McLennon Monday: How John Lennon Will Hold A Mic For You

Do you think John and Paul ever saw each other again after ‘76? Or even talked on the phone? I know Paul says they did but every so often doubt creeps in and I start wondering if Paul isn’t just making up stories to convince himself that they were still friends. Your thoughts?

Thank you for the ask! It made me look back at John's last interviews and some of Paul's earliest after the murder. I don't think Paul made up the phone calls, because he has been consistent in talking about them since the early 80s. In his interviews shortly after John's death he talks about it quite detailed and I don't think he would make something like this up. For other speculations about their last meeting I found this great blogspot post: https://mccartnet.blogspot.com/2012/04/when-was-lennon-and-mccartneys-last.html

What I do wonder is, if they maybe saw each other for the last time in 1978. John mentions in 1980 he thinks that the "turning Paul away incident" was like 2 years ago and Geoffrey Giuliano claims that John, Yoko, Paul and Linda went to see the movie "Pretty Baby" together, which was released in April 1978. (The lost Lennon diaries) - but people say he's not a reliable source... But maybe John didn't turn Paul away the day after the SNL evening (24th of April 1976), but after the movie night? But then again Sean was already a toddler in 1978...

WELL if somebody did more research on this, I would love to know, but I'll end it here, because I think in the end there won't be a really satisfying answer. And maybe the important part is that the love they had for each other never went away either way.

(Newsweek, 1982, by Jim Miller)  Q: "Did you see much of him before he died?"

PAUL: "I saw him quite a bit. Always, the problem was talking business. Whenever we got into business, we got into an argument. It wasn't a pleasant framework for a relationship. When Sean (John and Yoko's son) was first born, I visited him a few times at the Dakota (Lennon's apartment house in New York). And then it had gone snotty. I used to turn up without calling him. One time, he got annoyed with me. He said, 'Well, look, man... Why do you just keep turning up here and surprise us? Why don't you just call first?' And I took that the wrong way. After that, I don't think I did see him. I phoned a few times. As long as we were talking about family, about life, it was good. The last time I spoke to him, I got off the phone and it felt like old friends again. I've talked to Yoko since then, and she's said to me, 'You know, he really was quite fond of you.' I think we were pretty close. But, sometimes, with brothers, you argue. They can be the most intense arguments, too."

(Playboy, 1984, by Joan Goodman) PLAYBOY: "Do you remember your last conversation with John?"

PAUL: "Yes. That is a nice thing, a consoling factor for me, because I do feel it was sad that we never actually sat down and straightened our differences out. But fortunately for me, the last phone conversation I ever had with him was really great, and we didn't have any kind of blowup. It could have easily been one of the other phone calls, when we blew up at each other and slammed the phone down."

PLAYBOY: "Do you remember what you talked about?"

PAUL: "It was just a very happy conversation about his family, my family. Enjoying his life very much; Sean was a very big part of it. And thinking about getting on with his career. I remember he said, 'Oh, God, I'm like Aunt Mimi, padding round here in me dressing gown' ...robe, as he called it, cuz he was picking up the American vernacular... 'feeding the cats in me robe and cooking and putting a cup of tea on. This housewife wants a career!' It was that time for him. He was about to launch Double Fantasy."

(Playboy, September 1980, by David Sheff) PLAYBOY: "Aside from the millions you've been offered for a reunion concert, how did you feel about producer Lorne Michaels' generous offer of $3200 for appearing together on 'Saturday Night Live' a few years ago?"

LENNON: "Oh, yeah. Paul and I were together watching that show. He was visiting us at our place in the Dakota. We were watching it and almost went down to the studio, just as a gag. We nearly got into a cab, but we were actually too tired."

PLAYBOY: "How did you and Paul happen to be watching TV together?"

LENNON: "That was a period when Paul just kept turning up at our door with a guitar. I would let him in, but finally I said to him, 'Please call before you come over. It's not 1956 and turning up at the door isn't the same anymore. You know, just give me a ring.' He was upset by that, but I didn't mean it badly. I just meant that I was taking care of a baby all day and some guy turns up at the door... But, anyway, back on that night, he and Linda walked in and he and I were just sitting there, watching the show, and we went, 'Ha-ha, wouldn't it be funny if we went down?' but we didn't."

PLAYBOY: "Was that the last time you saw Paul?"

LENNON: "Yes, but I didn't mean it like that." (Newsweek, 29th of September 1980, by Barbara Graustark) Q: "Paul McCartney's theory is that you became a recluse because you'd done everything - but be yourself."

