History Always Wins Out!
Dale Houstman
pay others (or not) to extoll her "obvious" virtues to the world, and no
matter how much the people in this group argue for or against Ono's
inclusion in the pantheon of artists and pertinent people, time and culture
has a way of working out the kinks in the chain between aesthetics and mere
monied influence. In Da Vinci's time there were penty of richer artisans,
with more powerful patrons, with more political dexterity, etc. They are all
forgotten, except to scholars, because a certain glamour and radiance - that
was always present in Leonardo's work - speaks louder than mere technique or
social graces or "pull." To the vast majority of people now alive Yoko
means almost nothing, except as the widow of John Lennon. Almost no one has
read her book of "poetry" (Grapefruit), or looked at or admired even one of
her art projects (which even seem to escape the memories of those who
support her here!), and her music remains the cult object it must be
considering its banality and charmlessness. Yoko - if indeed she is waging a
war for her place in the sun - has already lost. She will barely be a
footnote, no matter how much PR she squeezes from her warchest. Her one
value - in the world-at-large - is as an interesting if depressing series of
Beatles' stories. I don't know if John "loved" her or not, or whether he
quite knew himself, but I can tell you that it is obvious the world doesn't
love her, and never will. The Beatles were and are adored almost everywhere
in the world, their music instantly recognizable in the furthest nations.
For all of Yoko's thrashing over her situation as a songwriter and an
artist, no one will ever whistle one of her tunes, or discuss one of her art
projects, except in the dreary political context of segregated "woman's
art." That Yoko may or may not blossom forth now and then in such a ghetto
of politicizedx aesthetics is of little concern. Anyone and anything can be
temporarily and horribly resurrected from the dead if the scope is narrow
enough. But art is meant to bring a certain revelatory joy into human
existence, and Yoko's music certainly fails on that account, as done her
almost intangible art works.
The war is already over, and history won. Yoko will be a demure whisper in
the hallway near the janitor's closet.
dmh
nowhere man
another 'hate' post. What I can't fathom is why you spend this amount of time
on such a post as above. What does it achieve. Is your life THAT mundane to
have that volume of free time on your hands.
Will
robertandrews
>I don't know if John "loved" her or not, or whether he quite knew himself,
but I can tell you that it is obvious the world doesn't love her, and never
will.
I think you should speak for yourself, and not for John, Sean, & Yoko's
family & friends. From what I've seen on RMB, I believe Yoko does have fans
of her art. John has written many beautiful love songs about her, he's
expressed his love in many ways. I guess there's no way you could be
convinced if you don't feel the emotion expressed in his songs. I'm
convinced.
>The war is already over, and history won.
The war isn't over on RMB, though. Some of your ideas about Yoko will be
challenged for as long as I'm here.
>But art is meant to bring a certain revelatory joy into human existence
Tearing down your fellow artist is usually a waste of time. I could go on
about Michael Bolton, Kenny G, Cliff Richard, etc., but I'd rather talk
about the music I love. This particular post has done nothing to bring joy;
it's only brought me pain & sorrow. Since you're aware that there are some
defenders on Yoko on RMB, I assume that was your intention.
>Yoko will be a demure whisper in the hallway near the janitor's closet.
I'm sorry to learn that you're a janitor. Try to sing some songs, instead
of whispering around the hallway. Feel free to post your joyous art on RMB,
I'll give you a fair appraisal.
RollingTheRock
>quite knew himself, but I can tell you that it is obvious the world doesn't
>in the world, their music instantly recognizable in the furthest nations.
>For all of Yoko's thrashing over her situation as a songwriter and an
>artist, no one will ever whistle one of her tunes, or discuss one of her
>art
>projects, except in the dreary political context of segregated "woman's
>art." That Yoko may or may not blossom forth now and then in such a ghetto
>of politicizedx aesthetics is of little concern. Anyone and anything can
>be
>temporarily and horribly resurrected from the dead if the scope is narrow
>enough. But art is meant to bring a certain revelatory joy into human
>existence, and Yoko's music certainly fails on that account, as done her
>almost intangible art works.
>
>in
>the hallway near the janitor's closet.
I have risen to my feet an applaud each and every word of your observation! I
wholeheartedly agree and thank you for your words!
Lord Tim Brent
<dm...@citilink.com> wrote:
>It might be edifying to keep in mind that - no matter how much Yoko might
>pay others (or not) to extoll her "obvious" virtues to the world, and no
>matter how much the people in this group argue for or against Ono's
>inclusion in the pantheon of artists and pertinent people, time and culture
>has a way of working out the kinks in the chain between aesthetics and mere
>monied influence. In Da Vinci's time there were penty of richer artisans,
>with more powerful patrons, with more political dexterity, etc. They are all
>forgotten, except to scholars, because a certain glamour and radiance - that
>was always present in Leonardo's work - speaks louder than mere technique or
>social graces or "pull." To the vast majority of people now alive Yoko
>means almost nothing, except as the widow of John Lennon. Almost no one has
>read her book of "poetry" (Grapefruit), or looked at or admired even one of
>her art projects (which even seem to escape the memories of those who
>support her here!), and her music remains the cult object it must be
>considering its banality and charmlessness.
As far as her book goes,consider that most books press run are in the
5-10,000 copy range.To be a bestseller you have to sell 6000 in a
week.
If she ever exibits her work here in Detroit,I would go to see it.
On her music,doees the fact that thye like her music disqualify Eric
Clapton or David Bowie for being considered important?
Tim
-----------------
Duchy Of Grand Fenwick
The Church Beatle will now pass among you
No foreign coins,please.
Susan
a pleasure to read your posts.
Diana
>Dale, as always, very well written, I agree with you 100%. It's always
>a pleasure to read your posts.
What she said.
- - - - -
"Should you find yourself the victim of other people's bitterness,
ignorance, smallness or insecurities, remember, things could
be worse. You could be one of them." ~ unknown
John Serafino
Yoko's tunes will ALWAYS be sung, remembered, and adored by the general
public.
For example, my brother-in-law dropped a bag of charcoal on my foot last
weekend, and I san 'Don't Worry Kyoko, Mummy's Only Loooking For Her Hand In
The Snow' for about 10 minutes.
And once, I got kicked in the nuts, and sang a few tunes off of 'Yoko Ono:
Palstic Ono Band'. People recognized that easily.
-JS
Dale Houstman <dm...@citilink.com> wrote in message
news:396ef3fe$0$8306$65a9...@news.citilink.com...
> It might be edifying to keep in mind that - no matter how much Yoko might
> pay others (or not) to extoll her "obvious" virtues to the world, and no
> matter how much the people in this group argue for or against Ono's
> inclusion in the pantheon of artists and pertinent people, time and
culture
> has a way of working out the kinks in the chain between aesthetics and
mere
> monied influence. In Da Vinci's time there were penty of richer artisans,
> with more powerful patrons, with more political dexterity, etc. They are
all
> forgotten, except to scholars, because a certain glamour and radiance -
that
> was always present in Leonardo's work - speaks louder than mere technique
or
> social graces or "pull." To the vast majority of people now alive Yoko
> means almost nothing, except as the widow of John Lennon. Almost no one
has
> read her book of "poetry" (Grapefruit), or looked at or admired even one
of
> her art projects (which even seem to escape the memories of those who
> support her here!), and her music remains the cult object it must be
> dmh
>
>
John Serafino
> I think you should speak for yourself, and not for John, Sean, & Yoko's
> family & friends. From what I've seen on RMB, I believe Yoko does have
fans
> of her art. John has written many beautiful love songs about her, he's
> expressed his love in many ways. I guess there's no way you could be
> convinced if you don't feel the emotion expressed in his songs. I'm
> convinced.
Out of curiosity, how does Yoko's constant, infidelity an 18 month
separation with them openly having extra-marital affairs, and the fact
Yoko's boyfriend permanently moved into the Dakota less than three weeks
after John's murder affect how 'convinced' you are?
-JS
John Serafino
-JS
Dale Houstman
"Susan" <Mrs-...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:26699-39...@storefull-147.iap.bryant.webtv.net...
> Dale, as always, very well written, I agree with you 100%. It's always
> a pleasure to read your posts.
Let's just say I know how to make friends...
