Jay Bergen represented John Lennon the man, not John the Beatle

If you’re a Beatles fan hungry for new material about one or all of the Fab Four…or if you’re a researcher seeking authentic, primary source material about John’s solo years, look no further than Jay Bergen’s book, Lennon, the Mobster, & the Lawyer, The Untold Story. This 2022 publication is a gold mine! Bergen was John’s attorney in the case against mobster Morris Levy, who tried to market a bootleg of John’s Rock ‘n’ Roll LP that Levy called Roots. And Jay has his own personal story of his days preparing for the trial as well as John’s lengthy and insightful court testimony to share with you. This is factual, documented material you’ve never read before. And it is fascinating!

 

Meet Jay Bergen in person at the New York Metro Fest for Beatles Fans from March 31 to April 2, 2023! 

 

Jay himself is fascinating. An esteemed New York litigator, Bergen represented the New York Yankees, then-Cleveland Indians, Cincinnati Reds and San Francisco Giants in the 80s/90s Major League Baseball salary arbitration with their players. He also represented Albert Grossman, Bob Dylan’s first manager, in litigation with the star.

 

But, as you will see in the interview below, Jay is also down-to-earth, gregarious, and extremely kind. Over the course of the Roots trial, John and Jay became friends, sharing many conversations, lunches, and walks together. This is a story that will not only inform you about John’s creative process, his love of 1950s music, and his passion for his work, but will also give you a new glimpse at John, the man.

 

After 36 years of research on John Lennon, I found this one of the best books ever written about his life in the 1970s. Let’s meet Jay and hear more about this riveting story…

 

Jude Southerland Kessler: Jay, for those in our Fest for Beatles Fans family who don’t know the stories of John’s legal troubles in the mid-1970s, please give us a synopsis of what happened to precipitate the Roots trial against Morris Levy.

 

Jay Bergen: In 1970, Morris Levy filed a lawsuit claiming that “Come Together,” written by John Lennon, infringed the copyright to “You Can’t Catch Me.” It was one of Levy’s bogus infringement claims for which he was notorious. The case was coming to trial in NYC in October 1973, but during that time frame, John was in LA recording an album of oldies rock ’n’ roll with Phil Spector producing. John did not want to leave LA, so he settled the case by agreeing to record three Levy-owned songs, including “You Can’t Catch Me,” on his “next album,” which was supposed to be John’s oldies album.

 

Spector disappeared with the LA master tapes. It took Capitol Records six months to get the tapes from Spector and send them to John in NYC. They arrived when he was ready to record new songs he had written at the Record Plant. John knew the Spector masters required a lot of work so he put them aside and recorded the new songs. That was Walls and Bridges released in September 1974. Levy knew that rock ’n’ roll oldies could not be on an album of John’s songs but still claimed that this was John’s “next” album and John had not complied with the settlement.

 

Levy then demanded a meeting with John on October 8, 1974. Levy, John, May Pang, and Harold Seider, John’s business advisor, met, and Levy claimed in January 1975 that John made an agreement that night allowing him to release the oldies album on TV on a worldwide basis.

 

In February 1975, Capitol learned that Levy was buying TV ad time to advertise a bootleg unfinished version of John’s oldies LP that he was calling Roots. John finished his album and Capitol rush released John Lennon Rock ’n’ Roll on February 13th. Levy then stopped his TV ads – after selling 1,270 albums. He then filed a lawsuit against John, Capitol Records, EMI Records, Harold Seider, and Apple Records alleging breach of contract, fraud, and other false claims. Two weeks later his lawyers filed a federal antitrust case against the same defendants alleging $14 million in damages.

 

Kessler: How did you become John’s attorney and how long did you work to gather data for the case? How involved was it?

 

Bergen: On February 3, 1975 my partner David Dolgenos – John’s lawyer in connection with the dissolution of The Beatles partnership – asked me to attend a meeting at Capitol’s offices about a rumor that Morris Levy was going to release a bootleg John Lennon album. While I was meeting with three Capitol lawyers, John Lennon suddenly entered the room. I was stunned since I didn’t know he was going to be at the meeting. John filled us in on his contact with Levy and this possible bootleg album.

 

During the meeting, I asked John how long it would take to finish the oldies album. He said it would take two days, and he wanted to finish it now. Once John delivered the finished album, Capitol could release it in a week to ten days. So that’s what happened.

 

Even before the first lawsuit was filed, I began interviewing John, May Pang, and Harold Seider in more detail because I wanted to get the facts about all of the dealings with Morris Levy down pat. In the course of doing so, I also learned that Levy was connected to the Genovese crime family in NYC, that he was really a bad guy, and that he had been in “business” with the Mafia for many years.

 

Pulling together all of the facts was involved because I learned that John had spent time with Levy at a club/restaurant where Levy was a member. I also discovered that in October 1974, John had taken the band with whom he was going to record some new tracks for the oldies album  to Levy’s farm for a weekend of rehearsals. More disturbing was that John had accepted Levy’s invitation to spend part of the Christmas holidays with May Pang and his son Julian, who arrived from England at Disney World in Florida. This series of events could be interpreted as evidence that John and Levy were close friends and that perhaps they had made a deal!

 

Kessler: So, John agreed to be very active in the case against Levy… to be present in court, to give testimony, and to assist in any way possible. Do you feel that John contributed to the case against Levy and to the success of your litigation? If so, how?

 

Bergen: Yes, John was in court every day, even when he did not have to testify. I think that impressed Judge Griesa because it showed how important the case was to John. Yoko Ono was there also when the trial was spread over January, March, and April 1976, twenty days. Levy was not present very often. Since John was there every day, he was able to watch each witness and see how the judge ran the trial. John knew what to expect when he testified.

 

John was the best witness I ever had. He was willing to review all the facts and prepare for his deposition and trial testimony. While the judge was a trained musician, he knew nothing about The Beatles or John Lennon or rock ’n’ roll music. John explained his entire process of producing records, the amount of space needed between each track, how long each side of an LP should be, etc. The judge was really into it, so he and John would have these long question/answer periods which drove Levy’s lawyer crazy. He’d try to object, but the judge ignored him.

 

Kessler: Before you really began work on the case full-scale, you were asked to the Dakota to meet Yoko and chat with her. Please tell us about the meeting…a meeting that you categorize as an audition.

 

Bergen: Sometime in late March, John called me and asked me if I could come up to the Dakota the next morning at 11 AM to meet Yoko. He said, “She just would like to meet you.” When I arrived, we sat in their big living room overlooking Central Park. John was not there.