JOHN: "What the hell does that mean? Paul didn't know what I was doing - he was as curious as everyone else. It's ten years since I really communicated with him. I know as much about him as he does about me, which is zilch. About two years ago, he turned up at the door. I said, 'Look, do you mind ringin' first? I've just had a hard day with the baby. I'm worn out and you're walkin' in with a damn guitar!"

January 26th, 1969: Paul arrives at the studio accompanied by Linda and Heather just as George and Ringo are working out the melody for ‘Octopus’s Garden’ on the piano. John, who has been playing around on drums, chimes in none too discreetly with a question he’s been eager to ask Paul.

JOHN: Hey! Did you dream about me last night? PAUL: [long pause] I can’t remember. JOHN: Very strong dream. We both dreamt about it. It was amazing! Different dreams, you know, but I thought you must’ve been there. [inaudible] I was touching you. [inaudible] PAUL: Nothing to worry about, though? JOHN: Nothing to worry about, no.

do you have any theories about the india trip ?? personally, im not sure what to think about it, but i’d love to hear your thoughts !!

(Sorry its taken me so long to answer this - it just got lost in my drafts cause im an idiot lmao 🤦‍♀️)

Im not entirely certain on what I believe happened in India, if in fact anything did happen at all - but more on that later! I guess though that these are the main theories (though if you have any differing opinions/theories, feel free to discuss them!):

1. Paul rejected John’s advancements

2. John wanted to further their relationship, and Paul wanted to maintain the ‘friends with benefits’ situation they already had

3. Nothing significant happened between the two (yet something still changed in John)

I’ll try to discuss which theories I find the most convincing, compelling and substantiated - as well as offering my own opinions and hypothesis’s ^^ (discussion bellow the cut)

1. Paul rejected John’s advancements

The theory I would say im most drawn to - not the theory that im necessarily most convinced by though - is that John made a move on Paul, after a few years of pining for him, and was subsequently rejected. Its a theory that I tend to be compelled by, but I have to admit that its one I struggle to justify entirely. The problem with this theory, for me, is that this is a conclusion ive drawn based mostly off of what their relationship appeared to look like after India. It seems as though something must have happened between them to have ruptured their relationship as profoundly as it did - and because they were on relatively good terms before India*, combined with certain inferences we could draw from comments John made regarding his feelings towards Paul and their relationship, it feels as though it’s possible that he made an advance on Paul, which was rejected and thus caused the ultimate disintegration of the Lennon/McCartney relationship.

(*I mean, their relationship was always complicated and difficult - but it seems that it was okay-ish prior to India, and then just inexplicably plummeted after the trip)

But nobody (as far as im aware) has confirmed, or even really alluded to, this advancement or rejection ever having happened. And the lack of evidence substantiating the claim is a major draw back for me!

However, I do also feel as though nobody’s really come out about anything that happened in India - all ive heard is that they meditated, wrote songs, John and Cyn fought, and Ringo ate baked beans. But like, more must have happened on the trip, surely? Im not saying the absence of information regarding the trip is proof that there was a big “lovers quarrel” between John and Paul, and that everyone involved in that trip is now just sworn to secrecy or something - but like, id just like to see a biographer really investigate the holiday, and try to conclude what events might have occurred during the trip, because as of right now, with the information we have, it seems to have been, bizarrely, both a lacklustre and uneventful, yet still hugely impactful event. If the narrative of the “India trip” were to be shifted in the future in light of new information, the same way the narrative of “Let It Be/Get Back” is being changed, I wouldn’t be surprised!

2. John wanted more, but Paul didn’t

Another popular theory is that John and Paul were engaged in something of a physical affair, but in India John proposed (or perhaps demanded even) that they take their relationship further, and Paul just wasn’t compelled to do so.

Beliefs vary regarding this, based on how far you personally think their relationship went: some might say they only ever did a little drunken experimenting with one another, and that it was just a fun fling until John suggested they take it further. Others might argue that they were in fact in a committed relationship, and John wanted to go public with it - or at the very least, demanded exclusivity between him and Paul.

In entertaining this theory, im most compelled to believe that John and Paul were engaged in occasional “flings”, and perhaps by ‘68 were even acknowledging that there was some deeper and more sincere between them - but ultimately, I don’t think Paul would have ever been inclined to fully commit to John, because I think he always wanted children and a family. In addition to this, though its clear John and Paul were passionate about one another, it isn’t clear how compatible they were in the long term - and with Paul being the more grounded of the too, I suspect he would have recognised this incompatibility, which John (the idealist) might not have.

