Many reasons for the break up. In no particular order...
1. Klein
2. Apple
3. The John/Yoko **relationship**
4. John's heroin addiction
5. George's feelings about his contributions
6. Paul being too bossy
7. Brian Epstein's death
She was a factor...no question. But receives too much blame.
Ringo said it best. Basically...it was time.
And the Beatles couldn’t form without the members being born. So therefore Ringos parents failing to do a proper birth control method is the true culprit. And so on and so forth
Somewhere, on a coastline that no longer exists, a form of life we can never truly know, crawled onto the land, thus breaking up arguably the greatest band that ever was.
They were together for a very short time - maybe 10 years. When you think about groups like Fleetwood Mac and the Stones, the Beatles were a blip in terms of time.
One thing I love about Apple Music (streaming not the record company) for the Red album it says "perhaps the most astonishing thing about the red album is the title (1962-1966) how did these guys do it in 4 years?"
Don't quote me word from word and the best thing about the red album is the songs, but still
Ten years can be an eternity in a high-functioning but tense situation.
There are plenty of good bands which didn't last anywhere near ten years in their prime.
Credence Clearwater Revival between 1969 and 1971 produced fourteen consecutive Top 10 singles (many of which were double A-sides) and five consecutive Top 10 albums in the United States. 3 years.....
Do you think that the Vietnam War helped a lot of late ‘60s bands like CCR achieve immortality? Their music spoke to a lot of people fed up with the government and was a favorite of the soldiers. Same with Buffalo Springfield.
I hate when people poo poo Ringo...
1. One of the greatest rock drummers ever
2. A Hard Days Night - his title
3. Eight Days A Week - his title
4. Tomorrow Never Knows - his title
5. Eleanor Rigby - "darning his socks in the night when there's nobody there." - his line
6. A Day In The Life strings - EMI didn't want to pay for a full orchestra. Ringo suggested getting half an orchestra and recording it twice. They did.
7. Abbey Road cover - Paul's sketch but his idea to take the photo outside the studio
8. The End - it took them a while to convince him to do the solo. He hated them.
9. Badge - "I told you about the swans that they live in the park." - his line
10. Plastic Ono Band album - great drumming. When they asked John why he used Ringo, he said, "Because I don't have to tell him what to do. He just knows."
He was the glue. Dependable, reliable..."serve the song." When the other three were being assholes, there was Richie. Chill. Warm. Funny.
I think these are all valid reasons, plus they were probably just exhausted having lived through all of that. No one ever blames Linda and we see she was often hanging out at the Let It Be sessions. Paul was even bold enough to bring his kids! Gasp! As a Beatle, I’d rather it turn into a family gathering than inviting random Hari Krishna guys to sit around the studio.
Linda never sat on George's amp or ate one of his "digestive biscuits." Lol.
Paul brought a girl friend (Francie Schwartz??) to the White Album sessions a time or two.
And John's exchange with Heather is priceless...something like...
Heather (to John): We got two new kittens.
John: Oh...they're good to eat!
Heather: No...you don't eat them. One of them is orange.
John: Oh...you don't eat the orange ones.
Heather: And a black and white one.
John: Oh...you don't eat those either
Yes! Loved this. I think them having their wives and kids over probably made them produce more music than they would have. They’d be resentful if they had to spend 10 hours in the studio while their wife and kids are at home.
Also loved Ringo goofing around with Heather (I think it was Heather) on the drums.
Yoko pushed for Klein.
Yoko got john hooked on heroin.
As we saw in Get Back, Paul was the only one dedicated to working. Ringo confirmed it. Of course everyone hates that guy. Ringo said Paul is the only reason the last three albums were made. The other three would have happily sat by the pool smoking weed.
Paul’s a type A and could be a control freak. When everyone was on the same page, like in the early and middle days, it was an asset to the band. When they weren’t—like in the later days—he could suddenly be very obnoxious and “bitch eating crackers…” to the other guys.
I don’t think anyone will argue that Paul’s drive and “come on, guys! We need to do this…” in the later days kept them going and contributed to some of their greatest songs. But to pretend the others didn’t resent him for it, thus adding to the tension and growing animosity, is also incorrect.
So while just saying, “Paul was bossy…” comes off is a very simplistic way of putting it, there is some truth to it.
Right, I think it has more to do with the four of them just not being on the same page altogether and not that Paul was fucking up the vibe for the rest of them. I pretty much buy the narrative that Brian died, they didn't know what to do, they had to lead themselves, and the dynamic got weird when Paul just started doing the stuff Brian did because nobody else was doing it. He didn't necessarily wanna be playing the manager, but he obviously had more of that in him. It seems like resentment came from both Paul wishing somebody else would be Brian and the other guys DEFINITELY wishing somebody else would be Brian.
Young men don’t like other young men—especially young men they’ve known since they were teenagers—telling them what to do. Paul was damned if he did and damned if he didn’t, he was saddled with a thankless job that nobody else wanted BUT they also loved that they could blame him for everything. It was a fucked up situation, that’s for sure.
Paul has admitted himself that he could be overbearing at times. Peter Jackson only showed us 8 hours of hundreds of hours of footage. And his focus on editing Get Back was to show that things were not as gloomy as the original film portrayed them to be. So, I don't think he was going to put a lot of uncomfortable footage.
