months (which is the conventional wisdom to this day). The "Pepper"/"Satanic Majesties" influence is undeniable, but to say "We Love You" was a knockoff of "All You Need is Love" is flatly absurd.
I mean, John sang on the song -- but did he bother to listen to it? "We Love You" was far from a lovey-dovey ode to hedonism; it was a grand flip-off to the British establishment that put them in jail.
And, yeah, John and Paul gave the Stones their first hit in Britain. So what. It was 1963, and Mick and Keith started writing songs far better than "I Wanna Be Your Man" by 1964.
8th May 2007 10:02 PM
MikeyC613
quote:Mel Belli wrote:
And, yeah, John and Paul gave the Stones their first hit in Britain. So what. It was 1963, and Mick and Keith started writing songs far better than "I Wanna Be Your Man" by 1964.
Es la verdad!
8th May 2007 10:47 PM
corgi37
As far as i am concerned, the Beatles became the chasers after Pepper. With bands like the the Doors, Airplane, the Dead, Creedance - and the Stones from JJF onwards - all of a sudden the satin pirate suits looked a bit ridiculous.
Then, like lightning, the hair got longer, the photos of them were no longer smiley smiley, but "sullen" and "deep" and they came they changed from Octopusses garden to "why dont we do it on the road".
I mean, come on. It was the greatest wank in rock history! The greatest con.
Oh, and dont forget, Winston was also at the Stones rnr circus!
Lennon, like Roger Waters, never got over not having a dad.
8th May 2007 11:56 PM
Lethargy
John Lennon is one of the bigger dickheads ever born.
9th May 2007 12:37 AM
pdog
Nothing about the interview bugs me... Just talking shit, he resents alot... A resentment is his problem, not the person he resents... Was this his heroin period, sounds like it. Shit makes you bitter...
9th May 2007 01:16 AM
Starbuck
yes, this anti stones rant was recorded after the "casino gig" last weekend.
it was 1:45 AM, i was tired, we still had break down to do, i had had a few vodka martinis on the house, the mrs was just not biting, and i was stuck talking with a drunk cheesehead in a sombrero. what's a guy to do? sue me.
[Edited by Starbuck]
9th May 2007 03:50 AM
pdog
quote:Starbuck wrote:
yes, this anti stones rant was recorded after the "casino gig" last weekend.
it was 1:45 AM, i was tired, we still had break down to do, i had had a few vodka martinis on the house, the mrs was just not biting, and i was stuck talking with a drunk cheesehead in a sombrero. what's a guy to do? sue me.
[Edited by Starbuck]
9th May 2007 08:17 AM
Mel Belli
quote:corgi37 wrote:
As far as i am concerned, the Beatles became the chasers after Pepper. With bands like the the Doors, Airplane, the Dead, Creedance - and the Stones from JJF onwards - all of a sudden the satin pirate suits looked a bit ridiculous.
Then, like lightning, the hair got longer, the photos of them were no longer smiley smiley, but "sullen" and "deep" and they came they changed from Octopusses garden to "why dont we do it on the road".
That's interesting, because it's always assumed that everything the Beatles ever did, every move they made, was completely self-directed.
9th May 2007 08:35 AM
PartyDoll MEG
quote:Starbuck wrote:
yes, this anti stones rant was recorded after the "casino gig" last weekend.
it was 1:45 AM, i was tired, we still had break down to do, i had had a few vodka martinis on the house, the mrs was just not biting, and i was stuck talking with a drunk cheesehead in a sombrero. what's a guy to do? sue me.
[Edited by Starbuck]
Oh dear Lord, Bucky? Is that the best you can do?
But you made her day I am sure!!!
Are there no YOUNG Beatle groupies to be had?
9th May 2007 10:12 AM
Starbuck
meg....
she gets around...
she was awesome though...had a blast...when we did the bow for the last number, she bowed right along with us...almost fell off the stage in doing so....
younger groupies don't seem to do casinos. we had to trash our room all by ourselves.
9th May 2007 11:13 AM
nankerphelge
I guess I never heard Mick's comments about the Beatles that got so under JL's skin so.
Clearly he had as much jealousy in his heart as anyone.
The part that surprised me the most was when he said they weren't in the same class musically.
Last I checked, this is rock and roll, right?
Was Lennon so self absorbed that he honestly thought that the Bealtes had somehow transcended into something better?
I remember reading once that Sgt. Peppers was so groundbreaking because someone played a hair comb.
If that is the kind of thing that makes Sgt Pepper something beyond mere rock and roll...well.
You can have it.
Corgi is dead nuts on -- biggest con ever.
Lennon -- the man who hated the idea of a class system for anything, puts himself and the Beatles in another class.
What an idiot.
9th May 2007 11:26 AM
Mel Belli
quote:nankerphelge wrote:
I guess I never heard Mick's comments about the Beatles that got so under JL's skin so.
Clearly he had as much jealousy in his heart as anyone.
The part that surprised me the most was when he said they weren't in the same class musically.
Last I checked, this is rock and roll, right?
Was Lennon so self absorbed that he honestly thought that the Bealtes had somehow transcended into something better?
I remember reading once that Sgt. Peppers was so groundbreaking because someone played a hair comb.
If that is the kind of thing that makes Sgt Pepper something beyond mere rock and roll...well.
