I realise why people are mad - Sean Lennon
TheWalrusWasDanny
father's legacy by allowing images of the murdered Beatle to be used
in a TV commercial.
Faced with a growing storm of protest Sean Lennon is claiming the
Citroen car ads are being screened as the family's way of keeping
Lennon's memory alive.
Yoko Ono gave permission for archive footage of a John Lennon
interview to be used in a UK advert for the Citroen DS3 hatchback.
Sean Lennon with mother Yoko Ono, pictured together in New York last
August, has defended her for allowing footage of his father to be used
in a Citroen car ad
But Beatles fans have accused the pair of cheapening the name 'Lennon'
and branded them Yoko and Sean as 'leeches'.
One disgusted fan, named only as 'Stew' fired a stream of abuse over
the ads at Sean, 35, via the social networking site Twitter.
Stew told Sean: 'You and Ono have sold John out allowing Citroen to
use him to sell their cars. English fans are disgusted at you both.
'You and your mother are a talentless pair of leeches. You're not fit
to use the surname Lennon. Enjoy the money...can't buy you love!'
Stung Sean initially hit-back, branding his critics 'peasants' and
'a**holes' but claimed he had not seen the ad.
Now Sean has viewed he commercial and has confessed that he
understands why fans were so upset, but denied that making money was
the family's motive.
Speaking via Twitter, Sean said: 'Look, TV ad was not for money. It's
just hard to find new ways to keep Dad in the new world. Not many
things as effective as TV.
'Having just seen the ad I realise why people are mad. But intention
was not financial, was simply wanting to keep him out there in the
world.'
Citroen has defended its use of John Lennon by saying that permission
was sought and given by Yoko Ono and the Lennon estate.
The campaign, by London-based advertising agency Euro RSCG, is billed
as 'anti-retro' and also features legendary screen siren Marilyn
Munro.
Some Beatles fans have challenged Yoko to explain why she gave her
permission and told her 'Shame on you!' But defending his mother's
decision, he continued: 'She (Ono) did not do it for money. Has to do
with hoping to keep dad in public consciousness. No new LPs, so TV ad
is exposure to young.'
From The Daily Mail
Danny
marcus
be remembered, in the public consciousness?
I hate to side with the usual suspects here, but I am at a loss for
why the Lennon Estate stoops to this level.
richforman
wrote:
Ridiculous. Lennon's remaining "out there" in the public mind has got
to be a natural organic thing if it's going to happen, forcing it by
letting them put him in car ads is not exactly a holistic spiritual
way to do it. (So even if we give Ono the benefit of the doubt and
accept Sean's statement at face value, the move is still bullshit.)
Also what is a citreon?, never heard of it.
richforman
John Doherty
I have no sympathy for the Yoko bashers here, and have often tangled
with Basher in Chief over her paranoid accusations.
But you won't see me jumping in here to defend Yoko on this decision.
It stinks.
If it were to support Amnesty International, or to raise consciousness
about Darfur, that would fit the legacy. But this was boneheaded,
greedy or both.
TheWalrusWasDanny
> greedy or both.
The reason she did it was for
1) Money
2) Fame
Danny
The Harmonic Wheel
wrote:
> Faced with a growing storm of protest Sean Lennon is claiming the
> Citroen car ads are being screened as the family's way of keeping
> Lennon's memory alive.
I'm sorry, but although I thought the car ad wrong, I "understood".
Sean Lennon is a disgrace, however, to his father "claiming the
Citroen car ads are being screened as the family's way of keeping
Lennon's memory alive."
What an f***ing JERK to even think that his father needs to have a car
ad out to keep his father's memory alive.
John Lennon's name will be remembered LONG after Sean and his bitch of
a mother's name are forgotten!
I have NOW officially heard everything!
Sean is a low, no count bastard of a son, and a disgrace to his
father's name.
TheWalrusWasDanny
wrote:
You can have five stars for that one!!
Danny
TheWalrusWasDanny
I'm light...watch me skip and dance tra-la-la.
Danny
The Harmonic Wheel
You're welcome!
Let me shed a little more light on a different subject: you are STILL
a total asshole.
With every posting you prove it more and more, but please do remember
that The Light that I AM would be nothing without the deep, dark
pitch, and shadowy darkness that we all see reflected in your soul.
rwalker
<rfor...@msn.com> wrote:
snip
>
>Ridiculous. Lennon's remaining "out there" in the public mind has got
>to be a natural organic thing if it's going to happen, forcing it by
>letting them put him in car ads is not exactly a holistic spiritual
>way to do it. (So even if we give Ono the benefit of the doubt and
>accept Sean's statement at face value, the move is still bullshit.)
>Also what is a citreon?, never heard of it.
>
>richforman
European car maker. French, I believe.
Fattuchus
wrote:
> John Lennon's son has denied that Yoko Ono is cashing-in on his
> father's legacy by allowing images of the murdered Beatle to be used
> in a TV commercial.
>
> Faced with a growing storm of protest Sean Lennon is claiming the
> Citroen car ads are being screened as the family's way of keeping
> Lennon's memory alive.
>
> Yoko Ono gave permission for archive footage of a John Lennon
> interview to be used in a UK advert for the Citroen DS3 hatchback.
>
> Sean Lennon with mother Yoko Ono, pictured together in New York last
> August, has defended her for allowing footage of his father to be used
> in a Citroen car ad
>
> But Beatles fans have accused the pair of cheapening the name 'Lennon'
> and branded them Yoko and Sean as 'leeches'.
>
> One disgusted fan, named only as 'Stew' fired a stream of abuse over
> the ads at Sean, 35, via the social networking site Twitter.
>
> Stew told Sean: 'You and Ono have sold John out allowing Citroen to
> use him to sell their cars. English fans are disgusted at you both.
>
> 'You and your mother are a talentless pair of leeches. You're not fit
> to use the surname Lennon. Enjoy the money...can't buy you love!'
>
> Stung Sean initially hit-back, branding his critics 'peasants' and
> 'a**holes' but claimed he had not seen the ad.
>
> Now Sean has viewed he commercial and has confessed that he
> understands why fans were so upset, but denied that making money was
> the family's motive.
I wonder how much the estate was paid.
And if money is NOT the motive for Yoko having Lennon's image and
music used to sell stuff, how much money is she and Sean sharing with
Julian?
Fattuchus
> be remembered, in the public consciousness?
>
> I hate to side with the usual suspects here,
Side with us. We are the good guys.
but I am at a loss for
> why the Lennon Estate stoops to this level.
