Yeah this is all great, we're admiring Lennon because he's pro-peace (Wow what a statement!).

 

So who here has done anything to represent his mentality today?

I didn't kill anyone today. Yay peace!

Lennon was a moron, who could write great songs.

 

As far as political issues, he never made any stance.

Lennon was a moron, who could write great songs.

 

As far as political issues, he never made any stance.

 

How was he a moron?

 

I'm just interested to know.

^ I don't know what kind of stance you would want him to take. When I think of John Lennon, I associate him very strongly with peace activism, and I think his songs provided a backdrop to all who felt this way in a time of war. I think that music is supposed to get people to think and feel a certain way, which can often act at as catalyst for monumental political and social change. No, I don't think Lennon could probably perform the high level policy analysis or program evaluation needed to solve public problems, but I don't really hold a musician to that standard.

How was he a moron?

 

I'm just interested to know.

 

Anyone who spends all of their time focussing on politics and peace should eventually get some grasp about how it all works. Politics isn't that complicated, it's pretty straightforward to get an opinion on some basic level.

 

He never did, he never showed any sort of clue. And that's what I kinda of despise about this celebration, and about him as a person, what good is anyone doing by just sitting around going "Peace is Good!! :) War Bad!! :(" and not actually fucking doing anything. Journalists did often ask him "So how do we achieve peace?" and he'd give some random obscure answer like "We achieve it in our brains". Wooooah :wideeyed:

 

Basically, I think anyone who believes in John Lennons methods of creating a peaceful world care more about looking like gentle souls then actually changing anything, and we all waste a big amount of time even thinking about them.

 

Lennon never gave a shit about his first son or first wife, he was known for being a total bastard as a child and through his teenage years around Liverpool (Of course he'd never mention this, in his own eyes he was always Ghandi) and used peace and protest to mask what a total bastard he was. Now the sadly ironic thing is that he's recognised as an icon for peace on earth, makes me a bit sick.

^ I agree that there is no way John Lennon could adequately articulate a plan of action toward making any type of significant change. That's not really an easy thing to do. Even people who are highly trained in politics understand that you are often dealing with competing goals and viewpoints. I actually think being a skilled politician is very difficult.

 

Again, I think he should be credited with providing songs that got people to think about a kinder, gentler world during an era of war. I don't really have higher expectations of him. Celebrations and memorials are always going to be overblown because he is a Beatle.

^ I don't know what kind of stance you would want him to take. When I think of John Lennon, I associate him very strongly with peace activism, and I think his songs provided a backdrop to all who felt this way in a time of war. I think that music is supposed to get people to think and feel a certain way, which can often act at as catalyst for monumental political and social change. No, I don't think Lennon could probably perform the high level policy analysis or program evaluation needed to solve public problems, but I don't really hold a musician to that standard.

I guess I would have to agree with this. I think that he tried to open up peoples minds and make people more aware of the world around him

 

Anyone who spends all of their time focussing on politics and peace should eventually get some grasp about how it all works. Politics isn't that complicated, it's pretty straightforward to get an opinion on some basic level.

 

He never did, he never showed any sort of clue. And that's what I kinda of despise about this celebration, and about him as a person, what good is anyone doing by just sitting around going "Peace is Good!! :) War Bad!! :(" and not actually fucking doing anything. Journalists did often ask him "So how do we achieve peace?" and he'd give some random obscure answer like "We achieve it in our brains". Wooooah :wideeyed:

 

Basically, I think anyone who believes in John Lennons methods of creating a peaceful world care more about looking like gentle souls then actually changing anything, and we all waste a big amount of time even thinking about them.

 

Lennon never gave a shit about his first son or first wife, he was known for being a total bastard as a child and through his teenage years around Liverpool (Of course he'd never mention this, in his own eyes he was always Ghandi) and used peace and protest to mask what a total bastard he was. Now the sadly ironic thing is that he's recognised as an icon for peace on earth, makes me a bit sick.

 

I guess I could see where your coming from. I think he really tried to more than anything open peoples minds up, and not always buy into the system and take it for what it's worth but hopefully motivate people to change. Also with the US government constantly on his back I think it also made things a bit more difficult. But I think he tried to use his music to get people to think different and think about love, peace, equality, etc.

 

 

Now was he a fully nice person throughout his life? No... not at all. I mean like you mentioned he didn't really care about his first wife or his son much at all. I know it's not right but it was most likely all the fame of the Beatles that got to his head and he felt he didn't have to worry about anyone else, is it right? No... but at his age you can sort of understand why he may have done what he did. Also his relationships with people often would go through a lot of turmoil whether it be Paul, or Yoko too. So I understand that he wasn't perfect... then again who really is? I mean I'm sure that many musicians can be just as shitty to their family (Bing Crosby, Frank Sinatra), but does it really stop people from loving them or their music? Also I feel that before Lennon died he was trying to redeem and make up for all the mistakes he made. I mean he started to form a relationship with his first son. I think by having a child with Yoko and becoming a "househusband" perhaps brought him to reality and made him realize how it's the people you are with that matters most. So I think towards the end of his life he tried to be kinder and at least from interviews he seemed like he was a lot happier.