 

Yoko had read the two complaints and asked me a series of questions about them. She also wanted to know about my background and experience as a trial lawyer. She was very interested and asked very good questions. She was extremely smart. She politely grilled me. After about an hour or so, she told me that John and she were very worried about Levy’s cases; she emphasized that all John and she wanted to do was hold down the amount of money that John would owe Levy. I told her that if I had anything to say about it, John would not owe Levy anything! That was my goal.

 

She finally stood up, said she was glad to have met me and thanked me for coming.

 

You might say I was naïve, but it wasn’t until many years later that I fully realized that our meeting was an “audition” so to speak…and that if Yoko had not liked me and thought that I was not the right lawyer to represent John, I would have been replaced.

 

Kessler: Jay, one of the most interesting parts of your book was John’s court testimony about how involved he was in the creative process for each of his solo LPs (just as The Beatles were actively involved in the making of their LPs.) Tell us about John’s involvement in insuring that each LP was special…and if you would, please share some passages with us that John actually said about that process.

 

Bergen: It’s really hard to describe John’s “involvement” as you say, without reading the entire two chapters — “How We Learned The Trade” and “John’s Creative Process” — in which some of his testimony is set forth. Let me insert the portions of that testimony:

 

Bergen: Now, would you generally describe the recording processes for the Court from the moment you got into the studio?

 

Lennon: Well, it varied from artist to artist.

 

Bergen: In [your] experience tell us what procedures you followed?

 

Lennon: In general, I take the group into the studio, and in general, I record my own songs, so I have to teach them the songs, either in the studio or outside of the studio. Generally, I teach them inside the studio, like a rehearsal or run-through.

 

And for that we would put it on just a one track or a two track. We would not waste time setting a 16-track machine, which costs money for the tape, and it is not worth it. So, we just run rehearsal on a smaller tape. And then we will try after we run through all the songs, and I have decided which ones they seem to be getting the best, after two days of that, say, I will start laying down the basic tracks for the first song. It usually take[s] the engineers an evening or half an evening to get the sound of the drums, then the sound of the bas[s], then the sound of the guitar, then the sound of the piano, and then a combination of all those people playing at once.

 

Bergen: You mean, to get it at the right level?

 

Lennon: The engineer has to know virtually what the drum is going to do, what it is going to sound like when it is hit, whether it is going to distort, so that there has to be an interruption and a sound check without having anything to do with the song, then rehearse the sound without me. The engineer will say drummer, drum, play your tom-tom, and he will play the tom-tom and adjust the mikes and move them around and play the tambourine or cymbals. They have to go through the whole thing before they even start the session.

 

Usually, I hire the studio, so I know I am going to be there for a month; I am usually there for ten days with the musicians, and so all the instruments are set up already, but even with that, after the run-through and the sound check still each night they will run through the sound of the instruments again, because people come in and move microphones, or the musicians forget and they kick the amplifiers or they change the volume.

 

Bergen: You mean then before you start the sessions?

 

Lennon: Yes, every night. That is why we get there early and I generally like to sing with the musicians. I may be in a booth that is supposed to be soundproof.

 

But I like to sing with the musicians, because then I get the rhythm; I like to do it by feel. Quite often I can’t use my vocal, but at least I know how it was.

 

Bergen: When you say you can’t use the vocal?

 

Lennon: I can’t use [it], sometimes it is no good, and I like to play an instrument myself. So, if I am lucky, I get a vocal. But even though I am singing, I have to be listening to the drummer and the bass player and all. I go around and say, “Has anybody got any secrets I didn’t hear?” Sometimes they [tell] you when it is too late, “Oh, yes, I played a wrong note here.” “Why didn’t you tell me? I didn’t hear it.” So, it is a matter, I have to produce it listening hard and do this for ten days usually. I usually put ten tracks on an album. I will tell you the reason if you want to know.

 

Bergen: Yes.

 

Lennon: In general, I put ten tracks because I have learned over the years — well, everybody knows this — after you get past 20 minutes the volume of a record has to go down, and it has something to do with the grooves getting thinner. I have had records over 20 minutes, but when it gets over 20 minutes, the volume goes down, and if you  average out ten songs it works out to about 20 minutes a side. So it usually takes about ten days to [p]lay the basic tracks down with the musicians, and then usually I send them home, and if I am going to overdub, like a saxophone or xylophone or flute or whatever, I want to put it on, then I will hire a new lot of people with those instruments.

 

Bergen: Talking about how long a record should be, what you mean is that there is just so much space on each [side] of a record for the sound that is going to be of a proper quality?

 

Lennon: Well, it is a matter of taste. I am not saying you [cannot] have more.

 

Bergen: I am talking about what you do.

 

Lennon: [It can] be done to 28 minutes, but I don’t like to do that, because I want the record loud, and if the groove is deeper you can get more bass drum, and it even goes to the selection of what to put nearest to the center of the record, because the nearer to the center of the record you get the quieter it has to be. The grooves change when you get to the middle. That is what I have learned from the engineers.

 

Bergen: You say you like the records loud?

 

Lennon: Yes, I like them to have depth.

 

Bergen: If you put your record on at a certain sound, say my stereo at home, it will play [at] a certain level, if you put on another record without adjusting the volume it may not be as loud?

 

Lennon: That is quite possible, yes.

 

Bergen: Now, you started talking about the next step after you finish the first basic tracks with the musicians. What is next?

 

Lennon: Every time I go in, I relearn the whole business. So, sitting here cold it is hard to remember what I do next. Probably I take those things home, play them on a cassette, listen to them, and decide what kind of instrumentation I want to put over the top of it.

 

Bergen: You mean what instruments in addition to the basic instruments that have been put on by you during these ten days?

 

Lennon: There is a chance that I have a few things I want to do with the tracks. In the meantime, I take them home and listen, or go to the studio and listen, and then decide the next phase, whether I am going to put in a rhythm section or something else.

 

This concludes the court testimony in Lennon, the Mobster, & the Lawyer, The Untold Story found on pp. 131-137.

 

Kessler: Jay, why was John’s testimony on this matter so crucial?

 

Bergen: Because John had to explain to the judge how careful he was in producing his albums – which was the exact opposite of what Levy did with the 7 1/2 inches per second unmixed and unfinished two-reel tape of the album John gave him just to listen to! Levy kept hounding John for a tape so he could hear the three songs owned by his publishing company that John had to have on his next album. Through John’s testimony, we had to make the judge understand that John had not given Levy the two tapes so that Levy could begin marketing them as the finished album.

 

Kessler: Jay, another section of the book that I, as a Lennon biographer, especially enjoyed was his testimony about what each song on the Rock ’n’ Roll LP meant to him. Can you tell what he said about “Bring It On Home To Me” “Bony Moronie,” and “Slippin’ and Slidin’.”