Answer: $$$$$$$$$
Fattuchus
> > Citroen has defended its use of John Lennon by saying that permission
> > was sought and given by Yoko Ono and the Lennon estate.
>
> > The campaign, by London-based advertising agency Euro RSCG, is billed
> > as 'anti-retro' and also features legendary screen siren Marilyn
> > Munro.
>
> > Some Beatles fans have challenged Yoko to explain why she gave her
> > permission and told her 'Shame on you!' But defending his mother's
> > decision, he continued: 'She (Ono) did not do it for money. Has to do
> > with hoping to keep dad in public consciousness. No new LPs, so TV ad
> > is exposure to young.'
>
> > From The Daily Mail
>
> > Danny
>
> Ridiculous. Lennon's remaining "out there" in the public mind has got
> to be a natural organic thing if it's going to happen, forcing it by
> letting them put him in car ads is not exactly a holistic spiritual
> way to do it. (So even if we give Ono the benefit of the doubt and
> accept Sean's statement at face value, the move is still bullshit.)
> Also what is a citreon?, never heard of it.
With all the controversy, we've heard of it now.
TheWalrusWasDanny
> Who's the one enraged about a *television commercial*, you or me?
Well he's not the only one is he Guru? The fact that's it's a trivial
TV Ad is *exactly the point*.
Danny
Fattuchus
wrote:
Yoko is very detailed and quite controlling in other areas. I am
surprised she would allow John's imagine and voice (?) to be used for
such a shoddy ad.
TheWalrusWasDanny
> And if money is NOT the motive for Yoko having Lennon's image and
> music used to sell stuff, how much money is she and Sean sharing with
Fuck all I imagine.
Don't forget this Citroen thing is also designed to create news and
generate FAME! Look at me everybody! I'm YO and I can sell cars
irresponsibly, through using JLs image...somebody will interview me on
prime time TV and that will sell more cars and get me more money and
fame...then people will become more curious about me and see me on
youtube wailing and then join me twittering and go on my FB group and
I will be more famous....
A Famous Twat. Fucking YO a disgrace to fucking Humanity.
Danny
TheWalrusWasDanny
> Just another person who accuses me of inserting too much negativity.
> What more needs to be said?
>
> Beyond kooky.
I might be a wanker (best in the world - very well practised), I might
be a monkey, I might be well endowed (unlike you eh Guru?) but I'm
really confident that I'm not negative! I'm positive! I'm postive that
YO is a twat!
Danny
John Doherty
> On Mar 4, 3:48 pm, marcus <marcus...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > How the hell does Lennon selling cars keep his name, the way it should
> > be remembered, in the public consciousness?
>
> > I hate to side with the usual suspects here,
>
> Side with us. We are the good guys.
Heh. I'm sure you believe that you are. "The road to hell is paved
with good intentions". & need I point out that on the official nazi
uniform the belt buckle read "Gott Mitt Uns" (God is with us).
& I actually like some of Sean's music ("Tomorrow" for instance). I
feel like he's just following Yoko's lead. After all, he barely knew
his dad, so I'm sure he naturally defers to her on this sort of stuff,
or at least has up till now.
And I'm sure after growing up in a world full of Yoko haters like you
(convinced they are doing the Lord's work), he's quick to go into
defensive mode whenever there's an attack on his mother.
TheWalrusWasDanny
I am a childish Brat! Always have been. I wear it well!
Danny
TheWalrusWasDanny
The Lord? What a load of old bollocks that is.Fuck all to do with God.
God doesn't exist. Goldilocks and the three bears. YO is a conniving
arse irrispicaltive of bloody God, sitting on his arse with a fucking
bald head and singing hari krishna. All evidence in the known universe
indicates that YO is a money grabbing parashite on the first degree
that (sings) nobody can deny.
Danny
John Doherty
> On 4 Mar, 23:26, John Doherty <j...@johndoherty.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Mar 4, 5:15 pm, Fattuchus <fattuc...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Mar 4, 3:48 pm, marcus <marcus...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > How the hell does Lennon selling cars keep his name, the way it should
> > > > be remembered, in the public consciousness?
>
> > > > I hate to side with the usual suspects here,
>
> > > Side with us. We are the good guys.
>
> > Heh. I'm sure you believe that you are. "The road to hell is paved
> > with good intentions". & need I point out that on the official nazi
> > uniform the belt buckle read "Gott Mitt Uns" (God is with us).
>
> > & I actually like some of Sean's music ("Tomorrow" for instance). I
> > feel like he's just following Yoko's lead. After all, he barely knew
> > his dad, so I'm sure he naturally defers to her on this sort of stuff,
> > or at least has up till now.
>
> > And I'm sure after growing up in a world full of Yoko haters like you
> > (convinced they are doing the Lord's work), he's quick to go into
> > defensive mode whenever there's an attack on his mother.
On Mar 4, 6:32 pm, TheWalrusWasDanny <dannyisthewal...@tesco.net>
wrote:
> The Lord? What a load of old bollocks that is.Fuck all to do with God.
> God doesn't exist. Goldilocks and the three bears. YO is a conniving
> arse irrispicaltive of bloody God, sitting on his arse with a fucking
> bald head and singing hari krishna. All evidence in the known universe
> indicates that YO is a money grabbing parashite on the first degree
> that (sings) nobody can deny.
Don't hold back, Danny, tell us how you really feel .;-)
No, I have no problem with this perspective.
It's Fatts' demented take that John needed protection from Yoko, that
he was somehow not adult enough to understand how "mean" she was to
him, in a way only she seems to understand.
That and all the dark allegations about Yoko enabling his murder, the
different standard for Yoko who is seen as a fallen women for having a
relationship with another guy in the year after Lennon's murder while
John gets a pass for screwing loudly some chick in the next room while
he & Yoko were at a party at Jerry Rubin's that put her in her won
universe of Yoko hatin'.
TheWalrusWasDanny
Oh come on let me play! (snigger)
Danny
marcus
This is basically the same argument we hear from those who have no
problem with The Beatles' music used in TV ads. Proponents often
state that it's OK because it keeps The Beatles "in the news",
possibly gaining "new" fans. Now, this is the same argument being
used to rationalize Lennon's image being manipulated.
It's wrong in both instances.
I honestly like Yoko, but think she has become misguided...perhaps she
has fallen in love with the technology that produces such a thing
(just as she did with the laptop computer give-a-way last year). I do
not think she does it for the money...she doesn't do it for the
money. She is basically a romantic, and I believe she mistakenly
believes that this keeps John's memory alive...she should know by now
that it's his music and legacy that continues to keep him alive in our
minds.