BTW: as I was reading the tea leaves today and perusing the entrails of a
gutted sparrow, I notice that you are due for a run of good luck sometime
between the rising of the moon in the Roadhouse of Saturn and the domination
of the Sun's third inning by Titan the beachboy. Lucky Susan!
dmh
robertandrews
>Out of curiosity, how does Yoko's constant, infidelity an 18 month
separation with them openly having extra-marital affairs, and the fact
Yoko's boyfriend permanently moved into the Dakota less than three weeks
after John's murder affect how 'convinced' you are?
The question was John's love for Yoko, & I'm convinced by the emotion of the
songs. If she simply inspired those songs & it was all an illusion, then
maybe all of love is an illusion. If love wasn't always there, sometimes
relationships go through hard times. John said love is real & I'm inclined
to share his point of view. I'm not an expert on the other events you've
spoken of; I've really no interest in their personal lives.
Derek J. Larsson
Dale Houstman wrote:
>
> The war is already over, and history won. Yoko will be a demure whisper in
> the hallway near the janitor's closet.
>
> dmh
War -???? ....
What war -?
Look, Yoko had some technical skill & talent as: a filmmaker,
a performance artist and also a poet/writer. Not enough
to create anything hugely successful or popular ... but
enough to know and hang out with other famous people
in New York prior to ever meeting John Lennon in 1967.
Her lack of a big-time success on her own is also true for many
struggling artists (with some talent and high hopes) ..
That does not make her "evil" or worthy of scorn,
verbal abuse, or a worthy target for hateful emotions.
She was a horrible singer .. and had the audacity
to let it just hang out there anyway - it would
be entirely fair to criticize her for that .. but John liked
her and encouraged her for her "free spirit" and
devil-may-care attitude. He liked her for her
raw originality. If that bothers you ... that's
your own personal failing.
Oddly, VH-1 voted her amongst the top 100 Women
in Rock music ...
But Yoko herself never claimed to be a great musician/singer etc.
or even a great "artist" and there is no "War" being waged to
assert herself that way.
There's no reason to heap a lot of unneccessary abuse at her
or imply she is campaigning for some lofty title .. that she isn't.
There is no war ....
-- Derek
======================================================
Derek J. Larsson EMail: derek_...@3com.com
======================================================
Lord Tim Brent
<johnse...@mediaone.net> wrote:
>Grand Douchebag, would you mind repeating this in English?
>
>-JS
>
>> As far as her book goes,consider that most books press run are in the
>> 5-10,000 copy range.To be a bestseller you have to sell 6000 in a
>> week.
According to most sources that I personnaly hjave found and heard
from,most Publishing Houses(Random House,etc.) will,depending on
author,genre(type of book-you know,what shelf the stock boy at the
book shop is supposed to put it on.) only print from 5 to 10 thousand
copies of a book.
To get into say the Detroit Free Press Top Ten bestsellers list,a book
has to sell at least 750 copies(usually around 6,000 for ,say,the NY
Times bestseller lists) in a week.
Grapefruit,being a book of poetry is not going to get much
circulation.At least in bookstore I frequent,most have maybe half a
shelf of poetry,and usually just Maya Angelou.
>> If she ever exibits her work here in Detroit,I would go to see it.
What is difficult about this?
>> On her music,doees the fact that thye like her music disqualify Eric
>> Clapton or David Bowie for being considered important?
Besides the cheap spelling flame I perceive your answer to be,again I
state that David Bowie annd Eric Clapton,two true legends,are fans of
Yoko's music.
Tim
-----------------
Duchy Of Grand Fenwick
The Church Beatle will now pass among you
No foreign coins,please.
Tony Cilantro
"robertandrews" <robert...@hotmail.com> wrote on Sat, 15
Jul 2000 02:41:08 GMT:
Nyarlathotep <nyarla...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> >Ono's odious output
> Despite your personal opinion, there are many who don't
> consider her art odious. That word betrays a disrespect
> for her fans on RMB, and that's why many nice folks have
> left.
Well you know robertandrews, this is a BEATLES newsgroup
after all, not a Yoko newsgroup.
Tony Cilantro
Anders Viberg
Derek J. Larsson wrote;
> There's no reason to heap a lot of unneccessary abuse at her
> or imply she is campaigning for some lofty title .. that she
isn't.
> There is no war ....
There is only one war and that's John vs. Paul, right Derek?
/Anders
RollingTheRock
>
again I
>state that David Bowie annd Eric Clapton,two true legends,are fans of
>Yoko's music.
I followed an earlier Internet address link that show some of Paul's paintings
that were on exhibit and one of them was called "Bowie Spewing" or perhaps it
was "Bowie Spews". Maybe Paul heard Bowie's claim to like Yoko's work and this
painting was his reaction.
I, personally, can't believe either Bowie or Clapton would say they were fans
unless they were perhaps in her presence, and didn't want to be unkind, and
hurt her feelings.
robertandrews
>I, personally, can't believe either Bowie or Clapton would say they were
fans unless they were perhaps in her presence, and didn't want to be unkind,
and hurt her feelings.
That's possible, though Clapton spoke specifically about her singing, and
seemed to show an understanding & respect. I wouldn't be surprised if an
eclectic musician like Bowie likes some of her art & music. In contrast, I
feel that many comments about Yoko on RMB have been intentionally unkind &
have shown little feeling for her fans.
Nyarlathotep
rolling...@aol.com (RollingTheRock) wrote:
>
> I followed an earlier Internet address link that show some of
Paul's paintings
> that were on exhibit and one of them was called "Bowie Spewing" or
perhaps it
> was "Bowie Spews". Maybe Paul heard Bowie's claim to like Yoko's work
and this
> painting was his reaction.
Ha!
> I, personally, can't believe either Bowie or Clapton would say
they were fans
> unless they were perhaps in her presence, and didn't want to be
unkind, and
> hurt her feelings.
>
Agreed.
Incidentally, this "Bowie says he likes it" approach to defending
Ono's odious output is pretty odd.
At any rate, if I were to make a case for, e.g., The Beatles' work,
I wouldn't come out with some limp "Clapton says he likes it" rigmarole.
No, I'd appeal *directly* to the work itself.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Nyarlathotep
"Derek J. Larsson" <derek_...@3com.com> wrote:
>
> Look, Yoko had some technical skill & talent as: a filmmaker,
> a performance artist and also a poet/writer. Not enough
> to create anything hugely successful or popular ... but
> enough to know and hang out with other famous people <snip>
As though ingratiating oneself with "famous people" had anything to
do with talent.
> Her lack of a big-time success on her own is also true for many
> struggling artists (with some talent and high hopes) .
Let's remember that Ono claims that she WAS famous & successful
before she met Lennon.
>
> That does not make her "evil" or worthy of scorn,
> verbal abuse, or a worthy target for hateful emotions.
No one suggests that Ono deserves scorn on the basis of her pre-JL
lack of "big-time success!"
robertandrews
robertandrews
>Well you know robertandrews, this is a BEATLES newsgroup after all, not a
Yoko newsgroup.
I'm sorry that those who use this forum to tirelessly criticize Yoko
disagree with you & me. I'd be happy to talk only about the Beatles, but
they won't leave her alone or tone down their rhetoric. Until then, I've
got to respond to their odious words.
Dale Houstman
"Nyarlathotep" <nyarla...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:8koi5p$dm2$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> In article <396FA48...@3com.com>,
> "Derek J. Larsson" <derek_...@3com.com> wrote:
>
> >
> > Look, Yoko had some technical skill & talent as: a filmmaker,
> > a performance artist and also a poet/writer. Not enough
> > to create anything hugely successful or popular ... but
> > enough to know and hang out with other famous people <snip>
>
> As though ingratiating oneself with "famous people" had anything to
> do with talent.
Well it does in one perverse way: hanging with famous people can create the
idea that one has "talent." That the one "gift" Yoko has is latching to
famous people should be obvious by now. Once you hang with the right folks,
it is assumed (by the context) that you have talent. As for technical skill:
this is the one quality Yoko demonstrably DOES NOT have. None of her "films"
reveal the slightest appreciation of the technical side of filmmaking,
unless you find home video hounds the epitome of the craft. At most she
could be said to have an "intuitive" grasp of the arts - like most rock
musicians have of music - but even this isn't true. She shows almost no real
feel for the dynamics of a song. Pleasing those who live to be pleased
("other famous people") is no great feat: kings and queens are famous for
being amused by hunchbacks pissing up a rope. So - maybe - Yoko could be
called the Hopfrog of rock and roll?
dmh
robertandrews
>Well it does in one perverse way: hanging with famous people can create the
idea that one has "talent."
