WI: John Lennon Lives

[Han]

In honor of John Lennon's birthday, I thought I'd make a John Lennon thread. I wouldn't be surprised if this topic has been covered before, but what do you think would've happened if John Lennon had survived (and was in perfectly healthy condition)? IIRC he planned to take a tour of England in 1981, and was planning to see his Aunt Mimi for the first time in years. He'd certainly release Milk and Honey some time in the 80's, and I think eventually he would've come around and worked on the Anthology with the other three Beatles. Maybe they would've even done a tour or two.

BTW, I remember reading somewhere Lennon was planning to vote for Reagan (I know, shocking ), but I'm not sure how credible the source was. Where would Lennon go in the realm of political activism? If he remained on the left, he'd probably have railed against the Bush administration.

 

[The Dude]

Dude, everyone voted for Reagan. My dad, who went to Madison University in the 1960's for chrissakes, voted for Reagan.

 

[Westbrook]

Maybe Lennon goes into seclusion? Becomes a recluse, like Axl Rose, Syd Barrett, Sly Stone. He'd still writes, maybe even produces or collaborates on songs, but you'd never see him.

 

[Glass Onion]

Could Lennon vote in an American election? I'm not entirely sure whether permanent residents are allowed to vote. Lennon as far as I know never actually became an American citizen. He did have a Green Card, and was considered a permanent resident-but not a citizen.

Anyway, Milk and Honey probably comes out a bit sooner than it did historically. I've read he was considering go back to England for a bit, so he might do that.

 

[Han]

Could Lennon vote in an American election? I'm not entirely sure whether permanent residents are allowed to vote. Lennon as far as I know never actually became an American citizen. He did have a Green Card, and was considered a permanent resident-but not a citizen.

Oh wait, you're right.

It still poses a question though: could Lennon have shifted to the right?

 

[Glass Onion]

It's hard to see Lennon completely reversing himself to become an establishment conservative. After all, he had spent a considerable amount of time in the seventies being harassed by those sorts of people. And nothing I've read about him indicates that he had the making of a social conservative. Of course time can change things-but honestly I think "Lennon the Libertarian" is more likely than Lennon the outright conservative. Socially I'd imagine that he stay pretty liberal.

 

[JoeMulk]

On February 7, 1984 for the 20th anniversary of they're appearance on the Ed Sullivan show the Beatles do a surprise reunion show at CBGB's, they then play Live Aid.

 

[archaeogeek]

But if John Lenon lives does that mean Sylvester Stalon won't become premier of Russia and instead see his power base in the party erode? >.>

(more seriously: probably turns into a "elder musician" like McCartney, maybe more political)

 

[mattep74]

I think Lennon would oppose the deal that gave the rights to Beatles music to Jackson

 

[Glass Onion]

I think Lennon would oppose the deal that gave the rights to Beatles music to Jackson

It's hard to say what Lennon's opinion on Michael Jackson in 1985 would have been. It's worth noting that Jackson was actually on pretty good terms with McCartney at the time. But I suspect Jackson wouldn't be able to buy the rights ITTL. With Lennon alive, regardless of his at time ambivalent attitude towards his past, I'm pretty sure he'd be more than willing to pull his resources with McCartney. Jackson has a lot of money, but I think John and Paul can outbid him. By the middle of the eighties the rights to the Beatles music would actually belong to John Lennon and Paul McCartney.

 

[Kevin Renner]

Because Saturday was Lennon's birthday I had to listen to "what would of happened" BS. My take was the Beatles would of wound up having their own theater in Branson

 

[Emperor Norton I]

I knew a lot of this subject some time ago, but it's not all coming to mind now. I remember that there were songs that would probably have been released on Milk and Honey that weren't (I'll remember those another time), and he was still working on a play called "The Ballad of John and Yoko" which would probably see release sometime in the 80's if it were completed.
The Beatles would probably have reunited in the 1980s as well. All parties, for the most part, had come to peace. Lennon wouldn't have wanted to be back together permanently, though. But a reunion either for an album or every once in a while to do an album or concert is probable. If memory serves, a reunion was supposed to be apart of the Beatles documentary entitled "The Long and Winding Road", which was shelved after Lennon's death and instead used for "The Beatles Anthology" on ABC back in the 90s.

Concerning things released because of Lennon's death:
"All Those Years Ago" was altered by George Harrison to be about Lennon after his assassination. If Lennon lives, the song remains as it was to be.
"Here Today" by Paul McCartney isn't released.
"When We Was Fab" probably involves a real appearance by Lennon in the music video.

Maybe Lennon goes into seclusion? Becomes a recluse, like Axl Rose, Syd Barrett, Sly Stone. He'd still writes, maybe even produces or collaborates on songs, but you'd never see him.