Marc
Jeff
None of our business.
The Harmonic Wheel
wrote:
> God doesn't exist. Goldilocks and the three bears.
I have always been fond of children's stories for they always seem to
have a bit of truth in them.
TheWalrusWasDanny
> I honestly like Yoko,
Fucking hell Marc...why? How?
Danny
TheWalrusWasDanny
wrote:
Well there's no truth in the God Bollocks..it's all pie in the sky
nonsense...Sky Fairies a go-go. Childrens stories are far more
credible..sometimes I'm the wolf..sometimes..or most times..I'm the
piggy who bult the house from Straw.
Still we battle on eh?
Danny
abe slaney
> This is basically the same argument we hear from those who have no
> problem with The Beatles' music used in TV ads. Proponents often
> state that it's OK because it keeps The Beatles "in the news",
> possibly gaining "new" fans. Now, this is the same argument being
> used to rationalize Lennon's image being manipulated.
Well, I for one don't consider the Beatles' music "sacred" - or any
more sacred than any other band. I like it more than most, but that's
that. Therefore, if I don't have a problem with some advertiser using
"Take the A Train", I can't allow myself the indulgence of getting
pouty over somebody else using "Hello, Goodbye". I know that you have
a built-in aversion to advertising *period*, so we're not exactly on a
level playing field discussing this topic.
I do have a problem with the ad, but it's not to do with using
Lennon's image to sell cars. I haven't researched this, I've only seen
the ad - so correct me if I'm wrong - but I believe they used a sound-
alike voice-over, inventing quotes that never happened. THAT crosses
the line of right and wrong in my view.
As far as using a celebrity's image to "sell product" - well, people
do it on an individual basis every day to sell themselves to the
world. Kids put posters in their bedrooms, people on Facebook become
fans of so-and-so, and put together playlists of songs by their
favorite artists. It's not an unheard-of concept to position oneself
via reference to known icons. Individuals do it and companies do it.
And the Beatles, like it or not, are a brand. Some people carry Louis
Vuitton bags, some people only drink Grey Goose vodka and some people
wear Beatles t-shirts - because it says something about you - and your
brand.
If Charlie's Clam Shack uses a picture of the coastline in their crap
ad in the crap local newspaper, are they "debasing" the billion-year
old history of that coastline? Personally, I'd say they're just trying
to get by, to survive. And they are leveraging the fact that people in
that area know and love that view. Is John Lennon quantitatively
different in this context than those rocks that have been on the shore
since time immemorial? They both stand for something in the mind of
the viewer, something that the advertiser wants you to identify with.
I don't believe there's anything inherently bad about using Lennon's
image. If I carried his picture at a peace rally, I gather you'd have
no objection. How about if I carried it at a "fair-trade coffee"
protest? Still okay, I'm guessing. How about if I carried it at a
Sarah Palin rally? Who are you to decide who may and may not invoke
your pet icon?
marcus
> On Mar 4, 7:40 pm, marcus <marcus...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > This is basically the same argument we hear from those who have no
> > problem with The Beatles' music used in TV ads. Proponents often
> > state that it's OK because it keeps The Beatles "in the news",
> > possibly gaining "new" fans. Now, this is the same argument being
> > used to rationalize Lennon's image being manipulated.
>
> Well, I for one don't consider the Beatles' music "sacred" - or any
> more sacred than any other band. I like it more than most, but that's
> that. Therefore, if I don't have a problem with some advertiser using
> "Take the A Train", I can't allow myself the indulgence of getting
> pouty over somebody else using "Hello, Goodbye". I know that you have
> a built-in aversion to advertising *period*, so we're not exactly on a
> level playing field discussing this topic.
>
> I do have a problem with the ad, but it's not to do with using
> Lennon's image to sell cars. I haven't researched this, I've only seen
> the ad - so correct me if I'm wrong - but I believe they used a sound-
> alike voice-over, inventing quotes that never happened. THAT crosses
> the line of right and wrong in my view.
That is the same thing that happened with the laptop give-a-way.
>
>
> If Charlie's Clam Shack uses a picture of the coastline in their crap
> ad in the crap local newspaper, are they "debasing" the billion-year
> old history of that coastline? Personally, I'd say they're just trying
> to get by, to survive. And they are leveraging the fact that people in
> that area know and love that view. Is John Lennon quantitatively
> different in this context than those rocks that have been on the shore
> since time immemorial? They both stand for something in the mind of
> the viewer, something that the advertiser wants you to identify with.
Do I really need to tell you the difference between a human being and
an inanimate object?
>
> I don't believe there's anything inherently bad about using Lennon's
> image. If I carried his picture at a peace rally, I gather you'd have
> no objection. How about if I carried it at a "fair-trade coffee"
> protest? Still okay, I'm guessing. How about if I carried it at a
> Sarah Palin rally? Who are you to decide who may and may not invoke
> your pet icon?
Why are you making this about me, as if I am an isolated figure about
this issue...see the original article posted by Danny. There are many
people who object to this.
marcus
.
>
> I honestly like Yoko, but think she has become misguided...perhaps she
> has fallen in love with the technology that produces such a thing
> (just as she did with the laptop computer give-a-way last year). I do
> not think she does it for the money...she doesn't do it for the
> money.**** She is basically a romantic, and I believe she mistakenly
> believes that this keeps John's memory alive...she should know by now
> that it's his music and legacy that continues to keep him alive in our
> minds.
>
> Marc
>
> http://www.counterpunch.org/catone01022009.html-
****should have read, "I do not think she does it for the money...she
doesn't need the money."
marcus
wrote:
> > I honestly like Yoko,
>
> Fucking hell Marc...why? How?
>
> Danny
Fair question.
From the time I first heard of her, in the Summer of 1968, I thought
she was good for John. Lennon had been in a funk, burying his ego,
letting Paul run The Beatles, letting his song writing slip. She
awakened him to new positive perspectives. She "got" him like no one
else had, and he understand her.
I was 18 and 19 years old at the time, and found them to be a very
romantic, positive couple. I was tremendously influenced by their
peace advocacy, and the novel ways they expressed it. It was the
meeting of two minds, soul-mates if you will.
I never bought in to that "Yoko broke up The Beatles" whine. I loved
The Beatles...was upset when they broke up, but I realized that they
were four strong-willed individuals who had endured a pressure-cooker-
like existence for years...no group of young people, whose likes and
interests were changing and expanding, could withstand that. They
really broke themselves up...Yoko provided those who couldn't
rationalize the break-up with a very convenient scape goat.