 

Bergen: John had reasons for each of the songs on the album and he testified that he was the only one who knew those reasons.  For example:

 

“Bring It On Home To Me” is one of my [all-time] favorite songs, and, in fact, I have been quoted as saying I wish I had written it, I love it that much, and I was glad to be able to do it.

 

“Bonie [sic] Maronie [sic]” was one of the very earliest songs, along with “Be-Bop-A-Lula,” and I remember [sing]ing it the only time my mother saw me perform before she died. So I was hot on “Bonie [sic] Maronie [sic].” That is one of the reasons. Also, I liked Larry Williams, who recorded it.

 

“S[l]ippin’ & Slidin’,” the B side of Long Tall Sally, which is the first Little Richard song I ever heard and was also recorded by Buddy Holly, so that covers a little of both. It was a song I knew. It was easier to do songs that I knew than trying to learn something from scratch, even if I was interested in the songs.

 

Kessler: Since the book came out, you’ve been on countless radio shows and podcasts, and you’ve been a sought-after speaker at numerous conventions and special events. You’ve been asked so many questions. If you don’t mind, please ask yourself a question that you haven’t been asked yet and that you want to answer. We’re all ears!

 

Bergen: I’ve told the story in the book about what happened when I stopped by the Record Plant Studios on my way home the evening of December 3, 1980, to say hello to a client, singer/songwriter Eve Moon, who was recording an album for Capitol Records there.

 

As I walked into the first-floor reception area on 44th Street just off Eighth Avenue, I was very surprised to see Yoko Ono sitting on a couch at the far end of the room. She immediately said to me: “What are you doing here?” I said “Hello Yoko” as I walked toward her.

 

I asked how John was since I assumed he was in one of the two studios on the first floor (Eve Moon was in a studio on the 10th floor). I knew that since Yoko was there, John had to be in one of those two studios right in back of me.

 

Later, on my way out I asked Yoko to give my best to John.

 

No one has ever asked me why didn’t I check each of those two studios and go in and say hello to John?

 

I could have easily done that. John would have been happy to see me, I know he would have been. Even though we hadn’t seen each other in four years that wouldn’t have made a difference to him or me. We had defeated Morris Levy together.

 

For a variety of reasons, I did not have a “voice” in my personal life. I was not like that in my professional life. I developed an aggressive style as a trial lawyer, not to the point that I was obnoxious. But I did not hesitate to speak up in situations where I had to.

 

That was not true many times in my personal life.

 

Five nights later, John Lennon was gunned down in front of the Dakota! And I had missed the opportunity to see him one last time.

 

I’ve replayed that night in my mind more than once over the decades since.

 

*****

As you can see, Lennon, the Mobster, & the Lawyer, The Untold Story is a remarkable book with facts and stories about John Lennon and his creative work that is extremely important and new! You can purchase the book at the Fest bookstore, on Amazon, or here.

 

And you can see him in action in this video episode of the “She Said She Said” podcast with Lanea Stagg of the Recipe Records Series and me:

 

Follow Jay on Instagram, Twitter, and Facebook

 

I also highly recommend the superb audiobook of Lennon, the Mobster, & the Lawyer, The Untold Story which is available on Audible. Scott McKinley, who does the professional voice work for this book, is amazing! His John Lennon is spot-on! McKinley keeps you so engaged that you can’t tear yourself away! I carried my phone around for days, listening to the audiobook. You will really enjoy it, trust me. Find it here.

Share

Rubber Soul Deep Dive Part 11: In My Life

Rubber Soul

Side Two, Track Three

“In My Life”

 

by Jude Southerland Kessler and Susan Ryan

 

Throughout 2021 and the first few months of 2022, the Fest for Beatles Fans blog has been exploring some of the finer points of The Beatles’ innovative 1965 LP, Rubber Soul. This month, a lifelong friend of the Fest, Susan Ryan, joins Jude Southerland Kessler, author of The John Lennon Series for an in-depth consideration of “In My Life.” Susan is the co-author of The Beatles Fab Four Cities, a new release thoroughly exploring the lives of The Beatles in Liverpool, Hamburg, London, and New York City. Susan is also an experienced New York City Beatles Tour guide and the owner of Fab Four Walking Tours. In her role as a noted public speaker, Susan has served as Emcee for Beatles at the Ridge and The Fest for Beatles Fans. Susan and Jude hope you enjoy this “fresh, new look” at Lennon’s masterpiece, “In My Life.”

 

What’s Standard:

 

Date Recorded:

18 October 1965 – The Beatles recorded the base track for the song: the two guitars, bass, and drums in three takes. On Take 3, John recorded his double-tracked vocals; Paul and George added backing vocals.

22 October 1965 – As per John’s request for “something baroque,” George Martin recorded an original piano solo for what John referred to as the song’s “middle eight.” Martin did this by playing half-speed on a normal piano and then speeding it up to create the sound of a harpsichord.

Studio: Both recordings took place in EMI Studios, Studio 2

 

Tech Team

Producer: George Martin

Engineer: Norman Smith (and according to some sources, Ron Pender)

Second Engineer: Ken Scott

Stats: Recorded in only four takes. “Best” take was Take 4. However, a plethora of overdubs completed the song in later sessions.

 

Instrumentation and Musicians:

 

John Lennon, the lyrical composer and, he states, the musical composer (Lennon stated to David Sheff that “All Paul added to the song was the middle eight and the harmony.”) sings lead vocals and guitar on his 1961 Fender Stratocaster electric. (Hammond, The Beatles Recording Reference Manual, Vol. 2, 73)

Paul McCartney, who also claims to be the musical composer, sings backing vocal and plays bass on his Rickenbacker 4001S. In his Beatles Recording Reference Manual, Vol. 2, Hammack points out that the Hofner 500/1 “was available, but probably unused.” (p. 73)

George Harrison sings backing vocals and plays lead guitar on his 1961 Fender Stratocaster electric, an exact match for John’s guitar. (Hammack, 73) Harrison plays the memorable and lovely introduction to this song. (Womack, Maximum Volume, The Life of Beatles Producer George Martin, 291)

Ringo Starr plays one of his Ludwig Oyster Black Pearl Super Classic drum sets (Hammack, 73 and Womack, 291)) and tambourine.

George Martin, plays the baroque “middle eight.” The complete story of this solo is covered in the “What’s Changed” section below.  (Womack, Maximum Volume, The Life of Beatles Producer, George Martin, 290-291.)