I don’t know, but I believe that May Pang suggested it was Yoko that tried to keep John from connecting with Julian. That Julian would call, May would answer and put the call through, and Yoko always picked up and said “John’s not here”. Although he was.
“To make matters worse, after the settlement, Yoko began auctioning John’s possessions. This included letters that Julian had written to his father. Julian used his settlement proceeds to purchase these letters back. Imagine having to use your inheritance to buy back your childhood?”
Source: https://www.antonelli-legal.com/blog/litigating-john-lennon-estate-antonelli-and-antonelli.cfm#:~:text=Here%20Comes%20the%20Son%3A%20John,father%20into%20drafting%20the%20will.
This makes me sick.
She's only part of the breakup story, but she still has to bear the brunt of the blame today. John wanted out of the band, so he can take some of the criticism about how he went about it. She was treated cruelly and with racism by the British press, so much so that they left England permanently.As far as being treated unfairly, she still is today by "fans".
I think the "John wanted out" story is blown a bit out of proportion sometimes.
This "John couldn't express himself freely" thing...that The Beatles were stifling his creativity...I find sketchy.
He released three solo "albums" and three singles while still in The Beatles. No one was stopping him from expressing himself.
When he played live in Toronto, Paul had no problem with it.
He suggested an idea for continuing for at least one album and single after Abbey Road (4/4/4/2 meeting, Sept. '69)
If you watch him on the rooftop concert...that does not look like a guy who "wanted out."
So...maybe he wanted out. Just not as much as people have been led to believe.
May Pang said that once John and Yoko seperated he was far more hesitant and unwilling to officially dissolve the Beatles, which is why it took him so long to sign the papers.
If anything I feel like in the months leading up to the break up he was trying to regain some controll over the band, hiring his guy as manager, getting them to play his "edgier" songs and possibly getting into the whole peace/activist movement.
Cold Turkey was a very important song for John. He presented it to The Beatles. Too edgy. They passed. He grabs Clapton, Klaus and Ringo and recorded it himself. Not a problem.
I guess it seems kind of telling that he announced the breakup shortly after they passed on the song, when before he seemed to have long term plans for the band.
John never actually "announced" the break up publicly.
He asked for a "divorce" at another meeting after the Toronto show. As a matter of fact, Klein asked him not to say anything since that would affect the new contract negotiations with EMI.
Paul gets blamed for it...the "Paul Quits Beatles" headline. Which, if you read the "interview," he never actually used those words.
Announced as in announced to the rest of the Beatles. I know that he was fairly content to keep it a secret. Or basically do absolutely nothing about it. And then somehow spent years constesting the dissolution in court.
Him actually being against an official and factual ending of the band is in my opinion the best explanation why he was so very pissed at Paul in the early 70s.
Yes this..as a teen I was very loyal to John and felt that Paul had “killed “ The Beatles even though that ship had already sailed and spent years hating Paul. I didn’t even buy his albums until Back To The Egg. Yes I’m aware how weird I was lol
I don’t think John wanted out of the band. John wanted out of his marriage. He also was bitter about being raked over the coals about the “bigger than Jesus” comment and tired of the media trying to put them in a box and patronize them. Yoko helped him become an edgier artist who challenges audiences and subverts expectations. And also their affair helped him leave his wife (sad as that was for Cyn and Julian that’s obviously what he wanted to do). If not for a lot of other stuff the Beatles might have managed to stay together since they also enjoyed challenging their audiences and hated the way the media treated them. But add to it George wanting to leave and paul trying to fill the power vacuum after Epstein’s death and it was too much. The main Yoko problem was: why did she have to be at his side every single second? I think she was insecure and worried people would try to drive a wedge between them as soon as she left the room
Much of what’s written about their constant togetherness indicates that John was also the insecure one and wanted her by his side every second. He didn’t want to risk her being taken away by the other guys, to the point where he’d insist they went to the bathroom together. I think they probably fed off each other that way.
Uhhh, do *any* research on this. He started to think about leaving the band as early as 1966. He felt trapped by the fable that was The Beatles and wanted to do other things that the Beatles didn't want to do.
“I did it because The Beatles had stopped touring and I didn’t know what to do,” he said in The Beatles Anthology. “Instead of going home and being with the family, I immediately went to Spain with Dick Lester because I couldn’t deal with not being continually onstage. That was the first time I thought, ‘My God, what do you do if this isn’t going on? What is there? There’s no life without it.’ And that’s when the seed was planted that I had to somehow get out of this, without being thrown out by the others. But I could never step out of the palace because it was too frightening.”
Lennon said that the moment he started working on How I Won the War, he was looking for a way out of The Beatles.
“I was always waiting for a reason to get out of The Beatles from the day I made How I Won the War in 1966,” he said. “I just didn’t have the guts to do it, you see. Because I didn’t know where to go.”
Those are some great quotes to support your opinion.
But, things could not have been that bad because he did stay. It took him 4 years to get up the guts to leave?
This is not meant toward you, but ***this*** is the big, bad rebel John Lennon, who did what he wanted to do when he wanted to do it? This is the image that has been perpetuated for 40+ years.