Tearing down famous people can create the idea that one is superior, to
cover one's insecurities.
>At most she could be said to have an "intuitive" grasp of the arts
She knows more about classical music than most of the people here,
especially Nyar (who pretended he was an expert, only to be exposed as a
fraud).
>kings and queens are famous for being amused by hunchbacks pissing up a
rope. So - maybe - Yoko could be called the Hopfrog of rock and roll?
That's the way I feel when I read your crippled attempts at good writing.
The difference is that most hunchbacks are pretty funny guys; they can even
laugh at themselves. I know this because I have a good friend who is a
hunchback, and he's a really nice guy. I rarely hear him speak badly of
people worse off than himself -- he doesn't need to tear down the less
fortunate, to create the illusion of his own superiority. By your own
words, you have proven to me (& I trust, many other intelligent &
compassionate people) that you are inferior to Yoko Ono.
RollingTheRock
>
By your own
>words, you have proven to me (& I trust, many other intelligent &
>compassionate people) that you are inferior to Yoko Ono.
The way you talk about Yoko makes me wonder if you don't consider yourself
inferior to Yoko. Face it. She's a hack who happened to be loved by a great,
great genius of a man.
John professed great and even greater love for Yoko even as he "dis"ed The
Beatles and virtually every song he ever wrote after The Beatles breakup.
Yoko intruded on and disrupted The Beatles, ultimately destroying them and
I'll never believe otherwise.
Stephen Carter
<dm...@citilink.com> wrote:
> [snips]
>To the vast majority of people now alive Yoko
>means almost nothing, except as the widow of John Lennon. Almost no one has
>read her book of "poetry" (Grapefruit), or looked at or admired even one of
>her art projects
Ah! That makes me an almost no-body. :-)
--
s.d.carterNOSPAM@btinternetdotcom
Nothing is Beatle Proof!!
Nyarlathotep
rolling...@aol.com (RollingTheRock) wrote:
> The way you talk about Yoko makes me wonder if you don't
consider yourself
> inferior to Yoko. Face it. She's a hack who happened to be loved by
a great,
> great genius of a man.
> John professed great and even greater love for Yoko even as he
"dis"ed The
> Beatles and virtually every song he ever wrote after The Beatles
breakup.
> Yoko intruded on and disrupted The Beatles, ultimately
destroying them and
> I'll never believe otherwise.
Ono seemed to induce in Lennon her delusion that, while *she* was
"revolutionary" (I'll grant that she's revolutionarily BAD, by the way),
the Beatles music was just a "waste of time."
Nyarlathotep
"Dale Houstman" <dm...@citilink.com> wrote:
>
> "Nyarlathotep" <nyarla...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
> news:8koi5p$dm2$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> > In article <396FA48...@3com.com>,
> > "Derek J. Larsson" <derek_...@3com.com> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Look, Yoko had some technical skill & talent as: a
filmmaker,
> > > a performance artist and also a poet/writer. Not enough
> > > to create anything hugely successful or popular ... but
> > > enough to know and hang out with other famous people <snip>
> >
> > As though ingratiating oneself with "famous people" had
anything to
> > do with talent.
>
create the
to
> famous people should be obvious by now. Once you hang with the right
folks,
Yes, good point. Ono pulled off public-relations coups in
associating herself with the likes of John Cage, The Beatles, Ornette
Coleman, Lena the Witch, etc.
But this knack of Ono's to link herself to big names is on the
wane. All she's got now are the likes of Havadtoy & Mintz!
As for technical
skill:
> this is the one quality Yoko demonstrably DOES NOT have. None of her
"films"
> reveal the slightest appreciation of the technical side of filmmaking,
> unless you find home video hounds the epitome of the craft. At most
she
> could be said to have an "intuitive" grasp of the arts - like most
rock
> musicians have of music - but even this isn't true. She shows almost
no real
> feel for the dynamics of a song. <snip>
She's fairly dynamic (climactic, even) on "Kiss, Kiss, Kiss."
Aside from that, her sense of rhythm (a term she confuses with time
signature) & melody (particularly when she's not borrowing someone
else's melody) are wretched.
> Pleasing those who live to be pleased
> ("other famous people") is no great feat: kings and queens are famous
for
> being amused by hunchbacks pissing up a rope. So - maybe - Yoko could
be
> called the Hopfrog of rock and roll?
Right on!
Lizz Holmans
<sXdXc...@btinternet.com> writes
>On Fri, 14 Jul 2000 05:51:01 -0500, "Dale Houstman"
><dm...@citilink.com> wrote:
>
>> [snips]
>>To the vast majority of people now alive Yoko
>>means almost nothing, except as the widow of John Lennon. Almost no one has
>>read her book of "poetry" (Grapefruit), or looked at or admired even one of
>>her art projects
>
>
>Ah! That makes me an almost no-body. :-)
I always knew you, me, and Emily Dickinson had something in common.
Lizz 'although none of us hangs around public bogs' Holmans
--
Lizz Holmans
Tom
> > It might be edifying to keep in mind that - no matter how much Yoko
might
> > pay others (or not) to extoll her "obvious" virtues to the world, and no
> > matter how much the people in this group argue for or against Ono's
> > inclusion in the pantheon of artists and pertinent people, time and
culture
> > has a way of working out the kinks in the chain between aesthetics and
mere
> > monied influence. In Da Vinci's time there were penty of richer
artisans,
> > with more powerful patrons, with more political dexterity, etc. They are
all
> > forgotten, except to scholars, because a certain glamour and radiance -
that
> > was always present in Leonardo's work - speaks louder than mere
technique or
> > means almost nothing, except as the widow of John Lennon. Almost no one
has
> > read her book of "poetry" (Grapefruit), or looked at or admired even one
of
in
> > the hallway near the janitor's closet.
>
time
> on such a post as above. What does it achieve. Is your life THAT mundane
to
> have that volume of free time on your hands.
>
> Will
>
What I can't fathom is why he thinks this is an intelligent argument when
it's based on a contradiction. First he uses DaVinci as an example, pointing
to his reputation several centuries after the fact as proof that history
wins out, then he claims that Yoko's position in history has be cemented
after two or three decades.
He also ignores the fact that time has brought greater acceptance and
appreciation of her art, as well as a growing acknowledgement of her
influence. If anything, history is on her side.
Sloppy thinking there, Dale.
Oh yes, and you lied about her supporters here when you claimed that they
were unfamiliar with her art works. I, for one, have posted about her art
on several occasions. Both Nick and Diana, neither of whom are great fans of
Yoko, have also expressed some respect for her art. Francie has also shown
some familiarity with it.
Tom
>
> >Dale, as always, very well written, I agree with you 100%. It's always
> >a pleasure to read your posts.
>
>
I think you're letting your personal opinion of Yoko get in the way of your
objectivity here. You know better than to think that history has made any
judgement on her art, much less a negative one.
As I said in a previous post, Yoko's art has been gaining greater acceptence
and influence over the last 30 years. How do you reconcile that with Dale's
conclusion?
Tom
> >It might be edifying to keep in mind that - no matter how much Yoko might
> >pay others (or not) to extoll her "obvious" virtues to the world, and no
> >matter how much the people in this group argue for or against Ono's
> >inclusion in the pantheon of artists and pertinent people, time and
culture
> >has a way of working out the kinks in the chain between aesthetics and
mere
> >monied influence. In Da Vinci's time there were penty of richer artisans,
> >with more powerful patrons, with more political dexterity, etc. They are
all
> >forgotten, except to scholars, because a certain glamour and radiance -
that
> >was always present in Leonardo's work - speaks louder than mere technique
or
> >social graces or "pull." To the vast majority of people now alive Yoko
> >means almost nothing, except as the widow of John Lennon. Almost no one
has
> >read her book of "poetry" (Grapefruit), or looked at or admired even one
of
> >her art projects (which even seem to escape the memories of those who
> >support her here!), and her music remains the cult object it must be
> >considering its banality and charmlessness.