Though I admit that John could certainly be unrealistic and irrational, im not convinced that he suggested to Paul they go public with their relationship, because I think John still had a fairly strong sense of his place in popular culture, and would have still been able to recognise that if they were to “come out”, it would probably deeply and irreparably damage both their careers - as well as George and Ringo’s too - at least amongst the general public. They’d still have some ardent fans, but their following overall would have become far more niche, and the “beatlemania” would’ve worn off swiftly. Im not sure if either of them would’ve been willing to take that heat in ‘68, especially not Paul, who as I mentioned earlier, I think might have recognised the futility and incompatibility inherent in their relationship.

Then again though, John was always a little “cocky”* when it came to his sexuality - I think if an interviewer were to genuinely have enquired into his sexuality, straight up asking him “Are you bi? Gay?” I get the sense that he would have told us! Sure he’d probably have dressed the response up with a dozen quick quips and jokes, but ultimately, I think he would have given a sincere response. And so, perhaps he did feel he had the confidence, at least in India, to actually “come out”, but if Paul wasn’t willing to make this official with him, perhaps this confidence dissipated.

(*No pun intended you pervs🤦‍♂️)

Another thing to note about India is that they’d have been relatively secluded, as well as off the drugs/drinks for the most part - and this would have forced them to really reflect upon their relationship. Perhaps John saw that he wasn’t contented with Cynthia, and recognised his desire for more from Paul - and so in such a raw state of mind, I can see how he’d become so shattered if Paul were to have rejected him (that statement could relate both to the first and second theory, I feel). Perhaps John made an advance upon Paul whilst they were both sober for the first time, and that changed their relationship somehow? Just thinking out loud here!

But again, this theory overall has the same problem as the first in that, though it appears to make sense, it still lacks proof; it ultimately isn’t a substantiated claim.

3. Nothing happened between J&P, but something changed

This is probably the theory that everybody is least interested in hearing, but I still think its a pretty valid one, albeit the least dramatic (In my opinion though its still a really interesting perspective to explore though!).

Its possible that nothing of particular significance happened in India, but something still shifted in John, causing him to vilify and reject Paul. The issue with this though, is that it begs the question: why did John undergo such a significant change in India then?

Id argue that perhaps John was making very subtle and slight moves towards Paul, that Paul either ignored or didn't pick up on. Id assume that perhaps John had been hinting at this desire for awhile now, and maybe he got it into his head that in India, where him and Paul would have a lot of time to be alone and intimate, his feelings would finally be reciprocated. But then, Paul never picked up on these hints, and never made any advancements - and this broke something within John. It would fit neatly within the Yoko narrative, because it offers reasoning to the abrupt but intense attachment John formed towards her almost immediately after India - as well as explaining the sudden vilification of Paul. But I suppose that the first two theories also fit pretty neatly within the Yoko narrative, because they all relate to the same basic concept that John wanted more from Paul, and Paul didn’t - and so he tried to replace him with Yoko.

I suppose though, that the this theory overall could also be countered by making the argument that Paul also began to spiral after India, and so some occurrence presumably must have happened to Paul too. I wonder though if its possible that maybe Pauls spiralling was kind of a result of Johns? I get the sense though that Paul would need a change in his life to cause his mental health to seriously deteriorate, but I don’t feel like the same is necessarily true for John - I think John is sort of the type to spiral, irregardless of whether his life undergoes a significant change or not, because I think John was the force driving a lot of the drama and troubles throughout his lifetime. So if Johns mental well-being started seriously deteriorating, I can see this being a cause of panic and anxiety for Paul.

But something that further inclines me to believe that an actual event occurred between John and Paul is this extract from Geoff Emmericks memoir (x)(id recommend reading the entire extract, its interesting!):

‘I glanced in Paul’s direction. He was staring straight ahead, expressionless and weary. He didn’t have much to say about India that day, or any other. I sensed at that moment that something fundamental in them had changed.”’

It just really feels as though there was some confrontation between John and Paul that had to have happened to perpetuate the miscommunication later seen between them. Like if there hadn’t been some kind of confrontation, then I can’t really understand why Paul would be reluctant to speak about India, or harbour any regrets or dismay regarding the journey. Perhaps you could drill it down to the betrayal they appeared to have felt by Maharishi allegedly hitting on girls - but I feel like this was a “betrayal” mostly felt by John, I never really got the sense that Paul was deeply effected by it.

But yeah - those are the main theories I think.

Overall, I think that the third theory is probably the most substantiated claim, but I think it leaves a lot to desired. It just doesn’t feel like it totally fits together, as though theres more to the story - but I guess relationships and peoples psyches aren’t puzzles, and so not everything is always going to piece together perfectly; but I dunno.