And I always found it so insulting to John that people considered him
a genius, who didn't take shit from anyone...yet they were able to
balance that image with John being taken over by Yoko...unable to
think for himself or discern what was right for him. They fought,
they argued like other couples, he wasn't controlled by her. And they
also happened to find themselves at the beginnings of Feminism. Some
people thought of Yoko as "lucky" that she married John, but she had
to sublimate her own desires and aspirations to be Mrs. Lennon...would
we castigate any other woman married to someone famous for wanting to
be her own person, recognized for what she could do, and not merely
being content for being known as someone's wife?
I admired Yoko...she introduced to me the notion of seeking a woman
who believed in the same values I held...independent, yet a partner.
And also, much later, my heart went out to her for having to endure
what no spouse, or significant other should have to endure, witnessing
the murder of their loved one in cold blood before their eyes.
RichL
> John Lennon's name will be remembered LONG after Sean and his
> bitch of a mother's name are forgotten!
I'd think you'd have a better chance of seeing that happen if you and the
others weren't constantly harping on her.
RichL
> Fuck all I imagine.
>
> Don't forget this Citroen thing is also designed to create news and
> generate FAME! Look at me everybody! I'm YO and I can sell cars
> irresponsibly...
Does Yoko appear in the ad?
> through using JLs image...somebody will interview me on
> prime time TV and that will sell more cars and get me more money and
> fame...then people will become more curious about me and see me on
> youtube wailing and then join me twittering and go on my FB group and
> I will be more famous....
Sounds familiar ;-)
The Harmonic Wheel
We're only talking here to... how many do you suppose, Rich?
None of our "rants" are liable to be heard by to very many.
The Harmonic Wheel
> On Mar 4, 7:45 pm, The Harmonic Wheel <from_me_to_...@comcast.net>
> wrote:
>
> > On Mar 4, 9:36 pm, "RichL" <rpleav...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > The Harmonic Wheel <from_me_to_...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> > > > John Lennon's name will be remembered LONG after Sean and his
> > > > bitch of a mother's name are forgotten!
>
> > > I'd think you'd have a better chance of seeing that happen if you and the
> > > others weren't constantly harping on her.
>
> > We're only talking here to... how many do you suppose, Rich?
>
> > None of our "rants" are liable to be heard by to very many.
>
>
> http://injury.findlaw.com/defamation-libel-slander/defamation-law-mad...
>
> See "injurious" as well as truth, opinion, and the higher standard for
> public figures.
>
> No way.
It must be late, or perhaps I'm just getting old, but that went right
over my head and have no idea what you are talking about.
The Harmonic Wheel
> On Mar 4, 8:09 pm, The Harmonic Wheel <from_me_to_...@comcast.net>
I haven't had a drink in nearly a month.
Have one for me... please!
> This is referencing a thread in which Blackpool Jimmy briefly appeared
> to darkly hint to Fatts (mostly) that "knowledgeable" eyes were
> watching and actionable defamatory words were being uttered here in
> rmb.
>
> I say no way that legal standard is met on several levels, but most
> particularly:
>
> FTA: 4. The statement must be "injurious." Since the whole point of
> defamation law is to take care of injuries to reputation, those suing
> for defamation must show how their reputations were hurt by the false
> statement -- for example, the person lost work; was shunned by
> neighbors, friends, or family members; or was harassed by the press.
> Someone who already had a terrible reputation most likely won't
> collect much in a defamation suit.
I think you misunderstood my use of the word liable in the sentence,
"None of our "rants" are liable to be heard by too very many." Let me
rephrase it for you.
None of our "rants" are LIKELY to be heard by too very many.
Eric Ramon
wrote:
I believe in fairies.
oh, by the way, acting like a childish brat *will* keep you young. In
a way. Sort of. But yeh.
abe slaney
> > I don't believe there's anything inherently bad about using Lennon's
> > image. If I carried his picture at a peace rally, I gather you'd have
> > no objection. How about if I carried it at a "fair-trade coffee"
> > protest? Still okay, I'm guessing. How about if I carried it at a
> > Sarah Palin rally? Who are you to decide who may and may not invoke
> > your pet icon?
>
> Why are you making this about me, as if I am an isolated figure about
> this issue...see the original article posted by Danny. There are many
> people who object to this.
My comments were addressed to a rhetorical "you". I realize there are
a lot of people who object to it...I do think a lot of the objections
are knee-jerk reactions that have perhaps not been thought through
fully.
You didn't address any of the points I made.
abe slaney
> > If Charlie's Clam Shack uses a picture of the coastline in their crap
> > ad in the crap local newspaper, are they "debasing" the billion-year
> > old history of that coastline? Personally, I'd say they're just trying
> > to get by, to survive. And they are leveraging the fact that people in
> > that area know and love that view. Is John Lennon quantitatively
> > different in this context than those rocks that have been on the shore
> > since time immemorial? They both stand for something in the mind of
> > the viewer, something that the advertiser wants you to identify with.
>
> Do I really need to tell you the difference between a human being and
> an inanimate object?
Everything is not always as clear cut as you would like it to be.
What if the inanimate object is the Berlin Wall? What if it is the
Liberty Bell? What if it is Plymouth Rock? What if it is a field at
Gettysburg?
Please do tell me the difference.
abe slaney
wrote:
> John Lennon's name will be remembered LONG after Sean and his bitch of
> a mother's name are forgotten!
> Sean is a low, no count bastard of a son, and a disgrace to his
> father's name.
Calm down there, big boy. It's all show biz.
Fattuchus
wrote:
> > And if money is NOT the motive for Yoko having Lennon's image and
> > music used to sell stuff, how much money is she and Sean sharing with
>
> Fuck all I imagine.
>
> Don't forget this Citroen thing is also designed to create news and
> generate FAME! Look at me everybody! I'm YO and I can sell cars
> prime time TV and that will sell more cars and get me more money and
> fame...then people will become more curious about me and see me on
> youtube wailing and then join me twittering and go on my FB group and
> I will be more famous....
Yes it's about getting attention, whether negative or positive. But
IMO $$ is the main issue.
Fattuchus
> On Mar 4, 5:15 pm, Fattuchus <fattuc...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > On Mar 4, 3:48 pm, marcus <marcus...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > How the hell does Lennon selling cars keep his name, the way it should
> > > be remembered, in the public consciousness?