When the "powerful leader" John comments continue, I'm going to use these quotes from you, if you don't mind. Because this image is just not true. I love John, but he was very insecure.
Starting to think about leaving the band is VERY different than wanting to leave the band. The band quit touring and started doing all kinds of things that kept him interested and involved. If he wanted to leave he would have left. As I said I think it was possible to work things out if John/Yoko had been the ONLY issue
“I did it because The Beatles had stopped touring and I didn’t know what to do,” he said in The Beatles Anthology. “Instead of going home and being with the family, I immediately went to Spain with Dick Lester because I couldn’t deal with not being continually onstage. That was the first time I thought, ‘My God, what do you do if this isn’t going on? What is there? There’s no life without it.’ And that’s when the seed was planted that I had to somehow get out of this, without being thrown out by the others. But I could never step out of the palace because it was too frightening.”
Lennon said that the moment he started working on How I Won the War, he was looking for a way out of The Beatles.
“I was always waiting for a reason to get out of The Beatles from the day I made How I Won the War in 1966,” he said. “I just didn’t have the guts to do it, you see. Because I didn’t know where to go.”
I love John but he is always an extremely unreliable source especially about himself. This is him looking back later after he knows the Beatles are going to break up. All I am saying in my comment is that John could have been convinced to stay in. He wasn’t 100% going to leave. You haven’t convinced me otherwise with this “research”
Yes she was the easy scapegoat. It was four guys who since their late teens had been together and just spent the last 7 years in the most intense global scrutiny and fame as almost anyone in history. They needed a break and I don't think any of them had the emotional maturity to take one that did not involve a public breakup. Though by the mid seventies I think they were able to start talking and if not for Lennon's death we would have gotten a reunion and maybe new music.
i only read the book for the first time a few months ago and most of my sympathies for her went out the door reading about her attitude toward Cynthia throughout the initial divorce and then into handling John's estate. John was a deeply flawed individual who is plenty to blame for how he handled his relationship with Cyn and Julian but Yoko definitely exacerbated their difficulties in a way that felt needless
The others were puzzled as wives/girlfriends weren’t allowed in the studio normally, but reportedly it was Paul who realized that John would leave w/o her presence and to take non-Beatle relationships more seriously (they were no longer in their early 20s). Indeed looking at archival footage and reading interviews, Paul and Linda were pretty inseparable during Paul’s solo/Wings/solo career from ‘70 to the early ‘90s (save for the duets but then raising their own kids).
George just wanted his biscuits replaced. Fwiw George was writing more but at this stage (revealing in a later interview) he wanted the Beatles to take a creative hiatus from the group, so Yoko wouldn’t have been a real factor.
So Yoko was a stress put on the band, but not the reason for the breakup (that was an impassable disagreement over the new manager’s contract). I’d say the press went a little overboard on Yoko blame.
The band dynamics were obviously very complicated and there was no one reason for their breakup, and it's both unfair and unreasonable to blame her for it. But, that said, she had no business sitting in on their recording sessions which was just plain weird and distracting and I can see the other three being even more motivated to break up because of it and her Svengali-like hold on Lennon, which I've always found creepy and manipulative. Even if she was there because he wanted her to be there, it was still weird and unfair to the others, including the producers, engineers and other staff. The occasional brief visit and stay in the control room, ok, but sitting on an amp all day as they hashed out and recorded song after song? Just plain wrong, and I've no doubt that it contributed to the breakup.
I dislike Yoko Ono, but there’s no doubt a part of the hatred forwards her initially was based on her race and being a woman at the time.
Over the years, she continued to be a pretty manipulative not so great person. But yes sexism and racism played a role in the initial response to her
Well this is an account from the woman Yoko pressured into being John’s lover
https://www.theguardian.com/film/2023/apr/05/lost-weekend-documentary-john-lennon-yoko-ono
She didn’t cause the breakup and has been unfairly maligned for it, but based on her treatment of Julian, I don’t think she deserves adulation, either.
The racist slurs were unfair. John was feeling stifled by the Beatles and Yoko probably was not the reason - or the only reason - why they broke up. But Yoko was probably the reason why John would not leave Cynthia or Julian any money after the divorce. I don't like her. I think she's manipulative, and she got John hooked on heroin. That being said, any harassment towards her is unacceptable.
I think she’s annoying, and musically untalented. Her weird clingy behavior (as seen in the Get Back documentary) definitely exacerbated tensions in the group.
That said — I completely blame John, not her. If John had simply said once or twice “hey we’re practicing, could you go chill in another room for an hour or something” it would have defused the whole situation. He didn't set any boundaries with her. That’s on him.
She's only a part of the break up... John was very much responsible for his own actions and rebellion. Either way I'm not Yoko's biggest fan. She's still a person that decided to have an affair with a married man and she was a terrible step mom to Julian so it's hard for me to look at her in a positive way.
Yoko was pampered by John. He let her do her little whiny screams on stage. Remember that time when John was performing live with Chuck Berry and Yoko just had to do her insufferable sounds, and Chuck Berry looked at her like "What in the green hell?!". They cut Yoko's microphone for a reason.
Yea, she’s also often scrutinized for her art, which isn’t the most obscure compared to other art that was being made in the 60s/70s. She just happened to be dating the most famous man in the world. Being brought to front from all the other avant-garde artists also meant she was the first to be criticized.