>
> 5-10,000 copy range.To be a bestseller you have to sell 6000 in a
> week.
> Clapton or David Bowie for being considered important?
>
so, according to some people here, he doesn't exist.
Tom
> I, personally, can't believe either Bowie or Clapton would say they were
fans
> unless they were perhaps in her presence, and didn't want to be unkind,
and
> hurt her feelings.
"He's as blind as he can be, only sees what he wants to see."
Strabbo
>As I said in a previous post, Yoko's art has been gaining
greater acceptence
>and influence over the last 30 years. How do you reconcile that
with Dale's
>conclusion?
>
In all honesty, I don't think we'll ever realize the true impact
of her art on the art world for another hundred years. I wonder
how she'll be remembered by generations that didn't know her as
the 'dragon-lady' that broke up the Beatles (I know this is just
one of the common generalisations; I'm not stating an opinion).
Will she just be a footnote in Beatles history, or will her art
be taught in schools and displayed around the world to great
interest?
MS
mar...@compusmart.com
"....In no way do I advocate the use of keen.com, but my news server
will plug it anyway..."
-----------------------------------------------------------
Got questions? Get answers over the phone at Keen.com.
Up to 100 minutes free!
http://www.keen.com
Tom
"John Serafino" <johnse...@mediaone.net> wrote in message
news:4nMb5.24718$Q8.1...@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net...
> And once, I got kicked in the nuts
A charming guy like you? I bet it was more than once.
Tom
>
> > Her lack of a big-time success on her own is also true for many
> > struggling artists (with some talent and high hopes) .
>
> Let's remember that Ono claims that she WAS famous & successful
> before she met Lennon.
>
Tom
>So - maybe - Yoko could be
> called the Hopfrog of rock and roll?
>
show a poor understanding of Poe.
Nyarlathotep
"Tom" <Blac...@msn.com> wrote:
> As I said in a previous post, Yoko's art has been gaining greater
acceptence
> and influence over the last 30 years.
You said that, but you didn't support it.
Anyway, even if one grants to you that Ono's output has "greater
acceptance" than it did 30 years ago, that's not saying much.
Nyarlathotep
A veritable piranha in a puddle.
robertandrews
>Yoko intruded on and disrupted The Beatles, ultimately destroying them and
I'll never believe otherwise.
I'm happy she did. I'm glad I missed the Beatles' disco period.
>The way you talk about Yoko makes me wonder if you don't consider yourself
inferior to Yoko.
I'll let others be the judge. I consider myself more compassionate &
fair-minded than most of the Yoko-bashers on RMB.
>She's a hack who happened to be loved by a great, great genius of a man.
I don't believe love is blind. John loved Yoko for a many reasons, probably
most of them good ones. Many of my friends who attended art school don't
consider her a hack. I'm not a fan of her music, but the only point of
these continual onslaughts is to embolden one's ego in order to mask one's
artistic impotence. That's clear to me by the sophomoric phrases & hateful
tone of the language.
Nyarlathotep
"Tom" <Blac...@msn.com> wrote:
>
> What I can't fathom is why he thinks this is an intelligent argument
when
> it's based on a contradiction. First he uses DaVinci as an example,
pointing
> to his reputation several centuries after the fact as proof that
history
> wins out, then he claims that Yoko's position in history has be
cemented
> after two or three decades.
Precisely what "contradiction" do you attribute to Dale, Tom?
He didn't make the assertion you attribute to him re: Yoko's
position being set in "two or three decades."
> He also ignores the fact that time has brought greater acceptance and
> appreciation of her art,<snip>
No, he *acknowledges* that Ono's popularity might -- with the help
of her money-fueled PR blitzes -- fluctuate. His larger point was that
*history* isn't susceptible to public relations campaigns.
A few hapless, gullible RMBers might fall for Ono's gimmickry & PR
stunts. History, will accord Ono her deserved status.
> Sloppy thinking there, Dale.
>
That's called "projection," Tom.
robertandrews
>A veritable piranha in a puddle.
Don't overestimate your woman-eating ability. Yoko is still alive & well,
though I'm sure you're sorry that Chapman didn't reload.
robertandrews
>History, will accord Ono her deserved status.
You're too blind to see beyond your own obsessive desire to destroy Yoko, &
that makes for a very slanted view of history.
I doubt many intelligent people will waste their time reading your books,
Cornylius Tacitus.
Steve Foresman
get well soon:-)
Dale Houstman
Next stop: Soupy Sales!
Yoko: "I have always considered myself to be a slapstick comedian in the
line of Ben Blue, and the great English toilet humorists. Wanna duck?"
dmh
>
Dale Houstman
> She's fairly dynamic (climactic, even) on "Kiss, Kiss, Kiss."
Even the blind worm finds the Apple every now and then, if the fruit's big
enough.
dmh
Dale Houstman
> In article <e07c5.28406$Q8.2...@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net>,
> "John Serafino" <johnse...@mediaone.net> wrote:
> >
> > I think I misunderstood you. Yes, I believe John loved Yoko. <snip>
>
> I wonder if "love" is the right word for John's feelings towards
> Ono in, say, the '75 - '80 period. I know, of course, that JL spoke &
> wrote that he loved her. But it seems to me that he had feelings of
> childlike dependence on her, and that he *mistook* those feelings for
> love.
>
This isn't uncommon for persons who felt abandoned and rejected in their
childhood, so I don't see why it is so difficult to believe - in John's
case - that he would have trouble distinguishing love from need. I don't
even think it's debatable, considering what we ALL know about Mr. Lennon's
childhood.
dmh
Dale Houstman
> Well, if you can believe it, I agree with your post NumbNutz. You've
> actually (and finally) said something coherent that isn't based in
fantasy.
>
> Some time ago, I was involved in a long thread because I asserted that
> appreciation of Yoko's type of 'art' stems from the perception of the
> creator as an 'artist', and has little to do with the piece or work
itself.
>
> For example, such an artist might place an apple on a pedistal and call it
> 'art'. And patrons might 'appreciate' this 'art'. But would it still be
> 'art' if the apple was placed on a pedistal by a child hurrying by?
>
> The answer is no, and everyone knows it. The concept of the piece as 'art'
> exists through the perception of the creator as an 'artist'.
>
> Therefore, the 'artist's' REAL piece of work is himself. He is actually
the
> work of art.
>
> Regardless, people attack Yoko because they believe she married John to
get
> at his fame. They also blame her for increasing his drug addiction,
> magnifying his paranoias and inabilty to cope with the problems going on
> with the Beatles, Feeding his fears and insecurities, controlling him
> through his fears and insecurities, selling him out in the end, etc. etc.
> etc.
>
> Picking on her 'art' is just convenient.
>
Maybe, but it is a convenience often forced upon us by Yoko's sometimes
shrill insistence on her role as artist, despite the "methinks she doth
protest too much" quality of that stridency. The fact is, Yoko herself has
made this a central concern, and it is difficult (given the fact that she
bases all her "value" as a celebrity on her artistic stature) to separate
any consideration of her apart from this subject. And - at any rate - as any
artist (good or bad) will tell you, art is not easily separated from the
life of the artist.
And - for me at any rate - my opinion of her art is only one aspect of my
distrust of her motives, but it remains essential to her own valuation, and
thus cannot be disregarded.
I dislike her art because - honestly - it seems either derivative (of
Duchamp in the main), or rather obvious in its social commentary. Once she
explains an idea behind a piece it ceases to be of any interest whatsoever.
She is entirely too conscious - at any given point - of her "message" and of
that "message's" seeming importance. But - yet - the work remains both
callow and - usually - juvenile.
There is nothing wrong with bad art, but it is her insistence upon her art's
importance (in the absence of any discernible quality) that so bores me.
dmh
dmh
John Serafino
can't have it both ways.
And yes, love really IS just an illusion. No, not an illusiion... but a
perception.
I think I misunderstood you. Yes, I believe John loved Yoko. I just don't
believe that their union was a particularly happy and healthy one.
-JS
robertandrews <robert...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:oSMb5.663$9J2.1...@paloalto-snr1.gtei.net...
> John Serafino <johnse...@mediaone.net> wrote:
> >Out of curiosity, how does Yoko's constant, infidelity an 18 month
> separation with them openly having extra-marital affairs, and the fact
> Yoko's boyfriend permanently moved into the Dakota less than three weeks
> after John's murder affect how 'convinced' you are?