>
> > > I hate to side with the usual suspects here,
>
> > Side with us. We are the good guys.
>
> Heh. I'm sure you believe that you are. "The road to hell is paved
> with good intentions". & need I point out that on the official nazi
> uniform the belt buckle read "Gott Mitt Uns" (God is with us).
You really believe most Nazi's believed in G-d or believed that
slogan? I don't.
>
> & I actually like some of Sean's music ("Tomorrow" for instance). I
> feel like he's just following Yoko's lead. After all, he barely knew
> his dad, so I'm sure he naturally defers to her on this sort of stuff,
> or at least has up till now.
I agree. He's a momma's boy. He also depends on her for $$$.
>
> And I'm sure after growing up in a world full of Yoko haters like you
> (convinced they are doing the Lord's work), he's quick to go into
> defensive mode whenever there's an attack on his mother.
I doubt he personally grew up in such a world. Sean was pampered and
sheltered from that. Probably brainwashed.
Sean called his own dad a macho pig. Where did he learn to talk like
that or to think like that? Hmmm? Sounds like Yoko talking to me.
But I agree that there is a world of Yoko bashers. But, wait a
second. How can there be millions of Yokotards? You mean they are
all nuts? Or perhaps they've seen "stuiff" trhat makes them have that
opinion?
Fattuchus
> > On 4 Mar, 23:26, John Doherty <j...@johndoherty.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Mar 4, 5:15 pm, Fattuchus <fattuc...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Mar 4, 3:48 pm, marcus <marcus...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > How the hell does Lennon selling cars keep his name, the way it should
> > > > > be remembered, in the public consciousness?
>
> > > > > I hate to side with the usual suspects here,
>
> > > > Side with us. We are the good guys.
>
> > > Heh. I'm sure you believe that you are. "The road to hell is paved
> > > with good intentions". & need I point out that on the official nazi
> > > uniform the belt buckle read "Gott Mitt Uns" (God is with us).
>
> > > feel like he's just following Yoko's lead. After all, he barely knew
> > > his dad, so I'm sure he naturally defers to her on this sort of stuff,
> > > or at least has up till now.
>
> > > (convinced they are doing the Lord's work), he's quick to go into
> > > defensive mode whenever there's an attack on his mother.
>
> wrote:
>
> > The Lord? What a load of old bollocks that is.Fuck all to do with God.
> > God doesn't exist. Goldilocks and the three bears. YO is a conniving
> > arse irrispicaltive of bloody God, sitting on his arse with a fucking
> > bald head and singing hari krishna. All evidence in the known universe
> > indicates that YO is a money grabbing parashite on the first degree
> > that (sings) nobody can deny.
>
> Don't hold back, Danny, tell us how you really feel .;-)
>
> No, I have no problem with this perspective.
>
> It's Fatts' demented take that John needed protection from Yoko, that
> he was somehow not adult enough to understand how "mean" she was to
> him, in a way only she seems to understand.
Several Lennon insiders noticed and stated that John was dominated and/
or manipulated and/or had a mommy complex. Julian, Pete Shotten,
Julia Baird, Linda McCartney, and the guy who founded Mersey Beat (the
name escapes me right now.) Also just read May Pang's book or Fred's
book . . . . .The evidence is overwhelming. How many insiders can say
the same thing? Are they all lying?
>
> That and all the dark allegations about Yoko enabling his murder, the
> different standard for Yoko who is seen as a fallen women for having a
> relationship with another guy in the year after Lennon's murder while
> John gets a pass for screwing loudly some chick in the next room while
> he & Yoko were at a party
I don't give Lennon a complete pass . . . . however he was drunk, and
he was immediately remorseful. It was not a reflection on how very
much he loved Yoko. Yoko, OTOH,publicly promoted John and herself
like crazy after the murder, portraying herself as the heroic wife,
while at the same time she was hot and heavy with a new man.
Havadtoy was kept secret. The fact that Yoko could carry on with a
new love so soon after John died is disrespectful, IMO. Plus it
mislead the public and made here grieving widow stance look phoney.
Fattuchus
Yoko loves money. It gives people power and buils up ego. Some
people believe they can never have enough. It's a competition.
Case in point: Yoko became rich when John died and worked hard to
make more and more money. Severl years later her parents died. Her
parents were very rich, and reportedly leftYoko more money. Did Yoko
"need" it. No. I read an article about it in the NY Times. In that
article, YO was quoted as saying something like, "Now I'm so rich, I
have almost as much money as Paul McCartney." Why is Yoko bragging
about it, in public yet? That quote shows you her mindset.
Fattuchus
> On Mar 4, 7:45 pm, The Harmonic Wheel <from_me_to_...@comcast.net>
> wrote:
>
> > On Mar 4, 9:36 pm, "RichL" <rpleav...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > The Harmonic Wheel <from_me_to_...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> > > > John Lennon's name will be remembered LONG after Sean and his
> > > > bitch of a mother's name are forgotten!
>
> > > I'd think you'd have a better chance of seeing that happen if you and the
> > > others weren't constantly harping on her.
>
> > We're only talking here to... how many do you suppose, Rich?
>
> > None of our "rants" are liable to be heard by to very many.
>
>
> http://injury.findlaw.com/defamation-libel-slander/defamation-law-mad...
>
> See "injurious" as well as truth, opinion, and the higher standard for
> public figures.
>
> No way.
Thanks for this link. Yes, there is a big difference in the US
between flaming a public figure suich as a politician or rock star and
flaming each other here. I've tried to explain this point before at
rmb, but most don't listen.
Fattuchus
> On Mar 4, 8:09 pm, The Harmonic Wheel <from_me_to_...@comcast.net>
>
> to darkly hint to Fatts (mostly) that "knowledgeable" eyes were
> watching and actionable defamatory words were being uttered here in
> rmb.
>
> I say no way that legal standard is met on several levels, but most
> particularly:
>
> FTA: 4. The statement must be "injurious." Since the whole point of
> defamation law is to take care of injuries to reputation, those suing
> for defamation must show how their reputations were hurt by the false
> statement -- for example, the person lost work; was shunned by
> neighbors, friends, or family members; or was harassed by the press.
> Someone who already had a terrible reputation most likely won't
>
> - Show quoted text -
Plus YO and the Beatles are public figures.
Fattuchus
> Fattuchus <fattuc...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > YO was quoted as saying something like, "Now I'm so rich, I
> > have almost as much money as Paul McCartney." Why is Yoko bragging
> > about it, in public yet? That quote shows you her mindset.