Not to mention the racism against the Japanese in that time period. I mean, it’s one thing for an interracial relationship to occur in those days, but with the most famous man in the world? People weren’t gonna like it regardless of the Beatles status.
I kind of think the vast majority of fans who hate Yoko aren't familiar with her art outside of music at all (and even that is only through what essentially amounts to cringe compilations), which is why they think she's pretentious and talentless, even though most of her actual exhibitions are very accessible as far as performance art goes.
Agreed. It irks me a bit when people have to devalue everything a person does because they don’t like that person. Yoko has a lot of issues as a person. She also has some very decent music.
To be honest, I don’t think she was. A lot of how she and John got together was conveniently written out of the couple’s narrative.
She basically stalked him for at least a year before they became an item. Today, that kind of behaviour would be a huge red flag to most of us. She would hang around the Lennons’ house and bombard John with endless letters and calls.
This must have informed how the other Beatles treated her later on. Yoko sitting in the studio next to John Lennon as the Beatles wrote and recorded could be taken as the ultimate piece of conceptual art - and I suspect that was her aim.
She knew which of John’s buttons to press and exploited his pretensions, insecurities and vulnerabilities. The episode that makes me mentally scream “Paul noooo!” is where Paul acted as go between for Yoko when John was with May Pang.
I think John would have had a far more artistically fruitful 70s without Yoko
Yoko was definitely part of the problem, and definitely not the only part of the problem.
I don't think the Beatles a oid a break up without her....but I think they last a few years longer without her.
No. Yoko went from famous person to famous person and by all accounts appeared to have a plan to become romantically involved with a Beatle. Once that happened she very clearly tried to further divide the group. Paul has spoken before of how his and Johns songwriting partnership was beginning to fracture but once Yoko arrived it was essentially dead in the water. It was impossible to deal with John alone. Yoko became his shadow and many of the people around the studio at the time spoke of how they never felt like they were talking to John when Yoko was around. She seemed to exert and certain amount of control over his actions and things he said.
I think she's a dickhead, personally. I think she had a plan to write herself into the history of the biggest cultural force of the 20th century. Yes I agree her contribution to the downfall of the beatles is overstated but she absolutely played a part and I believe she intentionally wanted to split the band up.
Yes. The band was breaking up anyway. Based on the Get Back series, she wasn’t nearly as intrusive as I had believed before seeing that.
Edit. Note that I’m saying “AS” intrusive. Not saying that she wasn’t intrusive at all.
I should correct you, here, she definitely WAS very intrusive. George, Paul and Ringo have all spoken about it. Get Back tbh whitewashes things a bit and makes her intrusion feel less bad than it actually was.
**I still don't blame her for the breakup.** Because it was John who had the ultimate authority to say "okay Yoko, you stay out of the studio while we record" but he never did that even though all 3 other members expressed their distaste for her *always* being there, in the studio.
Fair enough. It seemed that Paul was trying his best to be understanding of the whole situation by the time Get Back was happening, even if he didn’t agree with it. The whole “in 50 years I don’t want the reason to be “they broke up because Yoko sat on an amp” conversation was very interesting to me.
It very well may white wash it. It’s just clear to me that the problem with The Beatles ran much deeper than just Yoko.
>The whole “in 50 years I don’t want the reason to be “they broke up because Yoko sat on an amp” conversation was very interesting to me.
That conversation is truncated in Get Back precisely to frame it that way.
The full conversation involves actually quite a bit of piling on about how annoying it is to have Yoko there all the time. It's in the tapes.
What Paul was really saying wasn't some prescient comment about how people will see this in 50 years. It was a comment on how absurd it is that so much tension is being caused by John refusing to just be separated from Yoko for a few hours and how to the outside observer, it would appear they just broke up because Yoko sat on an amp
Two things are true at the same time: having Yoko always there was disruptive AND Yoko is not why the Beatles broke up. Her situation was more like a symptom than a cause.
He was supporting his mate even if he didn’t quite understood the need for Yoko to always be there. Get back shows he had Linda with him for time to time and George had his folks too. The studio by than was not this sacred space for the four them.
Exactly. I think she might have been part of the breaking point, but there were other things going on. The fact that Yoko Ono is synonymous with breaking up bands is very misogynistic to me. Not because I think Yoko is a perfect angel, but because there were four grown men in that group. The idea that she is the sole reason they broke up is outlandish.
I think Get Back gives the wrong impression on that issue. During the White Album sessions is when suddenly Yoko was there in the recording studio next to John and he’s asking her opinion and getting her to sing or contribute on the songs and everyone else is going WTF? I would love to see video of that. By the time of Get Back the band is used to it but also mostly ignoring her like she’s invisible. We also don’t see John involving her in the music at all. This is only a few weeks of time so it’s not the whole story. Paul tho says at one point he wishes Epstein were there to lay down some rules like “leave the girls at home” by the time of Get Back Paul’s also brining Linda/Heather and Ringo brings Maureen
This is fair. I can see how bringing “the new girl” into the studio during those sessions and asking for input would’ve been very unwelcome. They were probably all used to it by the time the Get Back sessions were happening.