>
> The question was John's love for Yoko, & I'm convinced by the emotion of
the
> songs. If she simply inspired those songs & it was all an illusion, then
> maybe all of love is an illusion. If love wasn't always there, sometimes
> relationships go through hard times. John said love is real & I'm
inclined
> to share his point of view. I'm not an expert on the other events you've
> spoken of; I've really no interest in their personal lives.
>
>
John Serafino
> >Grand Douchebag, would you mind repeating this in English?
> >
> >-JS
> Besides the cheap spelling flame I perceive your answer to be,again I
> state that David Bowie annd Eric Clapton,two true legends,are fans of
> Yoko's music.
>
> Tim
> -----------------
> Duchy Of Grand Fenwick
Oh, Ok.
-JS
John Serafino
-JS
Tom <Blac...@msn.com> wrote in message
news:e94c5.4147$5l.1...@news3.mia...
John Serafino
I'm disappointed.
-JS
Tom <Blac...@msn.com> wrote in message
news:Sb4c5.4152$5l.1...@news3.mia...
>
> "John Serafino" <johnse...@mediaone.net> wrote in message
John Serafino
actually (and finally) said something coherent that isn't based in fantasy.
Some time ago, I was involved in a long thread because I asserted that
appreciation of Yoko's type of 'art' stems from the perception of the
creator as an 'artist', and has little to do with the piece or work itself.
For example, such an artist might place an apple on a pedistal and call it
'art'. And patrons might 'appreciate' this 'art'. But would it still be
'art' if the apple was placed on a pedistal by a child hurrying by?
The answer is no, and everyone knows it. The concept of the piece as 'art'
exists through the perception of the creator as an 'artist'.
Therefore, the 'artist's' REAL piece of work is himself. He is actually the
work of art.
Regardless, people attack Yoko because they believe she married John to get
at his fame. They also blame her for increasing his drug addiction,
magnifying his paranoias and inabilty to cope with the problems going on
with the Beatles, Feeding his fears and insecurities, controlling him
through his fears and insecurities, selling him out in the end, etc. etc.
etc.
Picking on her 'art' is just convenient.
-JS
Derek J. Larsson <derek_...@3com.com> wrote in message
news:396FA48...@3com.com...
>
>
> Dale Houstman wrote:
>
> >
> > The war is already over, and history won. Yoko will be a demure whisper
in
> > the hallway near the janitor's closet.
> >
> > dmh
>
> War -???? ....
> What war -?
>
> Look, Yoko had some technical skill & talent as: a filmmaker,
> a performance artist and also a poet/writer. Not enough
> to create anything hugely successful or popular ... but
> enough to know and hang out with other famous people
> in New York prior to ever meeting John Lennon in 1967.
> Her lack of a big-time success on her own is also true for many
> struggling artists (with some talent and high hopes) ..
>
> That does not make her "evil" or worthy of scorn,
> verbal abuse, or a worthy target for hateful emotions.
>
> She was a horrible singer .. and had the audacity
> to let it just hang out there anyway - it would
> be entirely fair to criticize her for that .. but John liked
> her and encouraged her for her "free spirit" and
> devil-may-care attitude. He liked her for her
> raw originality. If that bothers you ... that's
> your own personal failing.
>
> Oddly, VH-1 voted her amongst the top 100 Women
> in Rock music ...
> But Yoko herself never claimed to be a great musician/singer etc.
> or even a great "artist" and there is no "War" being waged to
> assert herself that way.
>
> There's no reason to heap a lot of unneccessary abuse at her
> or imply she is campaigning for some lofty title .. that she
isn't.
> There is no war ....
>
>
> -- Derek
>
> ======================================================
> Derek J. Larsson EMail: derek_...@3com.com
> ======================================================
>
>
John Serafino
Trust me. It's blind. It's blind, and deaf. You must have never been in
love.
-JS
robertandrews
>robertandrews you are a sad little person. get well soon:-)
I was feeling sad until I came up with that cute pun, & I'm sorry it didn't
lighten your day. And I guess I'm too big to be playing in this
sado-masochistic sandbox forever. Get your laughs while you can, & thanks
for the good wishes.
Nyarlathotep
"John Serafino" <johnse...@mediaone.net> wrote:
>
> I think I misunderstood you. Yes, I believe John loved Yoko. <snip>
I wonder if "love" is the right word for John's feelings towards
Ono in, say, the '75 - '80 period. I know, of course, that JL spoke &
wrote that he loved her. But it seems to me that he had feelings of
childlike dependence on her, and that he *mistook* those feelings for
love.
Nyarlathotep
No kidding. As I mentioned earlier in the thread, Tom's prone to
projection.
Shobus
>the hallway near the janitor's closet.
Perhaps Yoko's view of what makes an artist successful has nothing to do with
mass popularity. It escapes some people that art can exist for art's sake, not
for a chart position of for adulation by Beatles fans. How history judges her?
Let's wait another 200 years.
Shobus
>after all, not a Yoko newsgroup.
>
>
>Tony Cilantro
Sort of like it isn't a Wings, McCartney, Lennon, Harrison, or Marek newsgroup?
Shobus
>("other famous people") is no great feat: kings and queens are famous for
>being amused by hunchbacks pissing up a rope. So - maybe - Yoko could be
>called the Hopfrog of rock and roll?
>
>
Let's not forget that Yoko is pretty popular with critics - check out reviews
for her solo albums and her Onobox - they are raves, as they should be!
Nyarlathotep
"Dale Houstman" <dm...@citilink.com> wrote:
>
> "Nyarlathotep" <nyarla...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
> >
> >She shows almost no real feel for the dynamics of a song.
>
> > She's fairly dynamic (climactic, even) on "Kiss, Kiss, Kiss."
>
> Even the blind worm finds the Apple every now and then, if the fruit's
big
> enough.
That was great!
robertandrews
>I don't even think it's debatable
If we can deny John's love for Yoko, we can do the same for everyone. Thus,
the necessary consequence is Mr. Serafino's "love is blind." That's one
opinion, but I feel John's songs speak for themselves. I'm convinced he
truly loved her, & not in the pathological way you speak of. His love was
no blinder than Paul's love for Linda. Love can be wise, beautiful &
transcendent. For you to say it's not even debatable insults my
intelligence & John's. It is indeed debatable, just as history's view on
Yoko will not be decided by a couple of writers on RMB.
Love is real. Hatred is usually blind.
Peanut Duck
>the necessary consequence is Mr. Serafino's "love is blind." That's one
>opinion, but I feel John's songs speak for themselves. I'm convinced he
>truly loved her,
just because love is blind doesn't mean it's real.
i think john was blindly in love with Yoko. but that doesn't mean their love
was any different than anyone else's.
alley.
robertandrews
>That was great!
I'm glad both you & Dale liked Kiss Kiss Kiss, I did too. It gave me more
pleasure than any of the hateful criticisms I've read on RMB. Too bad you
must demean the artist, even when you've enjoyed the art. In that sense,
you've shown yourselves to be blinder than Yoko, for your hatred has made
you blind.
robertandrews
>just because love is blind doesn't mean it's real.
The reverse is true as well. Mr. Serafino suggested that all love is blind,
deaf & illusory. I was arguing that love can be real, without being
completely blind. Unconditional or true love does not mean that you're
blind to someone's faults.
In that sense, if you believe that John's love was blind, I disagree. Just
my opinion -- based on the songs, interviews, TV shows, & the understanding
of what Yoko meant to him.
Camatelfoo
>love.
.....and you must be almost constantly in love.
RollingTheRock
Yes, let's. That's the last I hope to hear her name. I can hardly wait
myself!
RollingTheRock
>
Too bad you
>must demean the artist, even when you've enjoyed the art. In that sense,
>you've shown yourselves to be blinder than Yoko, for your hatred has made
>you blind.
It's good to see that you've found a way to ease back on the forum, almost
unregonized.
Dale Houstman
> Dale Houstman <dm...@citilink.com> wrote:
> >I don't even think it's debatable
>
> If we can deny John's love for Yoko, we can do the same for everyone.
True. But yet we don't. This strikes me as pertinent. What is it about the
particularities of this relationship that make some doubt it's
"healthiness"?