 

Sources: The Beatles, The Anthology, 194, Lewisohn, The Complete Beatles Chronicle, 202-203, Lewisohn, The Recording Sessions, 64-65, Womack, Long and Winding Roads: The Evolving Artistry of The Beatles, 122-124,Womack, Maximum Volume, The Life of Beatles Producer George Martin, 290-291 and 294, Womack, The Beatles Encyclopedia, Vol. 1, 462-464, Margotin and Guesdon, All the Songs, 302-303, Winn, Way Beyond Compare, 365 and 367, Hammack, The Beatles Recording Reference Manual, Vol. 2, 73-75, Turner, A Hard Day’s Write, 96-98, Spizer, The Beatles for Sale on Parlophone Records, 203, Coleman, Lennon, 299, MacDonald, Revolution in the Head: The Beatles’ Records and The Sixties, 136-137, Riley, Tell Me Why, 166-168,  Sheff, The Playboy Interviews, 149 and 151, Norman, John Lennon: The Life, 417-418, Miles, Paul McCartney, Many Years From Now, 276-278,  Babiuk, Beatles Gear, 169-170, and Spignesi and Lewis, 100 Best Beatles Songs, 33-34, and In My Life” by The Beatles. The in-depth story behind the songs of the Beatles. Recording History. Songwriting History. Song Structure and Style. (beatlesebooks.com)

 

What’s Changed:

 

  1. Overt autobiographical references set to a solemn melody –

 

Although many (if not most) of John’s songs prior to 1965 had been highly autobiographical, hits such as “I’ll Cry Instead,” “Tell Me Why,” and “Help!” had been accompanied by up-tempo music that made them seem happy, light-hearted, and upbeat. Even when John’s confessionals were backed by more somber music – as in the case of “If I Fell,” “I’m a Loser,” and “Not a Second Time” – the public perceived them merely as universal love songs, songs that could apply to anyone. Few guessed that rich, powerful, successful John Lennon was singing about his own wounds and fears.

 

“In My Life,” however, was at last quite completely candid about the joys and sorrows John had experienced. Spurred on by journalists John respected (including Maureen Cleave and Kenneth Alsop) who encouraged John to be more openly autobiographical and literary…and validated by the nature of Dylan’s popular “Freewheeling” LP, John summoned the courage to make “In My Life” an overtly personal release. He didn’t try to buoy it up with lively music or brush it off as nonsense or gobbledygook. John owned “In My Life” as “my first real major piece of work.” (Sheff, The Playboy Interviews, 151) Without excuse or camouflage, John laid bare his heart.

 

  1. Inclusion of a classical sounding (“Bach inversion”) piano solo –

 

John had originally envisioned a guitar solo as the instrumental solo for “In My Life.” He had even devised an intricate melody line for this part of the song. And in keeping with his wishes, a guitar solo was recorded. In his book, The Beatles Recording Reference Manual, Jerry Hammack states that this  might have been a dual solo, recorded by Harrison and Lennon. He writes: “…the solo appears to have been played by two different guitars. Harrison recalled that on October 22nd, he and John played a dual solo on ‘Nowhere Man,’ so the dual performance is a distinct possibility.” (p. 74) However, this solo just didn’t turn out to be as poignant or effective as John wanted it to sound, and he expressed those misgivings to George Martin.

 

In Kenneth Womack’s, Maximum Volume, The Life of Beatles Producer George Martin, we are told, “Lennon and Martin set about the business of recording a keyboard solo for ‘In My Life’…To Lennon’s mind, the solo was an essential feature – a highly melodic means of underscoring the song’s nostalgic power. With a Hammond studio organ on hand, Lennon opted for a classical sound in the manner of J.S. Bach. As The Beatles lacked the ability to score music…Martin sat beside Lennon in Studio 2. As Lennon sang the notes of a potential keyboard solo, Martin doubled the sounds on the grand piano with one hand while charting them in his notebook with the other. With the keyboard solo having been fully realized, Martin sat before the Hammond organ as Norman Smith cued up the existing first and second takes of ‘In My Life.’ But as he listened to the playback with Smith and The Beatles, Martin was decidedly underwhelmed [with the solo]…The organ sounded thin and lifeless in contrast with the song’s moving lyrics…”(p. 291)

 

So, the evolution of the lovely solo that John had composed did not end there. Womack goes on to say, “…on Friday, October 22…the band’s producer turned his attentions back to ‘In My Life.’ George was determined to unseat the Hammond organ solo that he had recorded…a stunning song and glorious song such as ‘In My Life’ deserved a much grander fate.”

 

To find out “the rest of the story” (as journalist Paul Harvey used to say), join Susan Ryan later in this blog for “A Fresh New Look” at the so-called “middle eight.”

 

  1. Highly-contested authorship and performance debates –

 

In the early years, The Beatles admittedly collaborated quite frequently on songs such as “She Loves You” and “From Me to You.” But as time went along and they lived further from one another, they began to write the body of a song singly, later altering that song with words or phrases deftly supplied by the other Beatles (such as John’s endorsement of “the movement you need is on your shoulder” in “Hey Jude”) or tweaking a composition here or there, with a little help from their friends. (Pete Shotton, for example, claimed to have contributed significantly to “I Am the Walrus”).

 

Of course, there were always some true collaborations such as “We Can Work It Out” and “A Day in the Life,” but these partnership productions were less prevalent post-1964 than they had been in the group’s ingenue years. Therefore, it was rare for a song’s authorship to be debated. “In My Life” is one of the few songs in contention. As Ken Womack points out in Long and Winding Roads, The Evolving Artistry of The Beatles, “It was certainly a song over which claiming authorship was a worthy goal indeed.” (p. 124)

 

More on this topic as we now join Beatles author Susan Ryan for…

 

A Fresh New Look:

 

Jude Southerland Kessler was thrilled to be able to interview Susan Ryan, for this deep-dive into John Lennon’s “In My Life.” When considering Lennon’s masterpiece – a song that Philip Norman has called “a superlative achievement” (John Lennon: The Life, 417) and Ken Womack has dubbed “John Lennon’s…exquisite composition.” (Maximum Volume, 290) Ryan has conducted tours of John Lennon’s New York City for many years as part of her company, Fab Four Walking Tours, and she is featured in the DVD “John Lennon’s New York City.” Kessler commented, “It would be difficult to find anyone who would know John Lennon better than Susan Ryan!” Here is their recent conversation:

 

Jude Southerland Kessler: Susan, congratulations on your new book co-written with David Bedford and Richard Porter, The Beatles Fab Four Cities! I’ve read it cover-to-cover and am really impressed with the depth of research and the wealth of Beatles history in its pages. I know you’re busy promoting it on podcasts, radio programs, social media, and so forth. So, thank you for taking time out to join us for this consideration of “In My Life!”