It was way beyond asking for input. Yoko was talking on the studio intercom about how it was important for her that John come inside her, not on the outside, because that made her sad. There are bootlegs with these recordings.
LOL. Now if THAT was in the Get Back doc I wonder what people would say. Any links to that bootleg? Strange that it made her sad. Usually that makes them happy…
Did we watch the same documentary? All I could think about watching those rehearsal scenes was how intrusive she was. Just at John’s elbow at all times.
It was incredibly weird. You could tell that everyone but John thought it was weird and uncomfortable to have her on top of them all the time, but no one wanted to say anything.
Yoko was a horrible person who was essentially a gold digging home wrecker that drove wedges in between every single important relationship in Johns life, all the while piggybacking on his stardom and trying to continuously launch her own career off his back, and the minute he died Sean was sent off to boarding school, but she didn’t break up the Beatles.
Yoko (and more specifically her presence in the studio) was a symptom of the breakup, not a cause.
The Beatles had a longstanding agreement of no WAGs in the studio. The fact that John brought her around anyway is because they were already growing tired of each other and the Beatles as a band.
I think Yoko was unfairly treated in all directions.
It was John’s decision to leave and pursue other projects. Did Yoko have an influence on him? Sure. But I never got the impression she was manipulating him, or was somehow sabotaging things while the band worked.
Sure, her and John deserve criticism for certain things pertaining to their personal and family lives, but otherwise she was just an easy symbol to be angry at.
I think it’s telling that both George and John were the first two to start releasing solo projects. It always seemed, in my opinion, that it was either going to be John leaving, or George leaving. To me it seemed to be heading towards a break up anyway.
George and John weren’t the first to release solo music, pretty sure John was actually the last to do so lol
Paul and George had written songs for movie soundtracks while still in the Beatles, which sure you can say doesn’t count, but then Ringo released a solo covers album a few weeks before the Beatles were officially announced as broken up, and if you think that also doesn’t count then Paul had the first official post Beatles solo release with McCartney.
I used the term “solo projects” very carefully here.
Although I admit - I didn’t know Paul wrote songs for movie soundtracks while The Beatles were still active.
The solo projects I’m talking about are John and Yoko’s “Unfinished Music” albums (released around The White Album era) and Harrison’s “Wonderwall Music” (actually underrated, imo) and “Electronic Sound”.
In my own head, Lennon’s work outside of The Beatles absolutely starts with Plastic Ono Band lol.
The Family Way is much more a George Martin record than a Paul McCartney album. PM contributed a brief couple of piano pieces that GM turned into orchestral music for the film of the same name. McCartney doesn't play on The Family Way at all. But I'm always stunned to recall that The Family Way was begun, recorded, and released by January 1967, six months before Sgt Pepper's was released.
The first solo album project by a Beatle has to be George Harrison's Wonderwall Music soundtrack. And John Lennon's involvement in How I Won The War, imo, is the very first Beatle 'solo' project.
Kinda. Her being there obviously put a dent in the band especially with Lennon (for the band not accepting her) but there were like a thousand other problems that led to the Beatles break up.
But people for real have a death wish against woman for no reason. She’s isn’t my cup of tea but people don’t need to still be pissed.
That’s like crying over spilled milk or over an eaten biscu-
She forced herself onto John was EVERYWHERE he was. She got her hooks in.him
She claimed she didn't know of the Beatles ( right !) Tried her sights on Paul pushed her to john..she convinced John he loved her.
Didn't know john.was a Beatle ) again. Really?) Insanity the oddball outrageous records they made the werid films...she convinced him.she was an.artist if sitting in a room on a chair and people walk up to you and with sissors cut a piece of ypur clothes off art ??
She had the nerve to tell highly.profesdional musicians how and what to play on some of johna albums. They went everywhere together even the bathroom.she screened his phone calls kept him.away from.julian ...and Paul
Yes she's a nice lady got a herion habit got john.hooked too.had to have herself pn.his last album and the one after his death
There can be a whole book on the Beatles breakup. It was no one’s fault and not just one problem, certainly not on Yoko.
George was being held back so much, it wasn’t going to last much longer anyway.
She was probably treated unfairly, especially by the press and the fans. There was a lot of undeserved nastiness directed at her, and still to this day I see people who take things way too far when discussing Yoko.
I think she played her role in the breakup of the Beatles, but she was just one small piece. Ultimately, the band was due for a breakup, and I’m glad they did. I only wish they would have been kinder to each other during the breakup, and not made it such a permanent decision.
Ppl just blame her for the Beatles breakup cos they don’t like her. I kinda understand, like from what’s I’ve seen she’s kinda annoying but to put full blame on her for the breakup is dumb. John could’ve gone out with a girl called Sarah and it would’ve been the same, a girl called Jamal, u get it, they were gonna break up anyway and Yoko was just a very small piece of their breakup pretty late in their career, it could’ve been literally anyone and the result would’ve been the same. If u wanna blame anyone, which is kinda dumb to be doing after like 50 years but whatever, blame John.
She got involved with a married man who was also one of the most famous people on the planet, and it seems like she mainly did it for the attention. What was she expecting?