>
> your spiteful spin added. It's just ANOTHER "quote" which you invented
> for her.
I did not invent it. It's similar to what was printed.
>
> > Sean called his own dad a macho pig. Where did he learn to talk like
> > that or to think like that? Hmmm? Sounds like Yoko talking to me.
>
> What a ridiculous conjecture on your part. Yeah, like every time a young
> man says something vulgar/rebellious/whatever, people assume it's due to
> his mother's influence.
"Macho pig"???
Fattuchus
> Fattuchus <fattuc...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > have almost as much money as Paul McCartney." Why is Yoko bragging
> > about it, in public yet? That quote shows you her mindset.
>
> your spiteful spin added. It's just ANOTHER "quote" which you invented
> for her.
>
> > that or to think like that? Hmmm? Sounds like Yoko talking to me.
>
> What a ridiculous conjecture on your part. Yeah, like every time a young
> man says something vulgar/rebellious/whatever, people assume it's due to
> his mother's influence.
>
> > second. How can there be millions of Yokotards? You mean they are
> > all nuts?
>
> "Yokotard" requires a degree of obsession which goes far beyond simply
> having a low opinion of her.
JD mentioned a world of Yoko haters.
marcus
Gay,
When I looked at the Yahoo home page this morning there was a
headline, "Finally, what really killed the dinosaurs?"
Yoko was not mentioned.
;-)
Marc
dahldude
> Fattuchus <fattuc...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > Sean called his own dad a macho pig. Where did he learn to talk like
> > that or to think like that? Hmmm? Sounds like Yoko talking to me.
>
> What a ridiculous conjecture on your part. Yeah, like every time a young
> man says something vulgar/rebellious/whatever, people assume it's due to
> his mother's influence.
>
"Yeah, like every time". I had to laugh at this. I don't blame your
mom at all for your 'tude, PR. It's the hormones and the fallout from
it.
If you don't think Sean has been Yoko's pawn, why would Sean even say
"the macho pig" statement? He was freakin' five when his dad got
snuffed. Like you at five when the Beatles broke up. What did you
_really_ know then?
John's 1972 betrayal of Yoko hadn't been that well documented. How do
you think Sean would have known about it? Please tell us where he
would have gotten that info. Jann Wenner? Allan Kozinn? Sam Havadtoy?
Not Yoko, when she finally broke that story into the more mainstream
all by herself?
Throw us a theory or conjecture for once, instead of a cheap shot.
You've been here ten years plus. What you got for serious discussion?
< zip >
OK, I understand. You're waiting for the possibility of an interview
with Yoko or Sean, so you must be a defender and not reckon rationally
with any of the testimony. Instead, just shun the real discussion and
go with attacking the messenger.
I await the interview. I'm sure it will be a puffy one, but if you
would, please solve the "does she have real piano chops" question and
really nail it once and for all.
It might put you on the map. Consider it a freebie from me...
UsurperTom
> You really believe most Nazi's believed in G-d or believed that slogan? I don't.
You're right. "Gott Mitt Uns" was on German uniforms before the Nazis
came to power. It wasn't a slogan invented by the Nazis.
marcus
My uniform has "Gott Gloves".
Crisstti
> On Mar 4, 7:45 pm, The Harmonic Wheel <from_me_to_...@comcast.net>
> wrote:
>
> > On Mar 4, 9:36 pm, "RichL" <rpleav...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > The Harmonic Wheel <from_me_to_...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> > > > John Lennon's name will be remembered LONG after Sean and his
> > > > bitch of a mother's name are forgotten!
>
> > > I'd think you'd have a better chance of seeing that happen if you and the
> > > others weren't constantly harping on her.
>
> > We're only talking here to... how many do you suppose, Rich?
>
> > None of our "rants" are liable to be heard by to very many.
>
>
> http://injury.findlaw.com/defamation-libel-slander/defamation-law-mad...
>
> See "injurious" as well as truth, opinion, and the higher standard for
> public figures.
>
> No way.
I haven't read the whole thing yet, but the article isn't clear in
that first it speaks of "any statement that hurts someone's
reputation" and right after that of telling "lies" about people.
The Harmonic Wheel
> There aren't millions of them.
You're right.
There are tens of millions of them.
You are blinded by the NIGHT.
tom mcdermott
proceeds to charity ? that way they get john out there, and contribute
to good causes at the same time. sean is a lying sob. he can piss
right off.
TheWalrusWasDanny
> TheWalrusWasDanny <dannyisthewal...@tesco.net> wrote:
> > Fuck all I imagine.
>
> > Don't forget this Citroen thing is also designed to create news and
> > generate FAME! Look at me everybody! I'm YO and I can sell cars
>
> Does Yoko appear in the ad?
>
> > through using JLs image...somebody will interview me on
> > prime time TV and that will sell more cars and get me more money and
> > fame...then people will become more curious about me and see me on
> > youtube wailing and then join me twittering and go on my FB group and
> > I will be more famous....
>
Oh God I'm the first to admit it...I absolutely want fame and
money...difference is I think I'm a better singer that YO...in fact I
think *everybody's* a better singer than YO!!!
Danny
Donna
>
> Oh God I'm the first to admit it...I absolutely want fame and
> money...difference is I think I'm a better singer that YO...in fact I
> think *everybody's* a better singer than YO!!!
>
> Danny
I know I'll probably get heck for this, but I sometimes wonder if Yoko
thoroughly plans out her stage performances. From what I've seen all of
these years, it just appears as if she mostly wings it according to the
way she feels at the moment. She seems awkard on the stage, as if she's
thinking of a sound that she could make or searching for an instrument
to pick up.... and trying to figure out when to come in. That's my
impression, anyway.
Jeff
I thought of an Idea that would help: Yoko goes on youtube for free
and presents us with just the John part of the commercial, and
leaves the rest out.
Jeff
RichL
> Fattuchus <fatt...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> Thanks for this link. Yes, there is a big difference in the US
>> between flaming a public figure suich as a politician or rock star
>> and flaming each other here. I've tried to explain this point
>> before at rmb, but most don't listen.
>
> wherein you manage to fudge a way to excuse all your repulsive,
> hateful behavior.
Even if her point was valid, I don't recall anyone here on RMB accusing
another poster of being responsible for someone's murder, so the analogy
wouldn't hold anyway.
The Harmonic Wheel
> The Harmonic Wheel <from_me_to_...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> > > There aren't millions of them.
>
> > You're right.
>
> > There are tens of millions of them.
>
> > You are blinded by the NIGHT.
