The Shrine

Saw this Onion Article the other day: Man Always Gets Little Rush Out Of Telling People John Lennon Beat Wife and I was like, nah, really? So I did a little research and found this article (very down on Lennon): Top 10 Unpleasant Facts About John Lennon. To summarize:

• Wife-beater
• Emotionally Abused His Son
• Pathological Liar
• Broke Up the Beatles
• Politically Clueless
• Talentless
• Follower Not a Leader
• Mindless Conformist
• Desperate for Money and Fame
• Hypocrite

Now several of these could be said of *most* people but the others are pretty damning.

Any article that calls Lennon a talentless mindless conformist who broke up the Beatles is not one I would trust for accuracy.


As far as talent goes, there's no question, he was an incredible talent bringing some of the most unique and progressive songs to ever be successful in the history of modern music. Portions of Lennon's work ultimately became the most influential music of the twentieth century.

Mindless Conformist? He was anti-conformist at every turn. The guy was perhaps the biggest counter-culture icon this side of Jesus; he is the sole reason why such a gigantic wave alternative music culture emerged in the wake of the Beatles. Politically clueless? Because he was pro-peace? Against the Vietnam War? Freedom of consciousness? I'm guessing the author is a Conservative is actually politically clueless

The Beatles broke up because they were tired of each other, it was a long time coming and dated back to the end of the touring era, years before the break-up. While it's true that John Lennon was probably the chief contributor to the jump to a studio only band, that is when their most brilliant work was released. They might have broken up earlier, or fizzled out if it weren't for John.
As for the actual break-up: it wasn't Yoko Ono or anything like that. It was inevitable. George, John, and Paul were not getting along. Paul and John clashed creatively - and sometimes it worked beautifully like a Day in the Life, but for the most part the Beatles were all beginning to divide into a glorified collection of solo artists. McCartney's style had shifted towards pop-rock, while Lennon was much more interested in experimental genres and genre fusion.
If there was a single event that shattered the band, it was when McCartney left and sued the three remaining members of the band for continuing to produce Beatles music. So, if you really need someone to blame for breaking apart this collection of solo artists, it's Paul McCartney's fault.

ManaMan wrote: To summarize:

• Talentless

A rebuttal:



Celebrities are people.

A lot of them are really terrible people.

Lennon was as human as anyone else, but the rush to call him "talentless" because he had personal failings doesn't hold water.

That's just crab-bucket syndrome.

Whatever else one may think of the man, he earned his musical chops and wrote music that changed our world forever.

Calling J. Lennon talentless is like calling A. Einstein stupid.

A good reimagined cover of the Ronettes

Ive stayed out up till now but...Lennon was pretty fucking talented. Even if you argue early Beatles music was "stolen" or derivative, a lot is amazing and Lennons solo work is full of timeless classics. He was also probably an asshole (from what I have seen in interviews...