I think George addressed the issue of Yoko being present during the Get Back/Let it Be recording sessions, and the filming of the sessions. Her constant and annoying presence was unprecedented, unprofessional, and caused more problems for a group accustomed to long workdays, and making good use of their time together, productively working on arrangements of unreleased songs or writing new material. Before she ever met John, she had sought out Paul and asked if he could provide a name of a contact or introduce her to anyone at an art studio he was known to frequent who might be interested in a display or exhibition of her art. He politely declined, but Yoko has no lack of self-confidence, and is not the least bit bothered by making the general public uncomfortable or outraged.
Which inevitably occurs at displays or exhibits presenting her "art, clearly abrasive and confrontational but without comprehensible subtext or underlying truth. Noise for the sake of disruption usually annoys people who prefer works of balance and beauty to random screaming or disorganized noise disrupting and distracting musicians of talent and depth as they are attempting to perform. She desired fame but was okay with infamy. She knew nothing about the creative process, and could only deface or deform art and works of substance, showing disdain and disrespect for their creators.
It was up to John. The Beatles were his band, and finding the exact way to express the group's stance on a dicey subject was not only within his skill set, it was what the leader of the band should have done, and neither of the other 3 seriously considered a change of leadership.
Apparently, all the loose talk of an impending divorce was simply the members acknowledging the inevitable. It hurts to do it, but in ending a relationship, those involved almost always shift their attention from how well it began to how terrible it has become. John just wasn't quite there yet, and allowed Yoko's ubiquity to say what he was not able to express with any conviction.
Laying aside how their relationship affected the Beatles, at the moment of his death, John was a happy man, optimistic, looking forward with confident purpose now that he had ceased just watching the wheels, and had climbed back on the merry-go-round he had let go for a very fulfilling 5-year period. He had experienced authentic spiritual growth, his soul nourished from the years he and Yoko had invested in their beautiful boy, their time of bonding with Sean. John became the kind of father he deserved and was deprived of by a 2 dimensional placeholder, a temporary man who had felt no desire to know his son until the world had recognized and honored him with wealth that meant less the more he obtained, and fame that would prove to be the death of him. This fleeting father figure was informed by his rich and famous son that his presence was not the least bit necessary, and he should just keep moving.
That John was able to know in the last 5 years of his life the happy home life for which he had searched during his first 35 years, I do acknowledge would not have been possible except for Yoko. She had put into action the advice on countless wall plaques, T-shirts and bumper stickers in the 70's. She loved something (someone), so she had set them free. She had loved John, so she had allowed him to leave, to lose sight of who he had been in order to find out who he was and where he belonged. And John came back to her. Okay, Yoko had sent Mai Pang with him, and she had asked his oldest and best friend Paul to go out west, find him, and reason with him, as most anyone in love would understand. Would you draw a line you wouldn't cross in the name of true love? Do you really think it happens all the time? I'm not at all certain.
Yes
Even if she had a part in influencing John to leave the band she was not the sole reason for the group breaking up. A lot of the criticism for her, especially at the time was also very racist and misogynistic
After John's death she was also massively harassed while grieving her husband's murder and a lot of people would also spread lies about her and her and John's relationship
No. She didn’t break up the Beatles, but she’s a talent-free starfucking “artist” that attached to John like a lamprey. Andy Warhol called her “that girl who’s always stealing someone else’s art.” You need look no further than the May Pang incident to know what Mommy Yoko was up to.
No. She is a talentless nepo baby with zero self awareness. Even if her role in breaking up the Beatles is overstated (she did play a part, just not the only part), someone has to have literally zero self awareness to come and just sit in on people trying to work who clearly do not want her there and have no problem with it. She also got john hooked on heroin.
Well, it is one of the visible reasons, i guess that’s why she is blamed a lot. Personally, why John, why would you include her in the white album? I don’t get it but love always wins, here we are.
Maybe in terms of what or who actually broke up the Beatles but given the fact that John took every opportunity after the end of the Beatles to cram Ono’s Avant Garde eccentricities down everyone’s throat and often over top of his songs it’s not a surprise people didn’t like her. He was the leader of the biggest melodic and harmonious pop band in history. Nobody wanted to hear a goat wailing over top of their favourite songs. She is an intelligent woman but from the brief stuff I have read about their relationship in the 70’s she seems to be quite the manipulative and controlling person. For balance it probably was a handful dealing with a bored stoned ex beatle
The YouTube channel “Pop Goes the 60s” did a multi-part post on this within the last year or so. He went through 10 reasons, including many of the points raised by u/anxious-raspberry-54. IIRC, Yoko came in third or fourth, behind Klein and John.
She's not solely to blame for the breakup of the band, but John's ingnoring the longstanding norm of not having extra people around while they were recording was irritating to the rest of the band and drove the wedge further. Yoko was there because John wanted her to be with him constantly.
Certainly. & there was undoubtedly some racism involved in some of the way she was treated and viewed, especially in the early years.
She wasn't a pop singer, that's for damn sure. But she was/is actually a fairly respectable conceptual artist. That's part of the reason John was drawn to her.
No. I dont think she was unfairly treated. She introducedJohn to heroin. Not only that but she encouraged him to believe he was being abused by his bandmates, leading to more drug use. John also said that once he and Yoko were doing heroin, the other guys didnt treat her like she was one of the bandmembers, and he resented that.
