Log In
Register
5.30pm
Reviewers
29 November 2012
Offline
parlance said
DrBeatle said
He only palled with John and helped with his early solo records, I suspect, because it was easy and fun to join in the bullying against Paul.I meant to say this above, but I dont’t think of it as being easy or fun to bully Paul, as George being unable or unwiling to direct his anger John. When they were younger, George was angry with Paul for pushing him aside for something newer and shinier, but he couldn’t get mad at John, so he directed his bitterness towards Paul. Then he got pushed aside again when Yoko appeared, and she was the easier target. For various reasons. As acmac said, maybe it was because John was less likely to forgive. Maybe because George still admired him despite John’s dismissive attitude. But it seems like someone other than John was always going to be on the business end of his John-rage.
parlance
So some deeper psychology there? I might buy that…George was a weird dude, much as I love him for who he was. To his credit, Paul almost never rose to the bait and was always gracious and willing to help. Hell, as I said either in this thread or another recently, he would’ve been 100% justified to tell George to f**k off when George was in desperate need of $$ and needed to do Anthology. After all the crap George slung his way over the years and the stonewalling he’d done to the project in the decades leading up to it, I don’t think anyone other than the completely irrational Paul bashers could fault him for that.
And mccartneyalarm, I get exactly what you’re saying. I will say that I, for one, feel no need to apologize for anything negative I say about Yoko for the reasons you state..IT’S ALL TRUE! 
"I know you, you know me; one thing I can tell you is you got to be free!"
Please Visit My Website, The Rock and Roll Chemist
Twitter: @rocknrollchem
Facebook: rnrchemist
5.41pm
8 November 2012
Offline 
DrBeatle said
So some deeper psychology there? I might buy that…
I go back and forth between looking more deeply into George’s psyche, and needing to look no further than his being discarded in favor of someone’s girlfriend after years of loyalty, at the height of his creativity. I think that would have been a maddening situation for anyone.
parlance
5.46pm
1 August 2013
Offline robert said
The only point I would add about George and John’s relationship is this – what is most weird to me is the Imagine period when George plays guitar on John’s record (remember John never played on George’s records). I think (and this pure conjecture), I think that Yoko fueled this – encouraging John to work with George in order to create greater distance between John and Paul. And then once John and George got too close – she sabotaged that.I believe, that with Yoko’s influence, John kept George and Paul at odds against each other to keep himself in the seat of control. This may sound wildly like psychobabble – but it is actually very common in these types of close, highly creative and competitive relationships.
I totally agree, psychobabble or no. And while I also agree Yoko probably encouraged this side of John, it was a side that already existed. John was a needy, manipulative b*****d long before Yoko ever came along. I suspect he similarly pitted Paul and Stu against each other back in the day. His ego enjoyed being “fought over.”
If we want to go really deep into psychobabble territory, I wonder if this tendency of John’s had its roots in the Julia /Mimi war over him.
5.52pm
1 August 2013
Offline parlance said
Maybe because George still admired him despite John’s dismissive attitude. But it seems like someone other than John was always going to be on the business end of his John-rage.
Well put. It seems George was quite willing to overlook/forgive incredibly shitty behavior in people he admired. How someone like George could stay such good friends with an asshat like Clapton, for example, has always been a mystery to me.
6.11pm
1 August 2013
Offline mccartneyalarm said
Excellent insights, guys I hope this comes across in the positive way that I mean it, but it is interesting (and I am guilty of this, too) that anytime someone tells the truth about Yoko, they find themselves apologizing for it cuz the facts make her look bad! We all say “I’m not Yoko-bashing” but…fill in the blank with the bad things she did. The truth is the truth. … Other than that, she is a manipulator; her reality is whatever she dictates it should be; she is fabulously self-centered; and she is completely self-serving. … She kept Julian away from John as well. She was a control freak. John fell for it. It wasn’t his fault. So, is that Yoko-bashing? If it is, I am sorry. But, I wish I didn’t have to apologize for telling the truth.
I don’t like Yoko, and I don’t argue with your characterization of her. But to absolve John of all blame goes way too far. John was a grown man, and he was every bit as capable of manipulation and narcissistic confabulation as Yoko, and a good deal more capable of outright cruelty and violence. Of course, unlike Yoko, he was also a tremendously brilliant artist and an extremely funny and engaging personality, so I can understand why people would rather make Yoko the scapegoat for his bad behavior. But I don’t think it’s fair or accurate to do so.
1.58pm
3 May 2012
Offline ^^ You’re right. Yoko was, and probably still is, all those things – but you can’t blame everything on her. John let himself be controlled and manipulated by her to a certain extent, and that was something he chose to do. He was a grown man, and he has to be held accountable for (at least) some of his actions. As you say though, people would rather blame Yoko than accept that John, whom we all love and look up to in one way or another, was far from perfect.
Moving along in our God given ways, safety is sat by the fire/Sanctuary from these feverish smiles, left with a mark on the door.