He already had been in seclusion. That's what the "House Husband" period was. Staying in New York and recording on his own terms was as far of seclusion he'd go for

Oh wait, you're right.

It still poses a question though: could Lennon have shifted to the right?

No. Lennon was always somewhere on the Left (not necessarily anywhere definable. A New Left-Socialist-Capitalist-anti government non anarchist). It doesn't make sense personality and opinion wise for him to become the arch-conservative.

I think Lennon would oppose the deal that gave the rights to Beatles music to Jackson

It's hard to say what Lennon's opinion on Michael Jackson in 1985 would have been. It's worth noting that Jackson was actually on pretty good terms with McCartney at the time. But I suspect Jackson wouldn't be able to buy the rights ITTL. With Lennon alive, regardless of his at time ambivalent attitude towards his past, I'm pretty sure he'd be more than willing to pull his resources with McCartney. Jackson has a lot of money, but I think John and Paul can outbid him. By the middle of the eighties the rights to the Beatles music would actually belong to John Lennon and Paul McCartney.

The deal in the OTL was that McCartney contacted Yoko and made a deal that they'd both pool together money to buy back the song catalog. If memory serves, the problem was something like Yoko arguing the amount to put up and saying "we can get it for such and such an amount" and then Michael Jackson swooping in and pulling the rug out from under them.

Maybe if Lennon lived, he'd be more willing to just blow whatever money was needed to buy back the catalog regardless of cost.

 

[Glass Onion]

Also, for obvious reasons The Lives of John Lennon never gets written.

 

[blackmath]

I really don't think the Beatles would have gotten back together until much later in the 80s - if at all. After re reading the Playboy interview from 1980 which goes into a lot of questions about a reunion, John seemed very annoyed at the questions. John made it sound like people constantly were asking him when they would re form, do a reunion gig, even a one off gig for charity and he never seemed to want to do it. So, I don't think they'd even reunite for Live Aid. It seems to me at that point in his life he was in a way tired of being some sort of icon and just wanted to be a working musician again.

Also, at the time John was angry at George for not giving him enough credit for his early growth as a musician. He had also just been in a small argument with Paul about his constantly dropping in without calling to the Dakota at that point, so it looks like Paul wanted to at least start working together again, but from reading the interview it seems like John wasn't into that arrangement. He went on to talk about a session from a 1973 song by Ringo that all the guys worked on and Paul asked him if he wanted to reform the group and John was shocked that Paul didn't want to include Yoko in the band at all, so John declined the offer.

It sounds crazy and even selfish to us that John wouldn't give the fans what they wanted but he was a stubborn guy who hated convention and doing what people expected of him. To him he gave the people what they wanted for ten years with the Beatles and that was enough in his mind. Rehashing the Beatles was like revisiting his high school days for John and he was never a sentimental person.

I could see John being a playwright or a novelist later in the 80s, still living in New York and still living as normal a life as he could raising his younger son Sean, patching things up with Julian and maybe giving him some guidance in his music career. Maybe he'd put out a few more solo records, and maybe he'd do a few one off shows with the other guys, who knows? To him I think it would be a spur of the moment decision, just like what almost happened on SNL that one night. He'd be a quote machine and would probably have a lot to say about the excess of the 80s, gentrification of New York in the 90s, the War in Iraq and a bunch of other issues and events all the while giving his own sardonic take on every situation.

 

[Emperor Norton I]

That was John Lennon's way. He would say one thing to act tough, but feel another. According to McCartney, he thought Lennon did miss the band. People did always ask him if the Beatles would reunite, which probably did get bothersome, but he'd have done a reunion for himself if he wanted to.

And Lennon had already gone through the point in his life where he wanted to remove himself from being an icon. That was the entirety of the 1970's for Lennon. The feeling began in the Beatles, which by the end of it he wanted out of, and carried on through the 1970's. The 1980's, however, were to be Lennon's comeback. John Lennon had reached an entirely different stage by 1980 where he wanted to get back into things again.

 

[Glass Onion]

Reading that interview I'm not sure his point was that he was totally adverse to working with Paul McCartney again (George Harrison is a bit trickier because of the autobiography issue.) And he had already worked with Richard Starkey a number of times since September 1969. His point was that The Beatles existed in a certain place and time, and however great the music that remains is, the Beatles could never really be brought back. That is, that band wasn't just John Lennon, Paul McCartney George Harrison and Richard Starkey. It was those individuals between 1957 and 1969/1970. It seems less like Lennon saying "I will under no circumstances ever ever ever work with Paul McCartney ever again" (And in my opinion that's what the talk about a Beatles reunion was really about. I mean, Lennon had worked with the other members on various projects before. I am the Greatest was practically a reunion of the whole group-sans Paul.)