And yet - in a a way - you make a point: why shouldn't we attempt to pull
away the veils of an ill-defined term (love) so as to comprehend more fully
certain processes of human attraction?
Did Hitler love Eva? Did O.J. love Nicole? Do I love Paris in the
springtime?
At any rate I am NOT denying John's love for Yoko, but merely making
observations about the quality of that pairing. This is a quite acceptable
occupation for any human, as far as I can tell!
But the point remains: what is the quality of the lineaments of this
particuar relation, whether or not we use the word "love" to describe it?
That's the kernel of the question...
dmh
Thus,
> the necessary consequence is Mr. Serafino's "love is blind." That's one
> opinion, but I feel John's songs speak for themselves. I'm convinced he
Dale Houstman
>
> >So - maybe - Yoko could be
> > called the Hopfrog of rock and roll?
> >
> show a poor understanding of Poe
Well, I know quite a bit about Poe, but that isn't really to the point here
since "Hopfrog" is a common term for "amusing mutants" that predates Poe. In
other words, it wasn't a Poe reference, and so it cannot be derided as a bad
one.
dmh
Tom
> > >So - maybe - Yoko could be
> > > called the Hopfrog of rock and roll?
> > >
> > First you show no knowledge of Yoko or of the concept of history, now
you
> > show a poor understanding of Poe
>
> Well, I know quite a bit about Poe, but that isn't really to the point
here
> since "Hopfrog" is a common term for "amusing mutants" that predates Poe.
In
> other words, it wasn't a Poe reference, and so it cannot be derided as a
bad
> one.
>
I'll take your word for it, but you still have a poor understanding of the
other topics I mentioned.
Tom
>
> Please tell me, Shobus: Specifically, who in this NG has alleged
> that the unhealthiness of J's & Y's relationship is due to Ono's being
> "strong-willed" or Asian?
>
> If no names come to mind, perhaps you ought to consider the
> possibility that you've succumbed to some of Ono's public-relations
> BS. (By the way, Ono is also fond of the ABSURD pretense that her
> critics don't like the fact that she's *female*, as well.)
>
>
Perhaps it's true, perhaps it isn't, but for you to call it an absurd
suggestion only betrays an ignorance of the general attitude toward women
during the period Yoko came up. (50s-70s).
I'd suggest you read Simon Frith's Sound Affects. It has a section about
what the allegedly enlightened folk and rock worlds considered a woman's
place to be. There's also an anthology of rock criticism by woman writers
that'll have some material on the subject. I'm thinking of an article by
Lori Twersky that originally appeared in the early 80s, but doubtlessly
there's more.
Dale Houstman
"Shobus" <sho...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20000716213435...@ng-fm1.aol.com...
> >True. But yet we don't. This strikes me as pertinent. What is it about
the
> >particularities of this relationship that make some doubt it's
> >"healthiness"?
> >
>
wifre
> have a mind, career, and mind of her own. Also, she is Asian. I am not
big on
> hidden racist feelings, but this seems to be a case.
Based on what evidence besides your own presumptions about a post you
obviously haven't bothered to read? Are you "telepathically" picking up
mental lint from beneath the bed of your own absurdity, or are you being
fattened on ignorance by the ladle-full?
Since there is not one word (as there couldn't be) about my being offended
by her "female will" and her Asian background, I can only assume you harbor
these feelings yourself and are merely projecting, until you offer proof to
the contrary.
>So many cannot accept
> that a famous white such as John Lennon would "lower" himself and marry
an
> Asian - so many would prefer him with a nice white girl.
And I am sure that hundreds never forgave King Eddie for marrying an
American either, but that has has much to do with this discussion as what
you have introduced by way of avoidance.
dmh
robertandrews
>True. But yet we don't. This strikes me as pertinent. What is it about the
particularities of this relationship that make some doubt it's
"healthiness"?
I've never denied John's love for Yoko, to me it's quite clear. I assume
most of their critics have had limited contact with Asian people, & have
never dated one. I gather they aren't particularly keen on art outside the
world of rock music. They blame Yoko for breaking up the Beatles, for
singing lousy rock (as if it were a crime), for being Japanese & ugly.
If we could approach John & Yoko without these prejudices, we'd see things
in a different light. Nobody would question John's love for his wife had he
stayed married to Cynthia or married a bimbo. He married an intelligent
woman who opened his eyes to a world outside pop music; he deserves enormous
credit for following his heart & mind. His songs say it all, & the
interviews I've read back them up. John thought she was pretty, I heard him
say it on Mike Douglas. Francie thought she was pretty. I think she's
pretty, though not particularly my type. I'd rather have a conversation
with Yoko than the other Beatle wives; I can respect her point of view even
if I disagree.
The pseudo-Freudian analysis based on gossip & dubious biographies is not my
cup of English tea. There's always a "need" component in love, but true
love is predicated on freedom. The love Hitler & OJ felt was sick, because
it was based on power, possession & violence. I don't see any of that with
John & Yoko. I see two people who loved each other, in an unconventional
but still healthy way.
I hope you prefer 'Paris in the springtime' to 'Springtime for Hitler' (Mel
Brooks reference).
Shobus
>particularities of this relationship that make some doubt it's
>"healthiness"?
>
Primarily, because she is strong-willed. Heaven forbid that a Beatle wifre
have a mind, career, and mind of her own. Also, she is Asian. I am not big on
hidden racist feelings, but this seems to be a case. So many cannot accept
Nyarlathotep
Please tell me, Shobus: Specifically, who in this NG has alleged
that the unhealthiness of J's & Y's relationship is due to Ono's being
"strong-willed" or Asian?
If no names come to mind, perhaps you ought to consider the
possibility that you've succumbed to some of Ono's public-relations
BS. (By the way, Ono is also fond of the ABSURD pretense that her
critics don't like the fact that she's *female*, as well.)
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Lord Tim Brent
it.
Dale,as to Yoko and her talking about the importance of her art,she is
nowhere near the shameless name dropping and self promotion of Andy
Warhol (who made more rotten movies than John and Yoko btw). I do like
some of Warhol's art in the 60's but after that only his Pete Rose
painting in the Cincinnati Museum Of Art.
Tim
-----------------
Duchy Of Grand Fenwick
The Church Beatle will now pass among you
No foreign coins,please.
robertandrews
>Specifically, who in this NG has alleged that the unhealthiness of J's &
Y's relationship is due to Ono's being "strong-willed" or Asian?
We've not seen any real evidence to the unhealthiness of John & Yoko's
relationship. All we've heard are insults, amateur psychology & constant
references to a man named Mintz. In contrast, I've quoted John's songs,
interviews & explained my feelings why their relationship was indeed
healthy. Absent any intelligent arguments, it's not a stretch to assume
that the hatred towards Yoko is based on the prejudices I've already
detailed, of which there may be an ethnic component.
I agree that these attacks betray a deeper hatred towards all women, as well
as a self-loathing that sparks the anger. The monomaniacal interest in the
wife of a Beatle who was gunned down is truly disturbing. Almost every post
by Nyar concerns Yoko, without a kind word for any living soul other than
the Yoko-bashers.
Yoko Ono matters to some people because they need a target for their anger.
I rarely hear her name outside RMB, and she's no big deal to me & most
Beatle fans I know.
Nyarlathotep
"Tom" <Blac...@msn.com> wrote:
>
> >
> > Please tell me, Shobus: Specifically, who in this NG has
alleged
> > that the unhealthiness of J's & Y's relationship is due to Ono's
being
> > "strong-willed" or Asian?
> >
> > possibility that you've succumbed to some of Ono's public-relations
> > BS. (By the way, Ono is also fond of the ABSURD pretense that her
> > critics don't like the fact that she's *female*, as well.)
> >
> >
>
> suggestion only betrays an ignorance of the general attitude toward
women
> during the period Yoko came up. (50s-70s).
>
> I'd suggest you read Simon Frith's Sound Affects. It has a section
about
> what the allegedly enlightened folk and rock worlds considered a
woman's
> place to be. There's also an anthology of rock criticism by woman
writers
> that'll have some material on the subject. I'm thinking of an article
by
> Lori Twersky that originally appeared in the early 80s, but
doubtlessly
> there's more.
The "general attitude towards women" in the 50s - 70s is one
thing. The contentions of Ono's critics are another matter.