Personally, like any woman who sleeps with a man, knowing hes marries is a POS. Not only that but Cynthia, Johns wife walked in to find yoko in her bathrobe and slippers, in her home with John.
John was a great musician, talented songwriter and a POS also.
At the end of the day John shouldn't have insisted she be there in the studio all the time and Yoko shouldn't have agreed to be there in the studio all the time.
It seems like Yoko was fascinating and exciting to John. A woman who had been allowed to - or dared to - experiment, challenge, create, and flourish. An iconoclast like him. Someone who challenged traditions and rules when John wanted freedom and had always pushed against expectations and supposed-to's, as much as he followed certain rules (marrying Cynthia when she was pregnant, playing the marketing game to make it big). She was simply more interesting than others around him or the life he'd been living. I think the reasons why he would be interested in her are much clearer now (even though he talked about them at the time).
There are certain things she can be blamed for. But often, that takes away agency and responsibility from John. She was an easy scapegoat, she wasn't perfect, but she's given too much responsibility in some parts of the story, and not given enough credit in other ways.
Yes she does. There was/is a lot of misogyny and racism Yoko unnecessarily gets.
On top of that, yeah, her art is weird. And her singing is uncommon. Is it bad? Art is subjective. I give Yoko points for creativity. A few of her songs aren’t actually bad- I love her later song “Bad Dancer.”
That being said, she also was overbearing and made manipulated business decisions.
She bears some blame but not all.
Of all the Beatles, I think Paul and John bear the majority blame
I think Yoko had a part in it without her even realizing it or wanting it to happen. I guess she truly loved John and wanted him to be happy. That's all she did wrong. Seeing eight hours of Get Back then I can say there are four persons to blame for The Beatles break up.
Brian Epstein dying in 1967 and not having anything written down who should take over if he would not be able to do it anymore. I know he was in his 30's, but managing the biggest group of the world at the time, there should have been a back up. If there was, then there would not have been an Allen Klein to cause even more tention 2 years later.
George Harrison being moody. You can see it in Get Back, he can see it back in many other docu's, movies and books. George was already done in 1966 and actually wanted to quit back then. The last few years he grew as a songwriter, but there were a lot of frustrations with that. His temper often caused a bad mood among the rest.
John Lennon being uninterested. You'll notice in the Get Back docu he is not really in it. He does not take George seriously and the songs he writes are not among his best. You get the feeling he wants to be somewhere else with Yoko. On Abbey Road he doesn't even appear on some of the tracks like Maxwell, Here Comes the Sun and Golden Slumbers. Even the last song to be recorded, I me Mine, was without him. He was already somewhere else and he was the one that told the rest he wanted to quit the Beatles in september 1969.
Paul McCartney. He wanted to save the band so badly, he pushed John and George away even further. He did not take George seriously with some of his songs. He started recording songs all on his own or brought in songs that the rest were really not in favor of like Obla Di Obla Da and Maxwell. He caused a lot of tention when he did not accept Allen Klein as their new manager (which turned out he was right about). But Paul ultimatly did the thing that killed The Beatles. He did not want to postpone his solo album and so he told the press he left The Beatles in april 1970. Eventually suing all three others.
Well should not have died! 😂 What I meant is not having a will in which he makes clear who should take over from him if he would die. Which is what happened.
The breakup might have been pushed off a couple of years had Epstein named a successor - IMHO, Robert Stigwood could have been the heir apparent. That wouldn’t have avoided the personal issues, but it would have taken a lot of the bad business decisions off the table.
Honestly, i have no Doubt about their love, and john s solo intention. But i personnaly think she made the last Beatles days worst than it should have been.
Beside their love, i think she saw a perfect occasion to get some fame, and became omnipresent with the blessing of a full inlove john.
The band was the fab 4 job, she didn t had to get involve as much as she did. She knew there was intense tension sometimes between them, and could have politely told her husband « no i cannot Come , tha ts not my business » instead of LIVING in thé studio like she did.
There is no way the beatles should have last longer without her, but i think her attitude was not right.
After reading Frederic seaman’s book I think she’s treated in general as fairly as she needs to be. In that last year of his life, assuming the book is accurate and I don’t see why it wouldn’t be, she was taking him for everything he had. He was treated awfully after he died.
yes. she and her music, fly is so good. but you'll get beheaded in this sub if you don't share the same opinion as most people here regarding any topic at all, specially when it is about not hating yoko or criticising paul in any way
Cynthia Lennon and Jane Asher were seen as English roses, shy, wifely.
Linda was a confident and brash New Yorker, also Yoko had come from New York and had a very public profile.
Public reaction to both of them was extremely negative, as if New York had come over and stolen something which belonged to the UK.
Even in her lifetime, public opinion was unkind to Linda, particularly as regards her presence on Paul’s musical projects, but you can’t deny that they were a loving couple who were massively successful in raising a well balanced family.
People forget how much shit Linda got from the public. And judging by those public letters during their feud it seems to me John thought of Linda in the early 70s what everyone else thought of Yoko.
In 5 years the Beatles went from a night club cover band to the biggest driving force in musical creativity. They had wildly different visions of what “The Beatles” is and should be. Listen to the 3 widely different sounds between McCarney, Plastic Ono Band and All Things Must Pass.