 

Susan Ryan: Thanks for asking me to help with this project, Jude! Rubber Soul is pretty much my favorite Beatles album, and being able to discuss “In My Life,” a song that has been one of my favorites forever, is a true privilege. I’m also glad to hear that you are enjoying The Beatles Fab Four Cities! Working on that book with David and Richard has also been a true joy, allowing us to share our personal passions as tour guides in our individual cities with all Beatle people!

 

Kessler: Well, let’s jump right into the heart of this beautiful Lennon ballad, “In My Life.” Susan, Ray Coleman in Lennon has this to say about John’s work on Rubber Soul: “For Lennon, particularly, this album marked a personal progression in his craft. Personal honesty and confession, which were to characterize his later work, were inherent. His songs are marked by a more poetic approach, and he was beginning to find his own voice.” How is Coleman’s observation well-illustrated in John’s poignant Side Two creation, “In My Life”?

 

Ryan: Certainly, by the time Rubber Soul and “In My Life” came out, John’s songwriting was maturing at rapid rate. His lyrics had already begun to exhibit a much more personal bent, less of the “I love you; you love me; she loves you” of earlier works. “In My Life” is absolutely an intensely personal reflection, a look back on simpler days and the people and things that were near and dear to John’s heart, and much more straightforward than previous “personal” songs that were covered up by cheerful pop melodies.

 

It is also interesting that the song came from someone so young – normally, a listener would not expect a man of just under 25 years of age to be able to craft such a heartfelt song about “looking back,” but John manages it, and you can hear his longing for times gone by, even if those times were not so very far in his past. Given everything that The Beatles had been through up to this point, becoming virtual prisoners of their fame, it’s not surprising that he would be wishing for the way things had been before they were swallowed up by fame and fortune.  It is also a definite step towards the sometimes brutal honesty that would characterize so many of John’s later songs, both with The Beatles and solo – songs like “Julia” on the White Album, where he sings about his mother, but also inserts his hope for the future with Yoko, or the songs on the John Lennon Plastic Ono Band album, nearly all of which are personal to the point of pain.

 

But it is with songs like “In My Life,” however, where the seeds for those songs and others begin to take root, and where his ability to craft beautiful, passionately personal songs that were destined to endure as pop standards began to emerge, although he could (and did) still write perfect bits of more commercial pop as well.  It’s no wonder this song means so much to so many people – even though they are John’s memories, there’s a universality to the lyrics, set to the lovely melody, that resonates with so many people and their lives.

 

Kessler: John wrote a third verse for “In My Life” that specifically mentioned places in Liverpool he so vividly recalled. However, he removed this bit because he said it felt too much like a “What I Did on Summer Vacation” essay. Share that verse with us, please, and if you don’t mind, please give us your reaction to the lyrics that were omitted.

 

Ryan: Here’s the omitted verse:

 

Penny Lane is one I’m missing
Up Church Road to the clock tower
In the circle of the Abbey
I have seen some happy hours

Past the tram sheds with no trams
On the 5 bus into town
Past the Dutch and St Columbus
To the Dockers Umbrella that they pulled down.[i]

 

Frankly, anyone who hears this song in its final form would have to agree with John; it reads like a travelogue or a “guide to Liverpool landmarks.” If it had been left in, it would have made what is a poignant, universally accessible song into something a little too personal and specific.  By omitting this verse, the song becomes something else – it takes on a life as a song any listener can relate to, no matter who they are or where they’re from. Everyone looks back at some point in their lives to “people and things that went before,” or remembers “friends and lovers….some (who) are dead and some (who) are living.” But not everyone is from Liverpool – and while the places mentioned specifically in those omitted lyrics may have meant something to John personally, or to the other Beatles or other Liverpudlians, they just would not have the same resonance to someone from New York or Los Angeles or any other place.

 

Removing this verse and leaving the form of the song as we know it was a brilliant move, whether originally intended or not, because even though the song remained intensely personal as far as John was concerned, it allowed other people to hear it and put themselves in the situation – the best way to create a “standard.”  There’s a reason this song is sung at weddings and funerals and other life-cycle events – it means something to everyone precisely because it is not time- or place-specific.

 

Kessler: Susan, John admitted that several influences led him to write this very autobiographical song in 1965. Tell us about those people who encouraged him to be more introspective.

 

Ryan: Prior to this song, although John had definitely written songs that were personal, he’d hidden that behind catchy pop melodies or found other ways to disguise the fact.  By the time he was working on this song, however, he’d done a couple of interviews with people who had asked him outright why he didn’t write more sophisticated, introspective songs. One of these was Maureen Cleve of the Evening Standard, who quite literally asked him why he “didn’t ever write songs with more than one syllable?” A second journalist, Kenneth Allsop, asked him why his songs didn’t contain the same kind of depth and meaning that his poetry and prose did when interviewing him after the publication of In His Own Write. All of this led John to begin thinking about doing something more serious and personal.

 

Add to this the release of Bob Dylan’s seminal work, “Freewheeling,” which was full of autobiographical songs, and John realized that if he wanted to do something more serious, he had to take that leap and be willing to share things of a more personal nature in his work.  For a man who most often carried his most intense personal feelings close to the vest, it was a huge step into the unknown, but as I mentioned above, it was also the seed that grew into so many other personal, autobiographical, confessional songs later in his life. The beautiful, tender melody also brought out a softer side of the man who had previously been perceived by many as the “rocker” of the group.

 

Kessler: All right, let’s address the elephant in the room. John was very proud of “In My Life.” In fact, he said it was “his first real major piece of work.” John emphatically said that Paul didn’t even see the song until the lyrics were finished and that “[Paul’s] contribution melodically was the harmony and the middle eight.” Paul, just as insistently, claims to have written the melody. This is the short version of this disagreement. Give us the details, please.

 

Ryan: Wow, Jude, you really want to open a can of worms here, don’t you?

 

There are numerous interviews where John states that he wrote the lyrics to the song first and the music later. This was frequently how he wrote – he’d start with an idea and then come up with the music. In the group’s early years, both John and Paul emphasized their “collaborative” songwriting, stressing the idea that every song they created was a totally collective endeavor by “Lennon and McCartney.”