Like I said though, the theory im most compelled by is the first. I acknowledge that it lacks evidence, but it just seems to make a lot of sense to me! But really, who knows what the hell happened in India?

If anyone else has an opinion on all this, or wants to expand upon or even suggest a new theory, feel free to! I always like hearing from you guys!

“You know, I think he would like it. In fact I said to them I hope somebody does this to all my crap demos when I’m dead… make them into hit songs”

With thanks to Joe Wisbey from the Beatles Books Podcast

FHIS IS SO SICK AND TWISTED. “John had to have a warm and loving side for me to stand him all those years” FUCKFCKUK FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK

“John and I were two of the luckiest people in the twentieth century to have found each other” IS LITERALLY VILLAINOUS. LUCKIEST PEOPLE ALIVE IJ YHE WORLD JUST TO KNOW EACH OTHER. TO HAVE FOUND EACH OTHER

“He was absolutely wonderful and I did love him” PAUL MCCARTNEY WHEN I CATCH YOU

Did Elton John suspect McLennon?

I believe it's very likely that Elton guessed that there was SOMETHING between John and Paul.

To start with, I want to quote an excerpt from my Walls and Bridges post: "Let's sum it up: Lennon spent a lot of time with Elton, gay (at the time he was 28, and he realized his sexual orientation at about 23 yo), and a musician connected to the glam rock scene (and glam rock is inherently queer). I guess that Elton knew or at least suspected what John feels towards Paul. And let's remember that at that time Lennon was coming to terms with his bisexuality which he already signaled in 1972. In 1974 John interviewed himself for Andy Warhol's Interview Magazine to promote Walls and Bridges. Here comes the question: "Have you ever fucked a guy?". The response: "Not yet, I thought I’d save it til I was 40, life begins at 40 you know, tho I never noticed it". Further dialogue: "Q. It is trendy to be bisexual and you’re usually 'keeping up with the Jones’, haven’t you ever… there was talk about you and PAUL… A. Oh, I thought it was about me and Brian Epstein… anyway I’m saving all the juice for my own version of THE REAL FAB FOUR BEATLES STORY etc.. etc.."".

Page 2nd of that interview contains a photo of John and Elton:

On November 28, 1974 they were performing together in Madison Square Garden. Announcing "I saw her standing there", John said: "And we thought we do another number of an old enstraged fiancee of mine, called Paul" (Tony King stated that Lennon often referred to McCartney that way).

As we can read in "Christies Auction; Rock & Pop Memorabilia" (July 2008): "Paul Gambaccini [PG] recalled that when he was waiting in the wings that evening, Elton passed him and said cryptically…"The Third Number". PG felt that Elton was probably remarking on the significance that Lennon was performing a Beatles song at this time, especially one written by Paul McCartney. [Lennon only sang a Beatles song in public on three occasions after the split]".

@paulsrighthand analyzed this excerpt perfectly: "I really do feel like he is trying to convey something significant, and the anecdotes and phrasing he chose are purposeful. The very fact that he shares the story of Elton passing him and saying, "cryptically".. the third number, is IMO, no accident. Elton, I'm sure, would have been aware that Paul Gambaccini is gay. Paul G would also know that Elton is gay. I believe that it was probably known that John was going to used the estranged fiancee line (I'll get to that in a second). So, in my theoretical scenario, a gay man is cryptically telling another gay man that his male friend will shortly be dedicating an overtly romantic message to his male friend… to phrase it another way, its just gossip! Like, OMG, you won't believe what John's about to do. It's the simplest explanation, I think?".

What's more, when Elton recalled this event years later, he said that John used the words: "an old FRIEND of mine" but pay attention to his body language. As @paulsrighthand summed up: "If you want to hide your love away , Sir Elton John will be the man to keep your secret, but he will have a little fun whilst doing so imagines a little tee hee thought bubble above his head every time he mentions John and Paul".

And last but not least: a birthday collage to Elton sent by John in 1975!

In a nutshell: John made a tone of queer references here, for example used polari. He also made references to McLennon; one of them is photo of a naked man who reminds Paul. The man is standing backwards so we can't say if that's Paul for sure but even if not, it might have been a sign for Elton. Or maybe John just liked guys of this type?

Even if we assume that Elton did not understand the references to McLennon in this collage (which is unlikely), we know (as seen from the previous points) that he knew John was very interested in queer topics. Elton would have been stupid not to know that John was probably bisexual too; and if so, he probably feels something gay for Paul (I suppose John talked a lot about Paul at the time).