>
> when you were a teacher, or if it's a more recent affliction brought by
> solitude and inactivity.
I was district Teacher of the Year, loved by my students, well
respected (and loved) by my peers, and MAD AS A HATTER!
What's your excuse?
And don't use the fact that you have an undescended testicle as an
excuse again. *Nut*
RingoOno
a fan of all things JPGR..how does this commercial have the ability to
make anyone "mad".. Maybe they are already mad to begin with? While I
think the concept lacks taste..it couldn't possibly make you upset
could it? This is after all is never gonna change your world.. ( no
pun intended) Yes ..we all know that Yoko should only put the image to
honorable mentions but getting hurt by it just means one thing.... Too
emotionally connected to people you don't know and they don't know
you. I will add this... I am glad she did it.. Know why?? The
controversy makes people discuss John Lennon again. Controversy sells.
Not all fans of John are of the elitist fan mindset.. It is after
all...only Rock n Roll... That should be good enough for most.
Fattuchus
> On Mar 5, 1:47 am, poisoned rose <nur...@ward-duty.com> wrote:
>
> > Fattuchus <fattuc...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > Sean called his own dad a macho pig. Where did he learn to talk like
> > > that or to think like that? Hmmm? Sounds like Yoko talking to me.
>
> > What a ridiculous conjecture on your part. Yeah, like every time a young
> > man says something vulgar/rebellious/whatever, people assume it's due to
> > his mother's influence.
>
> "Yeah, like every time". I had to laugh at this. I don't blame your
> mom at all for your 'tude, PR. It's the hormones and the fallout from
> it.
>
> If you don't think Sean has been Yoko's pawn, why would Sean even say
> "the macho pig" statement? He was freakin' five when his dad got
> snuffed. Like you at five when the Beatles broke up. What did you
> _really_ know then?
I understand PR's point . . . Sean could have heard that from anyone.
On the other hand, that particular remark (macho pig) sounds so much
like Yoko's voice . . . . . .
And like you say, dahldude, how could Sean know about John's alleged
bad behavior that would make him a "macho pig."? Where would Sean get
that info from, and why would he be so nasty toward his dead father,
unless someone close to him "brainwashed" him.
>
> John's 1972 betrayal of Yoko hadn't been that well documented. How do
> you think Sean would have known about it? Please tell us where he
> would have gotten that info. Jann Wenner? Allan Kozinn? Sam Havadtoy?
> Not Yoko, when she finally broke that story into the more mainstream
> all by herself?
Strange, isn't it, that she did not mention that "betrayal" during the
Playboy interview. No, she waited until years after John's death.
Fattuchus
Thanks. I suspected as such. I was under the impression that Naziism,
if anything, was anti organized religion.
Fattuchus
> dahldude <dahld...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> I sure made the right call in adding you to the Yokotard list. *Nuts*.
I bet there are millions of Yoko Tards out there.
Fattuchus
wrote:
You are a much better singer.
Fattuchus
I read an interview or two about Yoko's recent show at BAM and another
concert. Those commentators also stated that Yoko's portion of the
show seemed unrehearsed, whereas other performances (such as the one
by Paul Simon and his son) seemed much more prepared.
IMO she is quite amateurish. Some find that appealing. I don't.
Fattuchus
> poisoned rose <nur...@ward-duty.com> wrote:
You are missing the point. Flaming does not have to be limited to a
certain type of bad behavior. There are many different possible
accusations i.e. "you are mentally ill" or "you are a child
molestor."
Fattuchus
> Fattuchus <fattuc...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > I sure made the right call in adding you to the Yokotard list. *Nuts*.
>
> > I bet there are millions of Yoko Tards out there.
>
> people who don't like the Beatles), but that doesn't mean they're
> Yokotards.
Perhaps you can clarify something for me: what unique qualities makes
someone a "Yoko Tard" in your view?
Fattuchus
> YT#1 <fattuc...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > I understand PR's point . . . Sean could have heard that from anyone.
> > On the other hand, that particular remark (macho pig) sounds so much
> > like Yoko's voice . . . . . .
>
> anywhere. Do you have an invented quote which you can concoct to pass on?
>
> > And like you say, dahldude, how could Sean know about John's alleged
> > bad behavior that would make him a "macho pig."? Where would Sean get
> > that info from, and why would he be so nasty toward his dead father,
> > unless someone close to him "brainwashed" him.
>
> musician from anyone except Yoko. What a strange, totally delusional
> opinion that is.
You are correct, but it does trouble me that he would believe them or
that he would have such a nasty attitude toward his dad even if Sean
had heard such stories from casual strangers. John was HIS dad. And
then it seems odd to me that Sean would publicly speak about John like
that. It shows deep resentment. . . . . the type of resentment that
comes from being brainwashed by people close to Sean.
Do you really think Sean is going to read something "gossipy" in a
newspaper and form the opinion "My dad was a pig??" When I discuss
things here at rmb that some here consider "gossipy" they are the
first to defend Yoko. Why would Sean be so easily swayed against his
own father?
abe slaney
> > > Fattuchus <fattuc...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > Sean called his own dad a macho pig. Where did he learn to talk like
> > > > that or to think like that? Hmmm? Sounds like Yoko talking to me.
Actually, that sounds like John talking about himself, more than
anybody else. Where did you ever hear Yoko call John a "macho pig"?
Don't bother: you didn't. You think it "sounds like Yoko talking"
because you want it to sound like Yoko talking. John called himself
alot of names over the years looking back at how he treated people in
the past, but if his son agrees - it's Yoko's indoctrination...
BlackMonk
"Fattuchus" <fatt...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:d5de41e4-28aa-4e2e...@y11g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
< I understand PR's point . . . Sean could have heard that from anyone.
On the other hand, that particular remark (macho pig) sounds so much
like Yoko's voice . . . . . .
And like you say, dahldude, how could Sean know about John's alleged
bad behavior that would make him a "macho pig."? >
Any biography or from John's own interviews.
>
> John's 1972 betrayal of Yoko hadn't been that well documented.
If I knew about it, there's no surprise in Sean knowing about it.
< Strange, isn't it, that she did not mention that "betrayal" during the
Playboy interview. No, she waited until years after John's death. <
No, not strange at all.
abe slaney
> I read an interview or two about Yoko's recent show at BAM and another
> concert. Those commentators also stated that Yoko's portion of the
> show seemed unrehearsed, whereas other performances (such as the one
> by Paul Simon and his son) seemed much more prepared.
>
> IMO she is quite amateurish. Some find that appealing. I don't.