You can have it.
Corgi is dead nuts on -- biggest con ever.
Lennon -- the man who hated the idea of a class system for anything, puts himself and the Beatles in another class.
What an idiot.
It's not just rock 'n' roll. No sir. The Beatles ended "She Loves You" with a ... G6 chord! Whoa!
And Paul did show tunes!
Seriously, I actually like the Beatles a lot, and appreciate how revolutionary their recording techniques and songcraft were at the time. I also readily admit that they were -- are -- more popular than the Stones and have sold vastly more records.
But the thing about rock music, technically speaking, was that, if you look at it on the continuum of music history, it was actually a retrogression; it was an outgrowth of black folk music; it was amateurish (in a good way).
Not just classical music, but jazz had become almost exhausted by the '50s. Then along comes this three-chord popular revolution.
The fact is the Beatles integrated elements of these earlier forms into rock music. This hardly makes them gods; isn't it enough to say they were talented?
And I still maintain, against the Beatlemaniac friend who says the Stones weren't fit to carry the Beatles' guitar cases(!), that if you put the two bands side by side in an alternate universe where no one had heard of them, the Stones would blow them off the stage.
[Edited by Mel Belli]
9th May 2007 11:49 AM
Starbuck
as a worshipper of both bands, i am highly qualified to say the following comments:
-both are fuckin' awesome. i love them both. i don't pick which one of my sons i like better...why should we rag on one or the other here?
-the beatles were not virtuosos at their instruments, with the exception of mccartney. paul may have been an asshole to work with, but he was/is simply one of the best overall musicians to come out of the 60s. all his bass lines, from please please me to abbey road, are so melodic and very creative. i've learned this from playing their music, and come to appreciate their music all the more. i would pick ox as a bassist over paul, but not by much. plus, he is very good at all the other instruments as well (guitar, piano, drums), and his voice remains one of the most powerful in rock history. nobody i know of can pull off a soft ballad like "i will" as well as a screamer like "i've got a feeling" and "oh darling"...my voice is strong and getting stronger, but i can't even come within two steps of that shit. frickin' incredible.
-mick taylor is, like, one of the best guitarists ever. and we all know keith blows george and john out of the water on the six string.
-screw this wasting time...i have got #@!$in work to do today, and i have spent about half hour dinking around on this god forsaken message board!
9th May 2007 12:26 PM
Mel Belli
quote:Starbuck wrote:
-the beatles were not virtuosos at their instruments, with the exception of mccartney. paul may have been an asshole to work with, but he was/is simply one of the best overall musicians to come out of the 60s. all his bass lines, from please please me to abbey road, are so melodic and very creative. i've learned this from playing their music, and come to appreciate their music all the more. i would pick ox as a bassist over paul, but not by much. plus, he is very good at all the other instruments as well (guitar, piano, drums), and his voice remains one of the most powerful in rock history. nobody i know of can pull off a soft ballad like "i will" as well as a screamer like "i've got a feeling" and "oh darling"...my voice is strong and getting stronger, but i can't even come within two steps of that shit. frickin' incredible.
True, true. Although, to quibble, I'd say Paul's drumming is primitive at best. And his piano parts are easy to play even for me, a piano dabbler. Right hand is basic chords; left hand is all root-note octaves and chromatic walk-ups and walk-downs.
9th May 2007 02:01 PM
MrPleasant
Keith liked heroin.
9th May 2007 02:08 PM
TampabayStone
quote:Starbuck wrote:
as a worshipper of both bands, i am highly qualified to say the following comments:
-both are fuckin' awesome. i love them both. i don't pick which one of my sons i like better...why should we rag on one or the other here?
-the beatles were not virtuosos at their instruments, with the exception of mccartney. paul may have been an asshole to work with, but he was/is simply one of the best overall musicians to come out of the 60s. all his bass lines, from please please me to abbey road, are so melodic and very creative. i've learned this from playing their music, and come to appreciate their music all the more. i would pick ox as a bassist over paul, but not by much. plus, he is very good at all the other instruments as well (guitar, piano, drums), and his voice remains one of the most powerful in rock history. nobody i know of can pull off a soft ballad like "i will" as well as a screamer like "i've got a feeling" and "oh darling"...my voice is strong and getting stronger, but i can't even come within two steps of that shit. frickin' incredible.
-mick taylor is, like, one of the best guitarists ever. and we all know keith blows george and john out of the water on the six string.
-screw this wasting time...i have got #@!$in work to do today, and i have spent about half hour dinking around on this god forsaken message board!
9th May 2007 10:23 PM
Mel Belli
I guess John eventually mellowed somewhat:
Search for information in the wet page, the archives and this board:
The Rolling Stones World Tour 2005 Rolling Stones Bigger Bang Tour 2005 2006 Rolling Stones Forum - Rolling Stones Message Board - Mick Jagger - Keith Richards - Brian Jones - Charlie Watts - Ian Stewart - Stu - Bill Wyman - Mick Taylor - Ronnie Wood - Ron Wood - Rolling Stones 2005 Tour - Farewell Tour - Rolling Stones: Onstage World Tour A Bigger Bang US Tour
NEW: SEARCH ZONE:
Search for goods, you'll find the impossible collector's item!!!