I highly recommend you check out the original post about the birthday collage. There are more quotes there. People were reblogging and commenting on this post, sharing some really interesting reflections.

So... did Elton know what was going on? You may not believe it. But you can also believe in Santa Claus and fairies.

““I know for a fact Paul returned to Liverpool a few nights after this a few nights before the vigils for John in New York & Liverpool & was driven around by Taxi at around 2 in the morning to all the landmarks the city that were special to him & John. I know this to be true because my granddad was the driver. Paul told him he didnt want anyone from the tabloids following him so he took the taxi. He went to a place particularly special to him & John & buried something before returning to the taxi & breaking down. He actually told my granddad how bad he felt about the “it’s a drag” comment but he had flash bulbs, autograph hunters etc in his face & he was too Ill to be interviewed & my granddad reassured him that the people of Liverpool were pissed off at the media for cornering him & not for the “it’s a drag comment” adding that John would have understood. He also told my granddad that his hair had turned gray over the course of a few hours after being told & he was expecting to be ridiculed in the papers for it. My granddad dropped him off at a location, he went inside & got a huge hamper & gave it to my granddad & gave him £200 & wished him a merry Christmas. We still have the box & the envelope.””

— A comment under a Youtube video about The Beatles Reaction to John Lennon’s Death. I know that comments like these are usually not to be trusted and sort of impossible to verify, but for some reason this particular one sounds  believable to me. Details sound true. What do you think?

January 24th, 1969: After John and Paul run through another take of ‘Two Of Us’, Paul comments on the narratives and discreet emotional correlation between their songs.

PAUL: It’s like, uh, “We have to get back.” “We’re on our way home.” JOHN: Yeah. PAUL: There’s a story. There’s another one – ‘Don’t Let Me Down’. “Oh darling, I’ll never let you down.” Like we’re doing— JOHN: Yeah. It’s like you and me are lovers. PAUL: [reserved] Yeah. [pause] JOHN: We’ll just have to camp it up for those two. PAUL: Yeah. Well, I’ll be wearing my skirt for the show, anyway.

why aren't you posting more song analysis?

Thanks for the message anon!

I hesitate a lot when stating my views due to it being part of the minority on tumblr. (I'm one of those who believe J+P had an explicit love affair), to interpret their songs, I view it from that standpoint....

English is my third language and it takes a bit of work because if you interpret one song, it is usually interconnected with other songs.

Can't Buy Me Love and I Feel Fine as an example. I've always wondered why John was staring at Paul in the beginning of the "I Feel Fine" music video "Baby's good to me, you know", then it kinda clicked, that he might be replying to Paul's song (oh, there she goes, reaching):

In "Can't Buy Me Love" Paul wrote:

I'll buy you a diamond ring my friend If it makes you feel alright I'll get you anything my friend If it makes you feel alright

(very friend coded indeed and then, the question "if it makes you feel alright?" John answers with his song "I Feel Fine".)

In "I Feel Fine" John wrote:

She's so glad, she's telling all the world That her baby buys her things, you know He buys her diamond rings, you know

(John is telling the story in 3rd person "that she's being treated right", the boys were harmonizing on the "I'm in love with her and I feel fine" which is the lover's answer to the girl's claim).

I FIND JOHN AND PAUL ADORABLE ANSWERING EACH OTHER LIKE THIS

I wish I could share more of my views. But I'm scared to be labelled delusional as it is and be asked for receipts to claims I am not ready to show yet....

What did Mimi think of Paul?

This is from an interview in 1970

How did you view the troubles the Beatles have been going through these last few years?

I don’t know all this business between John and Paul is about and I don’t dare ask John. I did ring Paul about it, and he told me things would straighten up. The boys have been friends so long. I remember them coming home from school together on their bikes, begging biscuits. I’m sure they’ll get back together soon. This is just a phase they’re passing through.

 What do you think changed John so much from his early days as a carefree kid?

She’s responsible for all this, Yoko. She changed him, and I’m sure she and Linda are behind the split between John and Paul.

—–

In the book “Paul McCartney: the biography” there’s a page in which Mimi talks about the first time she saw Paul:

“John was insecure, and when he saw Paul he wanted to look cool. He was suddenly hooked. He gave up all his friends for Paul. Aunt Mimi recalled that John jumped around the kitchen when he told her about his new friend. And when Paul arrived at John’s home for the first time, Mimi sarcastically said to John that they were like ‘chalk and cheese’ meaning how different they were. And John would start hurling himself around the room shouting ‘Chalk and Cheese! Chalk and cheese’ smiling and laughing. He was fucking in love with him, he adored him. She understood he found the partner of his life.“