 

However, in later years, both of their recollections about who wrote the actual melody began to diverge. In a 1980 interview, John said, “There was a period when I thought I didn’t write melodies; that Paul wrote those and I just wrote straight, shouting rock ‘n’ roll. But of course, when I think of some of my own songs – “In My Life” or some of the early stuff….I was writing melody with the best of them.”[ii]  In that same interview, he stated unequivocally that “Paul helped with the middle eight.”  But there was controversy as early as 1976-77 – when Paul was shown a list of Lennon-claimed songs by Hit Parader Magazine, the only one he disputed was “In My Life,” claiming that he’d written the whole melody from beginning to end, inspired by Smokey Robinson.

 

This claim to the authorship of the melody continued when Paul reiterated his statement in 1998, in Barry Miles’ biography of him, Many Years From Now, disputing previous statements by John insisting that his contributions to the song were minor. The fact that John died in 1980 and isn’t here to clarify these claims certainly makes it difficult to discern who was the real author of the music, but given that the song is so intensely personal, it seems logical that John wrote the majority of the song, with only small contributions from Paul in sections such as the middle eight/bridge.

 

Another fascinating thing is that the handwritten lyric sheet of the completed song, which is in John’s handwriting, has only one credit at the bottom – John Lennon! When songs were more collaborative, they’d sign them with both their names.

 

I did find an interesting tidbit that said that in 2018, Harvard University applied an artificial intelligence model to the music of the song, and determined, by their calculations, that there was a “.018% possibility of McCartney having written the whole of the music.”  They gave John an 81.1% certainty of having written the verses, and Paul a 43.6% certainty of writing the middle eight, which means that although the song did contain some obvious collaboration, the vast majority of it was written by John.  I’m inclined to agree.

 

Kessler: As Ian MacDonald points out, there really is no bridge in this song. However, there is an instrumental bridge, artfully created by George Martin. It wasn’t the first bridge composed for the song, however. Please tell us about both bridges and how, by strange coincidence, they “come together.”

 

Ryan: As Jude mentioned earlier in the “What’s New” segment of this blog, “In My Life” doesn’t really have a “middle eight” as people who are familiar with the songs of Lennon and McCartney would recognize. Instead, it has an instrumental bridge, played by George Martin on what is credited on the album cover as a harpsichord.  More on that later…

 

The song was recorded on October 18, 1965, during what was a relatively short studio session for The Beatles. By the end of the day, they had completed most of the song, but there was a section in the middle that was left out because John couldn’t decide what to put there.  Originally it was a guitar piece by George Harrison, but that didn’t hit the right note. George Martin left a gap in the song and John suggested that he supply one himself.  In a 1970 interview, John stated, “In ‘In My Life’ there’s an Elizabethan piano solo.  We’d do things like that.  We’d say, ‘play it like Bach,” or ‘could you put twelve bars in there?’”

 

With that rather vague instruction, George Martin was left to his own devices to create something to place into that section of the song. He worked on the section four days later, on October 22, 1965, when he wrote and recorded something he described as being “like a Bach inversion.” He recorded it first on a Hammond organ, but then did it again on the piano because he didn’t like the sound of the organ. It’s here where George Martin’s genius really shows through, because he used a technique called the “wind-up piano,” with the solo recorded at half speed and an octave lower. When played at normal speed, this made the piano sound like a harpsichord – an auditory trick that no one even realized at the time!  When he played it back for the Beatles when they came back to the studio, they loved it, and left the “harpsichord” solo that we all know and love as part of the song.

 

Kessler: Susan, amazing work! I’ve so enjoyed this. Thank you for taking time out of your preparations for the New Jersey Fest coming up on April 1-3 to be with us this month for the Fest Blog!

 

Ryan: Thanks again for this opportunity, Jude!  It’s been a true pleasure!  I’m looking forward to hearing what people think about our discussion of this special song, and to seeing folks at the New Jersey Fest in April!

 

For more information on Susan Ryan and The Beatles Fab Four Cities:

 

The Beatles Fab Four Cities by Ryan, Bedford, and Porter had been acclaimed as “a must for every Beatles fan” by Billy J. Kramer. To find out more about the book, HEAD HERE

 

To purchase The Beatles Fab Four Cities, HEAD HERE

 

To hear Susan Ryan, David Bedford and Richard Porter discuss The Beatles Fab Four Cities on the “She Said She Said” podcast, HEAD HERE

 

To discover more about Ryan’s Beatles Tours of New York City, HEAD HERE

 

To follow Susan Ryan on social media, HEAD HERE

 

[i] The original lyrics to “In My Life” may be viewed here

[ii] Sheff, David, The Playboy Interviews with John Lennon and Yoko Ono, p. 116-117

Share

Rubber Soul Deep Dive Part 9: Girl

Side Two, Track Two

“Ah, Girl!!!”

 

by Jude Southerland Kessler and Robert Rodriguez

 

Throughout 2021, the Fest for Beatles Fans blog has been exploring the intricacies of The Beatles’ transitional 1965 LP, Rubber Soul. This month, our Fest friend Robert Rodriguez, award-winning author of Revolver: How The Beatles Reimagined Rock’n’Roll and Solo in the 70s: John, Paul, George, and Ringo (1970-1980), as well as distinguished podcast host of “Something About The Beatles,” joins Jude Southerland Kessler, author of The John Lennon Series, for a fresh, new look at the exciting second track of Side Two of this remarkable LP.

 

What’s Standard:

 

Date Recorded: 11 November 1965

Time Recorded: 6 p.m. – 7 a.m. (Work was also done on “You Won’t See Me,” “Wait,” and “I’m Looking Through You”)

Studio: EMI Studios, Studio 2

 

Tech Team:

Producer: George Martin

Engineer: Norman Smith

Second Engineer: Some sources say Mike Stone. Some say Ken Scott.

Stats: Recorded in only two takes. “Best” take was Take 2. However, three superimpositions were needed to complete the song. One for Lennon’s lead, one for backing vocals by Paul and George, and the last for George’s concluding solo.

 

Instrumentation and Musicians:

John Lennon, the composer, sings lead vocal and plays his 1964 Gibson J-160E acoustic guitar

Paul McCartney sings backing vocals and plays bass on his 1964 Rickenbacker 4001S bass

George Harrison sings backing vocals and plays lead in superimposition #3 on his 12-string Framus Hootenanny 5/024

Ringo Starr plays one of his Ludwig Oyster Black Pearl Super Classic drum sets in studio.

Thanks to Jerry Hammack and his superb The Beatles Recording Reference Manual, Vol. 2, for this information.