(Passover - I. Curtis)
4.47pm
Reviewers
29 November 2012
Offline I’ve got no issues admitting John, as much as I love him, was far from perfect. What irritates me now about that is how Yoko has spent all of her time and energy whitewashing John since his murder.
"I know you, you know me; one thing I can tell you is you got to be free!"
Please Visit My Website, The Rock and Roll Chemist
Twitter: @rocknrollchem
Facebook: rnrchemist
5.03pm
9 July 2013
Offline Dr. Beatle, I agree with you. Yoko’s whitewashing John also whitewashes her. I do agree with all of you that John should be held accountable for his actions. He chose Yoko. He loved Yoko. Because I love John, I accept that about him, and I accept that she was the most important part of his life.
I have a question about George (going back to his relationship with John)..I don’t know as much about George as the rest of you do, so forgive me if this is a stupid question. Robert said in his post that George remained the most money-focused member of the group (source: Living in a Material World). In my ignorance, I never caught on to that. Could someone give me some examples? I know Paul was and is a very talented businessman (my opinion). In what way was George so interested in money? Did he find himself in need of more money at some point? Thanks for your help!
"And in the end, the love you take is equal to the love you make."
5.20pm
5 November 2011
Offline The only reason George agreed to do the Anthology was for money.
All living things must abide by the laws of the shape they inhabit
5.37pm
6 August 2013
Offline I think Beatle´s relationship in the beginning was like a rectangle. We had Ringo-George in one side and John-Paul in the another. George and Ringo were best friends and Paul was his all-life friend. He admired John but in the beginning they were not so close and John was a little condescending, even not as much as Paul. George got completely tired of Paul during “Revolver ” and “Sgt.Pepper” era, when Paul starting to play lead in many records, leaving George apart. I think that John and George became closer in the India, when Paul and Ringo “left” them. John and George were changing a lot more than Paul and Ringo, and they became closer. And they helped each other in some songs, like “Taxman ” or “Everybody´s got something to hide…”. John didn´t play too much in the latest George´s Beatles songs, true, but “Something ” and “Old Brown Shoe ” became singles because of John. Paul always played in George songs, but in my opinion he always treated him as a little boy who didn´t write great songs, and he never admitted that George was better than him in the last years. John said that “Something ” was the best song from Abbey Road (that is a great compliment, of course), while Paul just said it was George´s best song.
And they were close too in the early 70´s. George played in John´s early records and they played in a Ringo´s album, I think. I don´t know the reason why their friendship broke down. Maybe because of Paul, because of Yoko, or because of the book (I think John overreacted there). I´m sure they still loved each other, but their pride or the fact that they had their own lifes put them apart.
Anyway, I understand that George was a little bitter about John and Paul. I mean, Paul was his best friend and he was replaced by John. And he was always the third beatle, after John and Paul, and they never let him take the spotlight, even in the last years, when he was as good or even better than them.
But in the end, the Beatles were four guys that really loved each other, and that is what we will remember over all.
6.02pm
1 August 2013
Offline mccartneyalarm said
Robert said in his post that George remained the most money-focused member of the group (source: Living in a Material World). In my ignorance, I never caught on to that. Could someone give me some examples? I know Paul was and is a very talented businessman (my opinion). In what way was George so interested in money? Did he find himself in need of more money at some point? Thanks for your help!
I don’t know that George was “the most money-focused,” but he certainly had a lifelong bitterness over taxes and made every effort to pay as little as possible, along with a lifestyle of “conspicuous consumption” (100-bedroom castle, racing car collection, bowls of jewels, etc.).
I believe George was in financial trouble before Anthology because of his business manager, Denis O’Brien. I’m not sure exactly what the story was; whether O’Brien was embezzling, or making bad/shady deals, or what. Anyway, apparently these financial troubles were the main reason George agreed to do Anthology — though I can’t fault him for that; nobody wants to go broke.
6.32pm
Reviewers
29 November 2012
Offline It’s been well documented that pretty much from the minute they signed with Brian in 1961, he was the one always obsessing over money…how much they earned, how much they actually had, the taxes, etc. Of course, it ended up serving him well later in the early 1990s when he was about to go broke and had to swallow his pride and agree to do the Anthology.
"I know you, you know me; one thing I can tell you is you got to be free!"
Please Visit My Website, The Rock and Roll Chemist
Twitter: @rocknrollchem
Facebook: rnrchemist
10.22pm
19 April 2010
Offline to clarify – George as being the most focused on money is documented from the beginning of the Beatles and throughout his life. There’s lots of instances from Brian on forward.
The reference to Living In A Material World has to do with Olivia acknowledging George’s womanizing. Something she essentially put up with.
"She looks more like him than I do."
11.10pm
21 November 2012
Offline I’m now reading that whole thread on that stevehoffman forum. Yep I’m probably going to read all of it. I’m only at page 2 though. What I knew was that Yoko was present a lot, obviously. But now I’ve just read a comment saying John wanted to officially include her in the Beatles. So that she would become the fifth Beatle. Now, I’ve heard a lot of things but I’ve never heard THAT. Does anyone know more about that?
