JOHN Lennon was no saint and no genius (So what did John Lennon mean to you?, December 8).
Many who knew him picture an egocentric, deluded bully. A misogynist and coward, he couldn't face life's difficult situations - whether sacking a drummer or cutting a wife and child adrift.
Lennon liked to see himself as the tortured artist, trapped inside the Beatles. He could have left, but was a worldly enough genius to worry about the golden cash cow drying up.
His post-Beatles barbs were unfair and unbalanced. He gave no credit to people like Brian Epstein and George Martin for their unstinting support. Incredible good fortune presented the Beatles with both manager and producer who were honest and not out to exploit.
Mealy-mouthed criticism of McCartney and Harrison did Lennon no favours. Not perceiving Ringo as competition, acid was reserved for the other two. His political and social naivety were an embarrassment. "Imagine no possessions" he wrote, but hung on to his own and was vitriolic about those whom he perceived as not delivering business-wise. Then there's the music. The simple truth is that together Lennon and McCartney were brilliant, but apart they were something less. Both could produce monumental follies of bad taste. The jury may still be out on who was the popular music heavyweight, but for every Mull Of Kintyre there's a Happy Christmas War Is Over.
Looked at dispassionately, Lennon's later material ranged from the mundane to the dire.
Liz Allen,
The Village,
York.
Updated: 09:11 Tuesday, December 13, 2005
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article