 

Sources: Lewisohn, The Complete Beatles Chronicle, 205-206, Lewisohn, The Recording Sessions, 68, Womack, Long and Winding Roads: The Emerging Artistry of The Beatles, 121-122, Margotin and Guesdon, All the Songs, 298-299, Winn, Way Beyond Compare, 375-376, Hammack, The Beatles Recording Reference Manual, Vol. 2, 96-97, Turner, A Hard Day’s Write, 95, Riley, Tell Me Why, 164-165, Spizer, The Beatles for Sale on Parlophone Records, 202, Everett, The Beatles as Musicians: The Quarry Men to Rubber Soul, 310-311, Miles, Paul McCartney: Many Years From Now, 119-120,  and MacDonald, The Beatles: Revolution in the Head, 145.

 

What’s Changed:

 

  1. The introduction of Viennese mandolin and Greek bouzouki sounds as experimentation in The Beatles’ catalogue soars – Girl” sounded unlike any other Beatles song that fans had ever encountered. John’s high-capo-ed guitar was exotic and was described by MacDonald in The Beatles: Revolution in the Head as very much like the Viennese mandolins that John must have heard on Hamburg radio stations in the first few visits to the German port city. (p. 145) That backing, coupled with George’s unique concluding solo, edged “Girl” as far from the traditional Mersey Beat sound as any Beatles creation had ever dared…thus far.

 

George Harrison’s striking concluding lead left experts guessing about its creation for years. Early accounts of the 11 November recording session had Harrison playing a Greek instrument, the bouzouki. Even George Martin, at one point, said that he remembered Harrison performing the song’s concluding solo on that instrument. (Spizer, 202) Later, however, Paul McCartney just as adamantly averred that he recalled Harrison using his guitar with the capo placed very high on the neck to produce the unusual and tinny bouzouki sound. Barry Miles quotes Paul as stating, “We did it on acoustic guitars, not bouzoukis.” (Paul McCartney: Many Years From Now, 119-120) Whatever the methodology, the effect was (and is) singular and enchanting.

 

As Kenneth Womack observed in Long and Winding Roads: The Emerging Artistry of The Beatles, “Simulating a bouzouki-like sound on his Hootenanny, George play[ed] an intricate Greek melody that afford[ed] the track…an Old World resonance.” (p. 122) Rubber Soul had already introduced the sound of the sitar in “Norwegian Wood.” Now, the tone and cadence of another little-known instrument was introduced to listeners by the adventurous Beatles. As the boys moved decidedly away from the “pop” sound that was their staple as late as early 1965, the inclusion of innovative, world music was rapidly becoming John, Paul, George, and Ringo’s “new normal.” (See the chart entitled “Population of The Beatles Early and Experimental Style Features” in Dr. Walter Everett’s The Beatles as Musicians, The Quarry Men to Rubber Soul, p. 311. Also, please read Dr. Everett’s list of instruments that were in the studio during the Rubber Soul sessions on p. 310. The leap into experimentation is dramatic with the advent of Rubber Soul and enhanced with Revolver).

 

  1. A penchant toward more acoustic flavors on this LP The original recording of “Girl” included George Harrison performing on an electric guitar with fuzz distortion. This rendition was removed as the acoustic sound became Lennon’s preferred medium. With extraordinary songs such as “Michelle,” “Norwegian Wood,” “Nowhere Man,” and “In My Life” populating this LP, The Beatles begin to venture away from the merry “tea-cup rattling” of “She Loves You” and “I Want To Hold Your Hand.” In 1966, Revolver would take them even further from the sounds of the early 60s. Rubber Soul gives us “an early clue to the new direction.”

 

  1. A tad of naughtiness in a song of desireJohn Lennon’s very intimate inhalation (created, George Martin explained, by a special compressor used on Lennon’s voice) wasn’t the only bit of sexy innuendo in this second track on Side Two. Paul and George covertly (they thought) sang “tit-tit-tit-tit” to John’s passionate sigh of “Ah, Girrrrrl!” When George Martin questioned them about the phrase, so the story goes, they claimed to be singing “dit-dit-dit,” but Martin stated that he knew what they were saying. He shrugged and let it pass.

 

Now, for a “fresh new look” at “Girl,” we turn to author Robert Rodriguez, who invented the Fab Four FAQ series, recently hosted the very successful online conference Fab4ConJam, served as “Featured Author” at Beatles at the Ridge, and has been a beloved Special Guest Speaker at The Fest for Beatles Fans for years. Jude Southerland Kessler recently sat down with Rodriguez to discuss Lennon’s innovative and personal composition, “Girl.”

 

Jude Southerland Kessler: Robert, it’s a joy to get to work with the remarkable author who opened my eyes to the real significance and importance of Revolver via your incredible book Revolver: How The Beatles Reimagined Rock’n’Roll. That book completely changed my whole perspective on the LP…for the better. It’s a book everyone should read!

 

But our focus today is on Revolver’s predecessor, Rubber Soul, and specifically on the track, “Girl.” So let me ask you, early on, many listeners assumed that the “sizzle-sound” following John’s intonation of the word, “Girl!” was the sound of a cymbal. Of course, now we know it’s the sound of John’s audible inhale. Tell our readers, if you would, what Norman Smith did to create that vocal effect: the sound of ecstasy.

 

Robert Rodriguez: For the second time during the production of Rubber Soul, The Beatles requested an unusual manipulation of the EQ to distort the sound; again – as they had with the guitars on “Nowhere Man” – boost the treble up high, creating a sound from John’s intake of air that nearly matched the sound of Ringo’s brushed cymbal work. It is entirely likely that they were simply looking for a cool new sound to add to the track to give it an air of distinction and weren’t going for a particular evocation. However, given that this was the “pot” album, as compared to Revolver, the “acid” album, it would be naive to ignore the possibility of the effect as emulating taking a hit on a joint. The Beatles loved to sneak little inside jokes into their recordings, and in the case of “Girl,” this naughty touch alongside the backing vocal part on the bridge would’ve doubled their (guilty) pleasure.

 

Kessler: “Girl” is a quite sophisticated song, musically. Naturally, the usual intricate Beatles harmonies are in play, but so much more is at work. Tel us about some of the instruments that are used to create an exotic sound.

 

Rodriguez: As was often the case throughout the Rubber Soul sessions, The Beatles and their producer – though squeezed for time to write and record the album by deadline – would experiment with ideas to broaden their sonic palette. To their credit, simply having an idea didn’t justify using it; it had to be a good idea to make the final cut, and The Beatles’ recordings are evidence enough of the superb quality control standards they adhered to. Perhaps the ultimate example of this is “12-Bar Original” – a recording that they took seriously enough to spend precious studio time on, rehearsing and tracking a pair of takes before abandoning the experiment as an unremarkable failure.