Also, this bit about George leaving was something I found interesting:
McCartney tried to organise and encourage his bandmates, but his attempts to hold the band together and rally spirits were seen by the others as controlling and patronising. Matters came to a head on 6 January, when Harrison had a heated argument with McCartney during a rehearsal of “Two of Us”, which later became one of the most famous sequences in the Let It Be film. What is not shown in the film is another, allegedly much more severe argument Harrison had with Lennon on 10 January. Harrison had become fed up with Lennon’s creative and communicative disengagement from the band and the two had a blazing row. According to journalist Michael Housego of The Daily Sketch, this descended into violence with Harrison and Lennon allegedly throwing punches at each other, though in a 16 January interview for the Daily Express, Harrison said, “There was no punch-up. We just fell out.” After lunch, Harrison announced that he was “leaving the band now” and told the others “see you round the clubs”. He promptly walked out, getting in his car and instead of returning home to his wife Pattie at his Esher home Kinfauns, he drove straight to his parents’ home in Speke, Liverpool.
So that’s that.
Now something completely different. I never really understood why some men just can’t be happy with one woman. My god. Just don’t marry if you don’t want to be in a relationship with one person. I can’t imagine how much it must hurt to know that your husband has slept with dozens of women and still does so. I also can’t imagine one could put their wife or girlfriend through that. But hey, that’s just me.
Also..was George really THAT broke?
11.44pm
19 April 2010
Offline Linde said
But now I’ve just read a comment saying John wanted to officially include her in the Beatles. So that she would became the fifth Beatle. Now, I’ve heard a lot of things but I’ve never heard THAT. Does anyone know more about that?Also..was George really THAT broke?
To the first question about Yoko joining the Beatles, yes, at the time – 69-70 I do remember hearing that a lot. Maybe it was in the Lennon/Rolling Stone interview or somewhere – but it was pretty common knowledge that John wanted Yoko officially in the band. Remember the picture cover to Ballad of John and Yoko has Yoko in the picture with the four of them. I remember being totally blown away by that.
And in terms of George being that broke – I’m not sure what broke means if you’re George Harrison , but considering your regular overhead costs, etc, I think it’s easy for accountants to project at what point your standard of living is going to be dramatically impacted without a good influx of cash (thus Anthology).
George had a ton of bad investments, failed albums, the tax on Bangladesh, lawyer and court costs from My Sweet Lord , money losing films, paying off Allen Klein (part of his anger at Lennon) the protracted legal battle over Apple, a divorce, that damn big house of his, and his love for racing cars and clothes (legendary), and it’s easy to see how he was heading towards bankruptcy.
And remember, even if you run of out of money, you’re still an ex-Beatle – it’s not like you can fly coach. I mean you just can’t.
"She looks more like him than I do."
11.59pm
21 November 2012
Offline I didn’t know that. Of course I knew she was there and he wanted her there, but to make her a BEATLE?! Dafuq. That’s even more ridiculous.
4.46pm
Reviewers
29 November 2012
Offline Yep, John actually legitimately wanted her to be included in the band as the 5th official member. I forget which interview it was but he expressed that he was so sure it wouldn’t be an issue and when they rejected her, it “blew him away.” That must’ve been SERIOUS s**t he was smoking in those days for him to think that!
"I know you, you know me; one thing I can tell you is you got to be free!"
Please Visit My Website, The Rock and Roll Chemist
Twitter: @rocknrollchem
Facebook: rnrchemist
4.50pm
9 July 2013
Offline Regarding George’s financial situation…not that this woud be easily acquired public knowledge, but, does anyone know how much Patti got in their divorce settlement? Was she in the Heather Mills category or the Cynthia Lennon category? Just curious.
"And in the end, the love you take is equal to the love you make."
5.27pm
3 May 2012
Offline I’m pretty sure that that info has never been released, but they stayed friends so it can’t have been that bad what she got. That’s just me speculating, though. I’m just trying to think if she said anything in her book… I can’t remember anything now. I know she bought a cottage somewhere and she had to save up for a few months before buying any furniture, so she was basically living in an empty house, so maybe she didn’t get that much after all….
Moving along in our God given ways, safety is sat by the fire/Sanctuary from these feverish smiles, left with a mark on the door.
(Passover - I. Curtis)
5.32pm
20 December 2010
Offline robert said
to clarify – George as being the most focused on money is documented from the beginning of the Beatles and throughout his life. There’s lots of instances from Brian on forward.The reference to Living In A Material World has to do with Olivia acknowledging George’s womanizing. Something she essentially put up with.
For the record, Olivia never said that her husband cheated on her. She said that George loved women and women loved George and that he could say something to you and have a profound effect. She did say it was hard but never commented that he cheated on her. I think a lot of people are reading to much into this. I like to think that if he cheated on her, Dhani would not have come out with some comments about his dad, one saying he was a great man. Of course, this is just my opinion.
The further one travels, the less one knows
3 Guest(s)