Unrehearsed does not = amateurish. Millions of amateurs rehearse every
day, and on the other hand, some of the best live performances are
spontaneous. The plain fact is that you didn't see the show so you
really have no basis to critique it. We're getting a third-hand review
here, and as is your custom, you are just looking for opinions that
confirm your prejudices.
Why not post links to the "interview or two" that you read? I trust
your interpretations of those interviews about as much as I've come to
trust your paraphrased "quotes".
Fattuchus
>
> For now, let's say it's about a persistent, nagging obsession with the
> subject...a tendency to argue unfairly with "spun" information...and an
> overheated, spurned-lover tone as if the person has been wounded by Yoko
> on an intimate, emotional level.
Over heated spurned love tone? That's very funny, coming from you.
>
> I'd say few people on Earth are as hatefully fixated on a daily basis as
> you are on this subject. And most of the others probably have personal
> dealings which fuel their resentment, rather than just a history of
> scanning tabloid books and articles to find "dirt."
Fattuchus
> Fattuchus <fattuc...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > So, you think Sean couldn't have heard stories about a world-famous
> > > musician from anyone except Yoko. What a strange, totally delusional
> > > opinion that is.
>
> > You are correct, but it does trouble me that he would believe them or
> > that he would have such a nasty attitude toward his dad even if Sean
> > had heard such stories from casual strangers. John was HIS dad. And
> > then it seems odd to me that Sean would publicly speak about John like
> > that. It shows deep resentment. . . . . the type of resentment that
> > comes from being brainwashed by people close to Sean.
>
>
> God, you really are nuts.
>
> > Do you really think Sean is going to read something "gossipy" in a
> > newspaper and form the opinion "My dad was a pig??"
>
> look a little less hysterical.
>
> And why is it so impossible for you to debate without dishonestly
> inventing quotes to make your case seem stronger?
>
> I Googled the actual quote. I found this:
>
> "He was a macho pig in a lot of ways and he knew it. The only thing that
> made it okay was that he could admit it. That was his saving grace. He
> tried to overcome it."
>
> Funny how the "unspun," honest facts seem a lot more reasonable, eh?
I wasn't spinning anything . . . . but the full quote is more
reasonable. However you are ignoring the point. How would a 4 or 5
year old kid learn the words "macho pig" and how would he get the
impression that his father was such an animal.
Fattuchus
> but hell, that was way back when, do you still have to carry that
> cross" stuff was all about.
Yes, I that is my opinion too.
>
> Which always makes me think of Alanis Morissette's famous cheatin' man
> lines:
>
> It's not fair, to deny me
> Or the cross I bear that you gave to me
> You Oughta Know.-
I don't know the whole song. I'm not sure what this means. Is
Morissette saying in a sense, "It's not fair to deny me the cross I am
bearing against you"? In other words, the singer on some level wants
to have the cross to bear and wants to continue having a grudge
against her cheating man?
Fattuchus
> > > > Fattuchus <fattuc...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > > Sean called his own dad a macho pig. Where did he learn to talk like
> > > > > that or to think like that? Hmmm? Sounds like Yoko talking to me.
>
> Actually, that sounds like John talking about himself, more than
> anybody else. Where did you ever hear Yoko call John a "macho pig"?
I have not heard Yoko call John that . . . . . in PUBLIC. But who
knows what goes on privately.
Yoko was an "angry" feminist. She made a number of silly public anti
male statements over the years, especially back in the 1970's. I do
recall on her song Sisters O Sisters, she started off the song by
calling the engineer a "male chauvenist pig engineer." That's how she
wanted to start the song.
Fattuchus
> On Mar 5, 10:55 pm, Fattuchus <fattuc...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > I read an interview or two about Yoko's recent show at BAM and another
> > concert. Those commentators also stated that Yoko's portion of the
> > show seemed unrehearsed, whereas other performances (such as the one
> > by Paul Simon and his son) seemed much more prepared.
>
> > IMO she is quite amateurish. Some find that appealing. I don't.
>
> Unrehearsed does not = amateurish. Millions of amateurs rehearse every
> day, and on the other hand, some of the best live performances are
> spontaneous.
From what I saw Yoko's performances often seem unrehearsed and
amateurish. There was a link to one performance she did in England a
few weeks ago (with some group called Basement Jaxx?????) where it
was obvious YO did not know what to do with the microphone or when to
come on the song.
The plain fact is that you didn't see the show so you
> really have no basis to critique it.
I've seen clips from the show on youtube. You can watch it
yourself.
We're getting a third-hand review
> here, and as is your custom, you are just looking for opinions that
> confirm your prejudices.
>
> Why not post links to the "interview or two" that you read? I trust
> your interpretations of those interviews about as much as I've come to
> trust your paraphrased "quotes".
OK. That's fair. In the future I'll try to remember to do that.
Fattuchus
> > > Which always makes me think of Alanis Morissette's famous cheatin' man
> > > lines:
>
> > > It's not fair, to deny me
> > > Or the cross I bear that you gave to me
> > > You Oughta Know.-
>
> > I don't know the whole song. I'm not sure what this means. Is
> > Morissette saying in a sense, "It's not fair to deny me the cross I am
> > bearing against you"? In other words, the singer on some level wants
> > to have the cross to bear and wants to continue having a grudge
> > against her cheating man?
>
> It's a very well known song in the scheme of things. You should listen
> to it for yourself to hear her tone of voice and the sarcasm and
> emotional punch. It's called "You Oughta Know."
>
> She's expressing anger about an ex-lover's betrayal. He left and
> hooked up with someone else after he made many deep promises and
> declarations to her of love until death and now the thought of him
> having sex with the new woman emotionally tortures her - how quickly
> she was forgotten.
>
> And in the song she calls him and says, guess what? It's me. I'm not
> going just disappear the minute you close your eyes. You're going to
> deal with the pain you have brought - you're going to deal with the
> cross I bear that you gave to me. You don't just get to capriciously
> skip away with the new woman and evade the emotional damage you caused
> because you feel like it.
>
> Now that I think about it, it's a demand for recognition of her
> current reality more than a demand to continue bearing the cross - but
> in any case I always think of "I'm Losing You" when I hear it - or
> even one of the interviews - where Lennon says "do you still have to
> carry that cross" to Yoko again talking about something Paul did.-
Yes, I can understand that. IMO "I'm Losing You" and "I'm Moving On"
were self revelatory about J & Y's relationship. John begging for
forgiveness for years and Yoko, moving on because she was a moving on
kinda gal.