And more like him saying "You know things have changed since I was in that group. I don't think any of us are the same people so if we played together it really couldn't be the same." And he isn't entirely wrong. As nice as a reunion would be, the Beatles had their time. I love the albums we have, and I like Lennon's solo output. But I agree that you can't magically get things back to 1964-1969, no matter how hard you try.

Of course Lennon seems to resent the implication that he has to reunite with his former bandmates which indicates some resistance to even incidentally reuniting.

Which means any reunion or pseudo reunion is probably very contingent on Lennon's mood. If he feels like working with McCartney on a particular song or album or whatever, he'll do it. I don't think his anxiety about the pressure surrounding a "Beatles reunion" would prevent that. As I mentioned earlier, he worked with Harrison and Starkey in the seventies, and though he and McCartney were somewhat distant I think that in the thirty years between 1980 and the present day there might be a circumstance with the two of them working together on something or other. It's not guaranteed to happen, but it's not outright impossible either.

The interview does indicate that the cliche of Lennon performing a charity gig with them probably wouldn't happen. Lennon seems very distrusting towards such things.

 

[RRA]

We must also remember that by his death, Lennon still had an unresolved beef with Harrison over Lennon backing out of George's Concert For Bangladesh in 1971.

Accounts diverge on what happened from George demanding Yoko doesn't appear on stage with John (which he found unacceptable) to John's ego not exactly secure at that point (if ever perhaps) to play second fiddle to his "little brother." They tried to bury the hatchet in 1974 with Lennon agreeing to "make up" by appearing at a Harrison concert during his Dark Horse tour at MSG. Except Lennon no showed again.

And from all accounts, afterwards neither met each other or perhaps even spoke to each other again for the rest of Lennon's life. Or to put it another way, George helped John on "Instant Karma!" and the Imagine album. But no more collaborations after the first Concert snub.

So in a haunting reality speculation, what if Lennon survived December 1980? Some thoughts:

(1) As planned, he would have conducted his first solo tour in 1981 to support Double Fantasy while also performing (with his own re-arrangements) Beatle tunes like "She Loves You," "I Want to Hold Your Hand," "Help!," etc. This fact was recently confirmed by Ken Sharp in his new book about the Double Fantasy studio sessions.

The album wouldn't have done as well because he lived (and let's admit something: Its sorta rubbish) but still probably decently received, a gold record. The tour is a big success though, even if there is a debate between fans about Lennon's re-interpretation of some of his Fab Four classics. But hey they get to see him live and playing that era of his life which he famously derided/dismissed years earlier.

(2) Speaking of which, in 1980s he would have scratched an old itch. He re-records/re-released "Help!" as the slower-ballad as he had initially envisioned and partners up in vocals with Sting, another lead-singer who's about to (or already has) quit his own then super-popular rock band at their supposed height of popularity. Even if it doesn't age well, its a big chart hit (hell lets say it goes #1) just from the combined star power alone, bridging two generations of rockers/fans (think MJ/Macca) and the memorable video is widely played on MTV.

(3) Beatles do get back together, albeit as a one-time concert appearance (Live Aid?) and/or releasing their long-in-development documentary and album(s) in the late 1980s, backed by a newly recorded "reteam" song or two which coulda been "Free As a Bird," "Real Love," "Grow Old With Me," (all Lennon demos), or Harrison's own "When We Was Fab."

Either way, the Fab Four use this opportunity to give their shared legacy/past the proper, positive public funeral instead of the bitter lawsuit-flying Let It Be divorce. Think Pink Floyd at Live 8.

(4) There might be a big hoopla over Lennon/McCartney working together again, maybe on a song here and there on each other's albums. Less World's Finest coming back to stands and more like special appearances. I'm sorry, that reference was too geeky. Apologies.

If of course each egomaniac could put aside their pride and outright ask the other to look over whatever crap they were working on separately at the time. Macca has been complimentary of numerous Lennon solo works, and Lennon notably liked Macca's "3 Legs" and especially "Coming Up."

(5) No Beatles Tour, though consider a possible outcome for comparison in The Police reunion tour. No new album or material, but guys at the bitter end were probably trying to murder each other at the studio, put aside their beefs and perform a super successful, super received "Greatest Hits" tour. Maybe in 1992 to commemorate the 30th anniversary of their first single's ("Love Me Do") release?

(6) Lennon continues for better or worse, public approval or not, speak his mind rather freely. In 1980 he had hallowed out from his late 60s/early 70s protest/activist stage, but surely something would have come along and burn his biscuits again. Maybe anti-Nukes or the Iraq War, he would have been inspired one way or another to use politics of the time to make music of the time. As we saw this can for good ("Give Peace a Chance") or bad (the tedious, self-important Sometime in New York record)