Now, if it *were* the case that Ono's critics are motivated -- as
Ono alleges they are -- by a hatred of Asians or a hatred of women,
then they're idiots.
But it seems to me that Ono's critics are manifestly concerned
with *other* things. These include Ono's exploitation of Lennon's
memory (putting his bloodstained glasses on her album cover; turning
his bullet-laden clothes into "art"; incorporating his morgue photo
into the "Woman" video, etc.); Ono's ripping off of John's English
relatives; Ono's employment of JL's image in disgusting -- &, given
JL's interests --, utterly inappropriate commercials & ads; Ono's
general love of MONEY; Ono's claim to being "revolutionary" in
everything she did when in fact she was merely incompetent (except when
it came to moneymaking and PR); Ono's claim that the Beatles were
merely "wasting their time" with their music; Ono's plagiarism of
"Makin' Whoopie" (&, if the truth be told, Japanese folk songs); Ono's
tendency to speak in nauseatingly trite platitudes, as a way to -- what
a surprise! -- evade the issue; Ono's inability to carry a tune; Ono's
unwillingness to pay Jack Douglas for his Herculean efforts to make her
work palatable; Ono's miserable taste in PR-representatives; Ono's
claim that her use of heroin was artistry; her pretense to being a
musician, when she confounds "rhythm" with "time-signature" and "4/3
time" with "3/4 time"; Ono's claim that Sam Havadtoy would come to the
Dakota "for John" (& later "for Sean"); her claim that her "music" was
undertaken "for John" (& later, "for Sean"); her addiction to every
superstition imaginable; etc.
In short, the criticisms Ono receives have NOTHING to do with her
sex or race.
It's Ono's arrogance & dishonesty that have gotten her into
trouble.
Nyarlathotep
timb...@canada.com (Lord Tim Brent) wrote:
> Dale,as to Yoko and her talking about the importance of her art,she is
> nowhere near the shameless name dropping and self promotion of Andy
> Warhol (who made more rotten movies than John and Yoko btw). I do like
> some of Warhol's art in the 60's but after that only his Pete Rose
> painting in the Cincinnati Museum Of Art.
Tim, you're a bit dependent on the "two wrongs" fallacy. Maybe
Warhol was shameless in his self-promotion -- but this has no bearing
on the subject at hand (i.e., it doesn't make *Ono* any better!).
Peanut Duck
beautiful. well said.
alley.
robertandrews
>when she confounds "rhythm" with "time-signature" and "4/3 time" with "3/4
time"
That was your mistake, not Yoko's. At this point it's nothing more than a
lie. Unless you can find some other musicians on RMB to support you &
explain their answers, we can use courtroom standards & discount all your
other testimony based on this fallacy.
>It's Ono's arrogance & dishonesty that have gotten her into trouble.
What trouble is that? I didn't know she had any enemies, aside from the
pathetic cowards on RMB. And what do you propose to do about it -- keep
screaming like a plucked chicken until all the decent people leave this
forum? Buy a gun & wait by the Dakota? It is YOUR arrogance & dishonestly
that have exposed you as a hateful fraud, & has sadly led many nice folks
away from this discussion group about the Beatles & their music.
The Nazi reference in your case is most appropriate: you've "virtually"
eradicated the good voices -- your unbridled hate has driven them away. I
say this not to try to change your diseased mind, but to make friends with
the few compassionate souls left on RMB.
thewalruswasDanny
Danny
thewalruswasDanny
> relationship.
Well it's there. The accounts are in May's and Fred's books. The
relationship was bloody weird, all that 1973 setting up May Pang with John
etc. THe evidence is there, but it is covered up as much as possibule by YO.
As Dal;e say's though history will win out (with a bit of luck)
All we've heard are insults, amateur psychology & constant
> references to a man named Mintz.
Well you have to expect that about YO in a beatles ng, whatever you may
think she played a hell of a part in the break up of the band and the
downfall of the health of JL.
This geezer Mintz is employed by YO to send stories to the press which put
YO in a positive light..that's what he's paid to do.
In contrast, I've quoted John's songs,
> interviews & explained my feelings why their relationship was indeed
> healthy.
You feelings are all very well, but if their based on YO spin then it's no
suprise you support those views..the interviews put forth by the pair of
them we're subject to the same kind of spin as Mintz dishes out these days.
Absent any intelligent arguments, it's not a stretch to assume
> that the hatred towards Yoko is based on the prejudices I've already
> detailed, of which there may be an ethnic component.
I don't agree. I don't give a toss that she's a Jap (and that's what she
is)..and no I'm not racist, dated a Jap in 1989/90 for a year - Rika from
Osaka - and I doubt Dale or Ny or many folk on rmb think any the worse for
YO because she's Asian...the fact that she is a money grabbing manipulating
pain in the arse is probably more to do with the YO bashing in this arena.
>
> I agree that these attacks betray a deeper hatred towards all women, as
well
> as a self-loathing that sparks the anger. The monomaniacal interest in
the
> wife of a Beatle who was gunned down is truly disturbing. Almost every
post
> by Nyar concerns Yoko, without a kind word for any living soul other than
> the Yoko-bashers.
Well sweeping...but hey Ny can post what the fuck he wants. If he doesn't
want to disscuss Pete Best, then that's up to him. He does wish to discuss
the YO problem (and that's what she is)..so let him.
>
> Yoko Ono matters to some people because they need a target for their
anger.
> I rarely hear her name outside RMB, and she's no big deal to me & most
> Beatle fans I know.
Oh to most Beatle fans I know there's an attitude of poison towards this
woman..not initially, but once the spin is questioned and the truths seeps
out (like yellow matter custard)..then her actions are called into account.
I've said it before, but it would help your argument if you read some books
Robert. Try "Get Back" the Beatles Let it be disaster by Sulphy and a
long-winded named guy. Check out Lewishon's Beatles Chronical and the
Recording Sessions...dip into "I me Mine" by George Harrison or "Daddy Come
Home" by Pauline Lennon. Even "All Together Now" and the new one "After the
Break up"..there's a lot of info out there..some of it ladened with myths
and religeons about the Beatles story (Like Raymond Jones)..take all this on
board, then call Ny a Nazi
Danny
Dale Houstman
"Lord Tim Brent" <timb...@canada.com> wrote in message
news:397278b2...@news.cis.dfn.de...
> Dale,as to Yoko and her talking about the importance of her art,she is
> nowhere near the shameless name dropping and self promotion of Andy
> Warhol (who made more rotten movies than John and Yoko btw). I do like
> some of Warhol's art in the 60's but after that only his Pete Rose
> painting in the Cincinnati Museum Of Art.
>
Uh - your point precisely?
I've got plenty of complaints about Andy too, if and when this becomes
subject that we are anywhere near discussing.
But it is interesting that Andy and Yoko are unbearable for precisely the
same reasons: their rabid celebrity-baiting and empty self-promotion.
I will say though that Andy is - by far - still the better and more
interesting artist and person. For one thing, he shows a certain morbid and
cool wit (in his little statements such as the "famous for 15 minutes" bit),
and is technically the obvious superior to Yoko. This guy worked in the
sweatlines of advertising graphics, and drew a damn fine shoe! And his take
on Pop Art - despite what one might think of Pop Art in general - is a
genuine accomplishment. Yoko has not one piece to her name which approaches
the sort of iconic presence of say the Campbell Soup can. She is simply not
in that league. Her film-making is atrocious, but so is Andy's. But he did
what he did first, before she did it again but worse.
dmh
UsurperTom
>I've said it before, but it would help your argument if you read some books
Danny, I recommend that you read Peter Brown's much maligned "The Love You
Make." This book details George's disdain for Yoko. It contains other
sensitive revelations about the Beatles.
Tom
robertandrews
>This geezer Mintz is employed by YO to send stories to the press which put
YO in a positive light..that's what he's paid to do.
I'd not heard of Mintz before coming to RMB. I assume all celebrities have
a PR person. I rarely read or hear anything about Yoko, so maybe he or she
is not doing such a good job.
>You feelings are all very well, but if their based on YO spin then it's no
suprise you support those views..the interviews put forth by the pair of
them we're subject to the same kind of spin as Mintz dishes out these days.