“Girl” provides a further example of this thinking, in that we now know that though the final released performance features acoustic instrumentation (excepting Paul’s bass), a fuzz-distorted Harrison electric was tried out, but ultimately rejected. (A similar idea was tried out four years later for “Here Comes The Sun” and thankfully shelved). Maybe it was because they came up with a better idea: a sound that has been described by writers who should know better as a Greek bouzouki — an exotic stringed instrument not typically heard much on pop records.

 

But while the origins of the sound may be Greek-inspired (Paul has said as much), it was actually performed by George on his Framus Hootenanny 12-string guitar. The attack of his picking the strings is sharper than usual, giving a staccato effect (with no ringing out), suggesting an austere sonic tone that matches the lyric describing the title character’s early Christianity teachings: that heaven was for those who suffered deprivation. It’s a brilliant touch that we as listeners can come up with any number of creative suggestions for what the intent behind it was, when – per Occam’s Razor – it was probably nothing more profound than a pleasing sound that was fresh at the time.

 

Kessler: Cynthia Lennon once said that this song was about her. In April 1995’s Q magazine, she said, “The only song that I thought might be something to do with me was ‘Girl,’ but of course John isn’t here to say anymore.” However, when asked about “Girl” during his life, John claimed that the song was about an ideal girl (although this girl is far from ideal in many ways), a girl who turned out to be Yoko. Once, he stated that the description of the girl in the bridge referred to the Christian church. What’s your take on the identity of this “Girl”?

 

Rodriguez: Honestly, I find it difficult to understand why any woman would choose to identify with the character described in this song: she’s punishing and apparently warped by early years of religious education. But someone better qualified in psychoanalysis than I can probably provide a more satisfactory answer as to why John identified the character in this song as a “dream girl,” though technically nightmares are dreams, too. As described, the decision to keep this woman around (though he characterizes the choice as hers: “the girl who came to stay”) comes with ambiguity: he’s clear-headed enough to recognize his desire for her as something punitive (“…makes you sorry”), yet he is without regrets. That alone suggests a desire to be punished, which aligns nicely with her own worldview, shaped by the church, that states “pain will lead to pleasure.” Thus, John is describing a situation where he accepts day-to-day unhappiness and being made to feel a fool by her (and in front of his friends, no less) by a woman incapable of graciously accepting a compliment, all for the sake of a future reward, in this world or the next. John’s describing the “girl” he sings about as someone who “turned out to be Yoko” may be more revealing than he intended; he might inadvertently be indicating difficulties in a seemingly faultless relationship.

 

Kessler: Margotin and Guesdon claim that John waited 15 years to write the sequel to “Girl,” and that song was “Woman.” Robert, do you agree or disagree with this assessment and why?

 

Rodriguez: For something to be a “sequel,” it has to acknowledge its antecedent and either build upon it or deviate from it, does it not? I think Lennon was trying to come up with a compelling connection between the two songs, but I don’t hear it. Between the two, I hear “Girl” as the much more compelling composition: in addition to everything else it offers as a performance and as a recording, the lyrical ambivalence is a marvel to behold. There is much to unpack in its mixed signals – someone unpleasant and difficult as an ideal – and yet remaining the object of profound desire.

 

“Woman,” in contrast, is – to my ears anyway – much more facile and shallow, while seemingly striving for the perception of depth. (The opening remark about the other half of the sky sounds profound, without actually saying much of anything). The narrator in “Woman” gushes on and on about the debt of gratitude owed (“…for showing me the meaning of success” – was this a comment on Yoko’s financial acumen, handling their business affairs?) while lamenting his own ingratitude and thoughtlessness. The song takes on the air of a religious hymn, with offers of praise and loads of “I’m not worthy.” As such, it’s hard for me personally to enjoy to any great depth, or to see as anything more weighty than his myriad other mea culpa songs (“Jealous Guy,” “Aisumasen,” “Forgive Me (My Little Flower Princess),” etc).

 

By the end of his life, in the promotion of Double Fantasy, John projected an air of having figured life out: his relationship with Yoko as being some kind of summit of both ideal romantic love and a wholly-encompassing creative partnership. To me, it rings hollow, especially when contrasted with his former songwriting partner, who made the same point about his own life partner without loudly banging on about it; instead, providing an example that was as interactive with the world as John and Yoko’s was sealed off from it. Contrast this with the 25-year-old Beatle who, throughout Rubber Soul, describes deep social connections (“In My Life,” “The Word”) and his place in society (“Nowhere Man”), as well as a series of women who are apparently self-sufficient (“Girl,” “Norwegian Wood”) that he connects with. Personally, I know which artist I find more interesting.

 

To learn more about Robert Rodriguez, HEAD HERE

To follow Robert on Facebook, HEAD HERE

To hear Robert’s podcast, “Something About The Beatles,” HEAD HERE

Share

December 8th — 35 years on

From Fest Founder and Director Mark Lapidos:

 

Time is a concept. It really doesn’t exist. You can’t touch it, feel it, breathe it. It is basically a demarcation line of events in a lifetime.

 

Well, this event was a life-changer for so many of us. None of us who were around will ever forget the moment we heard. It was the worst moment in my life. Perhaps John figured out how to stop time, because that moment wasn’t 35 years ago. It just can’t be. Maybe it was last year or two years ago.

 

Time doesn’t work so well when dealing with events like this one. “Life is very short and there’s no time.” There, he said it in song — there is no time! 

 

And yet here we are, still wondering how the world would be different had John lived. His voice was singular. I know in my heart he would have made a big difference (plus given us a lost wealth of music).

 

We are left with only those ideas in our brains of what would be different. We know we can not alter the past, but the past is a function of time, which is a concept. John lives in all of our hearts and that will never change. I miss him.

 

All you need is love…

Share

Alternate John Lennon/Plastic Ono Band

44 years ago today, John Lennon/Plastic Ono Band was released.
 
The album, which was John’s first legit solo venture, was powerful, raw, honest, and emotional, and is listed at #22 on the Rolling Stone Top 500 Albums of All-Time list.
 
Recently, we put together a live version of Rubber Soul. For John Lennon/Plastic Ono Band, we’ve put together a version made up of alternate studio takes, acoustic takes, and demos…
 
Mother (alternate studio version):
 

 
Hold On (take 24, with false starts):
 

 
I Found Out (alternate studio version):
 

 
Working Class Hero (demo):
 

 
Isolation (alternate studio version):
 

 
Remember (outtake from studio sessions):
 

 
Love (John Lennon Anthology version):
 

 
Well Well Well (acoustic demo):
 

 
Look At Me (acoustic version):
 

 
God (alternate studio version):
 

 
My Mummy’s Dead (acoustic demo):
 

Share