 

I do see what you are saying and I do agree with it but I think that Lennon was important because he really tried to open peoples minds with his music and I think also paved the way for other musicians to become more political (Bono, Eddie Vedder, etc)

 

 

 

Celebrations and memorials are always going to be overblown because he is a Beatle.

 

I agree definitely... and also because he was murdered too.

Very well put Mike, I do realise that I go very harsh on him more because things are overblown instead of actually focussing on what he did as a human, and at the end of the day, I can see it your way, he didn't do much wrong.

 

I guess what I'm really hating on is the people who genuinely seem to believe that he was a major advocate for peace, when he's never done anything of notoriety, he's not Martin Luther King, just celebrate him as a great musician and leave it at that.

 

I'm pretty much against the entire idea of musicians/entertainment attempting to change the world, so paving the way for Vedder/Bono only makes things worse. They may raise millions here and there, but on the grand scale, all they do is alienate people of why we actually raise money for charity. You're supposed to do it out of genuine concern for the issue, not because Bob Geldof writes good songs and seems like a nice bloke, and then tells you "Give us your fucking money!", use your own fucking money mate.

 

I'll explain further what I mean about alienation. Since Geldof's LiveAid shit, giving money to 'them africans' has become a vague issue, like "Help them sort out their aids of whatever". People don't know or want to know what they're actually donating to, it's just some general shit in Africa. He may have raised money for it but by making it this jumped up issue the general population won't give money on a regular basis because it's been removed from what we perceive as a reality.

 

These ideas can raise money in the short term, and totally fuck society's opinions in the long term. If we had gradually realised what's happening in Africa and why, we'd be genuinely concerned, instead we don't care, so we give money in small spurts when some rich rockstar asks for it.

 

Oh yeah back on topic. Lennon's not quite as bad as what I wrote earlier, I'll admit.

^ I agree that it's disgusting how some people can not make up their minds on their own, and they use the words of a celebrity, of all people, to form their world views.

 

That said, I do like it when musicians talk about political or social issues. In other words, I wouldn't want music to be apolitical. However, I do quickly grow tired of musicians being all "preachy." For example, I love Bruce Springsteen, and his music has moved me tremendously, but I know during every show I am going to have to listen to him spout off about his political views. I wish he wouldn't do it, but I love the guy's music, so I'm forced to endure it.

 

I think these people have too much time on their hands and not enough immediate problems to solve. I spend much of my day simply worrying about how I am going to successfully make it to the next.

^^you make a good point and I've always wondered the same thing a lot of time. I understand that most times a lot of people try to get people involved but if these musicians already have the money and are so passionate then why don't they do it themselves. I mean people like Bono are so rich already that by not taking any money from going on a single tour wouldn't really hurt them and could help a bunch of people. I still do think what they do is good and like Lennon they try to at least get people more aware about the world around them because honestly with all that the news covers in terms of politics, and world events (mostly europe/the middle east), a lot of these things would go unnoticed.

 

 

 

Back to Lennon I'm also thinking that perhaps why he treated his family was how he was brought up which was pretty terrible/tragic. I mean he was abandoned by both his parents, he had to live with his very strict aunt, his mother came back and Lennon started to form a very strong relationship with her and then she was killed by a car hitting her. Not an excuse but perhaps some sort of insight as to why he was cynical towards the world and others at time.

I also think it's important to note that John Lennon did not start out signing about political issues. Please, Please Me is an album full of "puppy love songs," which is one of the reasons I adore that album. Artists are going to evolve and take on a number of issues. As much as I love the early Beatles, I would not be much of a fan if every song was like "I Want to Hold Your Hand."

I've been there a few times (it's not too far from me).

 

But I took this one picture which I really like

Ooh I like your picture!

Gosh you're so lucky to live there :bomb:

I agree definitely... and also because he was murdered too.

 

I was thinking about how odd it is that someone who was such a peace activist would die in such a violent manner. There is an undeniable level of intrigue surrounding those circumstances. The same thing is true of Martin Luther King Jr. It's very odd.

I LOVE YOU LENNON <3

 

John Lennon to appear on new £5 coin

 

The late Beatle won a Royal Mint public vote with 92%

 

John Lennon is set to appear on a new commemorative £5 coin.

 

The late Beatle won the Royal Mint's public vote to be immortalised on a limited edition coin, as part of their 'Great Briton' series.

 

Winning with 92% of the vote, Lennon beat the likes of Jane Austin, John Logie Baird and Walter Raleigh, reports BBC News.

 

"It's entirely fitting that John Lennon has been chosen by the public in what would have been his 70th year," Dave Knight, director of commemorative coins at Royal Mint said. "The massive proportion of the vote he received shows clearly just how much his untimely death still resonates with the nation."

 

Only 5,000 coins have been issued, plus a one-off 24-carat gold version of the coin, which will be given to John Lennon's estate.

 

The price of the coin is £44.99. For more information visit RoyalMint.com

 

As previously reported, fans from around the world paid respect to John Lennon on what would have been his 70th birthday on October 9. A number of tribute concerts took place and even a memorial statue was unveiled in Liverpool.

 

http://www.nme.com/news/john-lennon/53639

Jane Austin lulz.

hardly surprising he won!