The interviews I've read with John, Yoko & other musicians have given me a
pretty fair impression, in my opinion. They don't seem like public
contrivances to mask a sordid reality. I much prefer them to the
distortions & gossip in the biographies (which I've only briefly perused at
book stores).
>the fact that she is a money grabbing manipulating pain in the arse is
probably more to do with the YO bashing in this arena.
I fail to see why Yoko's money is an issue. I assume Paul is much
wealthier, and now he's been knighted for, I think it was, Say Say Say. I
can rip into Paul artistically, but I won't because I'm not a hateful
person. If I don't like his music, I'll make my points without insults so
as not to offend his fans on RMB. That's not been done with Yoko. People
are obviously jealous of her money, and feel she doesn't deserve it -- we
could say the same about most wealthy people.
>but hey Ny can post what the fuck he wants
That's because you let him. I noticed you objected to someone writing in
CAPS. Why? Can't he post what he wants? If Ny uses this forum simply to
abuse Yoko & others here, I can post my Nazi crap. Reasonable people should
object to his verbal violence. Our right to free speech is not unlimited;
we can tone down the abuse if we choose.
Tom
> >trouble.
>
>
>
>
Even though half of it is demonstrably wrong, and much of the rest is the
rantings of a philistine with intellectual pretentions beyond his
capability?
Guess I was right. Yoko-bashers have no perception when it comes to the
allies they choose.
>
>
> alley.
Tom
> I will say though that Andy is - by far - still the better and more
> interesting artist and person. For one thing, he shows a certain morbid
and
> cool wit (in his little statements such as the "famous for 15 minutes"
bit),
> and is technically the obvious superior to Yoko. This guy worked in the
> sweatlines of advertising graphics, and drew a damn fine shoe! And his
take
> on Pop Art - despite what one might think of Pop Art in general - is a
> genuine accomplishment. Yoko has not one piece to her name which
approaches
> the sort of iconic presence of say the Campbell Soup can. She is simply
not
> in that league. Her film-making is atrocious, but so is Andy's. But he did
> what he did first, before she did it again but worse.
>
Again, you prove you know nothing of Yoko's work.
Tom
> > The interviews I've read with John, Yoko & other musicians have given me
a
> > pretty fair impression, in my opinion. They don't seem like public
> > contrivances to mask a sordid reality. I much prefer them to the
> > distortions & gossip in the biographies (which I've only briefly perused
> at
> > book stores).
>
I
> feel you should. Fine don't if you want! It just might help you be
> more..well aware of what we're all on about..that's all.
>
So interviews aren't good sources, but books are?
> > I fail to see why Yoko's money is an issue.
>
> It's *the* issue. If Lennon was apauper YO wouldn't have shagged him.
>
Now I understand. Yoko is the only person in the world who could know that.
Since you're asserting it as a fact, you must be Yoko having us all on.
Frank Booth
he'd SHUT IT!!!
Frank
Frank Booth
somehow I believe him.
Frank
Frank Booth
manipulated as Lennon's brain. Dylan sang.."Now, he's hell-bent for
destruction, he's afraid and confused, And his brain has been mismanaged
with great skill. All he believes are his eyes, and his eyes, they just
tell him lies." Now I have no idea who or what Dylan is referring too
here if...anyone/thing. However, I know who I think of when I hear
License To Kill.
Frank
thewalruswasDanny
have
> a PR person. I rarely read or hear anything about Yoko, so maybe he or
she
> is not doing such a good job.
Probably not but I was just telling you who he was.
>
> The interviews I've read with John, Yoko & other musicians have given me a
> pretty fair impression, in my opinion. They don't seem like public
> contrivances to mask a sordid reality. I much prefer them to the
> distortions & gossip in the biographies (which I've only briefly perused
at
> book stores).
You ought to sap it all up, you've admitted to not reading any books, but I
feel you should. Fine don't if you want! It just might help you be
more..well aware of what we're all on about..that's all.
> I fail to see why Yoko's money is an issue.
It's *the* issue. If Lennon was apauper YO wouldn't have shagged him.
I assume Paul is much
> wealthier, and now he's been knighted for, I think it was, Say Say Say. I
> can rip into Paul artistically, but I won't because I'm not a hateful
> person. If I don't like his music, I'll make my points without insults so
> as not to offend his fans on RMB.
Franks had/has digs at Macca, besides Macca is not the topic of conversation
here.
That's not been done with Yoko. People
> are obviously jealous of her money,
I thought you said YOs money wasn't an issue!
and feel she doesn't deserve it -- we
> could say the same about most wealthy people.
Yos not very nice, I'm not jealous of her dosh (maybe I am! - wouldn't mind
all that money!)..but I'm not keen on lots of YOs behaviour.
>
> >but hey Ny can post what the fuck he wants
>
> That's because you let him. I noticed you objected to someone writing in
> CAPS. Why?
Because it's difficult to read.
Can't he post what he wants?
Yes Sculls can be I've asked him nicely to take the caps lock off so his
posts are easier to read. What's wrong with that? It's generally percieved
as shouting if you post in caps and I kind of get that analogy..surprised
you don't.
If Ny uses this forum simply to
> abuse Yoko & others here, I can post my Nazi crap.
So you accept you post Nazi crap?
Reasonable people should
> object to his verbal violence. Our right to free speech is not unlimited;
> we can tone down the abuse if we choose.
Tone it down then, stop posting, as you call it, Nazi crap, it's not nice.
Danny
Peanut Duck
>rantings of a philistine with intellectual pretentions beyond his
>capability?
what of it is wrong?
>Guess I was right. Yoko-bashers have no perception when it comes to the
>allies they choose.
>
?
i have plenty of perception. i call them as i see them.
alley.
Nyarlathotep
"Tom" <Blac...@msn.com> wrote:
> >
> Even though half of it is demonstrably wrong, <snip>
A tactic you acquired from Sam Havadtoy, infanTom?
(When asked about the rumor that he'd married Yoko, Havadtoy said
that the rumor was "demonstrably untrue" -- only to promptly fail to
give any such demonstration!)
Nyarlathotep
Again, you flaunt your infantilism. There's never any reasoning
behind your conclusions -- but that's probably because you've never
bothered to develop any rationality to begin with (hence your impulse
to seek consolation in fairytales).
Nyarlathotep
"Tom" <Blac...@msn.com> wrote:
> >
> So interviews aren't good sources, but books are?
He didn't say that, Tom. He's helping the guy out, advising him
to read some books. What's your problem with that?
> > > I fail to see why Yoko's money is an issue.
> >
> > It's *the* issue. If Lennon was apauper YO wouldn't have shagged
him.
> >
> Now I understand. Yoko is the only person in the world who could know
that.
> Since you're asserting it as a fact, you must be Yoko having us all
on.
>
No, Tom. One doesn't need to *be* a particular person in order to
be knowledgeable re: that person's motives.
robertandrews
>Again, you prove you know nothing of Yoko's work.
He's not much better with Warhol.
robertandrews
>It's *the* issue. If Lennon was apauper YO wouldn't have shagged him.
I don't think John would agree with that, & I doubt you'd have the courage
to say it to his face if he were still alive. If he's your hero, may I
suggest according him a little respect. I feel most men know very quickly
if a woman is out for his money, & John Lennon was no fool. There was much
Yoko loved about John, assuming money was even a factor.
>Yos not very nice, I'm not jealous of her dosh (maybe I am! - wouldn't mind
all that money!)
Isn't Yoko single?
>Franks had/has digs at Macca, besides Macca is not the topic of
conversation here.
Pretty easy for me to start new threads tearing Sir Paul to shreds.
>It's generally percieved as shouting if you post in caps and I kind of get
that analogy..surprised you don't.
I got the analogy -- it's a double standard to allow the Yoko insults on the
basis of free speech, & then object to CAPS & Nazis.
>Tone it down then, stop posting, as you call it, Nazi crap, it's not nice.
Neither are the Yoko insults. In the meantime, Mr. Ny is still on his
crusade to prove Yoko a fraud, employing Goebbels tactics: he lied about me,
my connection with Mintz, & Yoko's knowledge of music. He only posts about
Yoko & consistently uses hateful language. He's made this group a forum for
his Yoko-bashing & mean-spirited, witless humor. He needs to learn to
respect others, or leave RMB. Surprised you don't see that.