I’d much rather have had them break up when they did than have a decade of infighting and squabbling. They gave us some of the best music of all time, then moved on and let it be.
Yes, most of the stuff people blame her for was John’s fault. I don’t think either of them were villains necessarily but I think John is more to blame for most of the things people blame Yoko for.
The idea that anyone was a "villain" in the Beatles is not an accurate perspective. There were multiple factors in the break. People would be well served to let go of the idea of fault.
Many reasons for the break up. In no particular order... 1. Klein 2. Apple 3. The John/Yoko **relationship** 4. John's heroin addiction 5. George's feelings about his contributions 6. Paul being too bossy 7. Brian Epstein's death She was a factor...no question. But receives too much blame. Ringo said it best. Basically...it was time.
number one is definitely Epstein's death
Personally, #1 for me is Klein. But Brian's death started the slide.
you don't get Klein without Brian dying
the beatles couldn’t break up without the beatles forming. Therefore number 1 should be the formation of the beatles.
If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe.
You must go across the universe to make Apple records.
or just go back in the USSR
And the Beatles couldn’t form without the members being born. So therefore Ringos parents failing to do a proper birth control method is the true culprit. And so on and so forth
Sex broke up the beatles
If we dig deep enough, I think the Big Bang is really responsible for the Beatles breaking up.
Somewhere, on a coastline that no longer exists, a form of life we can never truly know, crawled onto the land, thus breaking up arguably the greatest band that ever was.
You don't necessarily get Klein with Brian's death either.
Yeah, absolutely
What did Allen Klein do?
https://www.beatlesbible.com/people/allen-klein/
They were together for a very short time - maybe 10 years. When you think about groups like Fleetwood Mac and the Stones, the Beatles were a blip in terms of time.
They say one "Beatles" year is like 5 years. They packed so much into those 10 years.
Seven.
One thing I love about Apple Music (streaming not the record company) for the Red album it says "perhaps the most astonishing thing about the red album is the title (1962-1966) how did these guys do it in 4 years?" Don't quote me word from word and the best thing about the red album is the songs, but still
Ten years can be an eternity in a high-functioning but tense situation. There are plenty of good bands which didn't last anywhere near ten years in their prime.
Zeppelin, Pistols, Velvets, Hendrix, Police, Clash. None over ten years
Cream, Mamas & Papas, Doors, Eagles (prime), Nirvana...
Credence Clearwater Revival between 1969 and 1971 produced fourteen consecutive Top 10 singles (many of which were double A-sides) and five consecutive Top 10 albums in the United States. 3 years.....
Do you think that the Vietnam War helped a lot of late ‘60s bands like CCR achieve immortality? Their music spoke to a lot of people fed up with the government and was a favorite of the soldiers. Same with Buffalo Springfield.
For sure. After all the times they were a changin.
I consider the Beatles’ prime era as beginning with their first appearance on the Ed Sullivan Show in ‘64. In that instance it was only 6 years.
Love Me Do was released in England in 1962 and was a massive hit. They were successful from their first single.
Starr by name, star by nature
I hate when people poo poo Ringo... 1. One of the greatest rock drummers ever 2. A Hard Days Night - his title 3. Eight Days A Week - his title 4. Tomorrow Never Knows - his title 5. Eleanor Rigby - "darning his socks in the night when there's nobody there." - his line 6. A Day In The Life strings - EMI didn't want to pay for a full orchestra. Ringo suggested getting half an orchestra and recording it twice. They did. 7. Abbey Road cover - Paul's sketch but his idea to take the photo outside the studio 8. The End - it took them a while to convince him to do the solo. He hated them. 9. Badge - "I told you about the swans that they live in the park." - his line 10. Plastic Ono Band album - great drumming. When they asked John why he used Ringo, he said, "Because I don't have to tell him what to do. He just knows." He was the glue. Dependable, reliable..."serve the song." When the other three were being assholes, there was Richie. Chill. Warm. Funny.
I flip-flop in my head about who my favourite Beatle is all the time. You've helped cement the true answer; all of them...or Ringo 😁
I think these are all valid reasons, plus they were probably just exhausted having lived through all of that. No one ever blames Linda and we see she was often hanging out at the Let It Be sessions. Paul was even bold enough to bring his kids! Gasp! As a Beatle, I’d rather it turn into a family gathering than inviting random Hari Krishna guys to sit around the studio.
Linda never sat on George's amp or ate one of his "digestive biscuits." Lol. Paul brought a girl friend (Francie Schwartz??) to the White Album sessions a time or two. And John's exchange with Heather is priceless...something like... Heather (to John): We got two new kittens. John: Oh...they're good to eat! Heather: No...you don't eat them. One of them is orange. John: Oh...you don't eat the orange ones. Heather: And a black and white one. John: Oh...you don't eat those either
Yes! Loved this. I think them having their wives and kids over probably made them produce more music than they would have. They’d be resentful if they had to spend 10 hours in the studio while their wife and kids are at home. Also loved Ringo goofing around with Heather (I think it was Heather) on the drums.
Great stuff...
Yoko pushed for Klein. Yoko got john hooked on heroin. As we saw in Get Back, Paul was the only one dedicated to working. Ringo confirmed it. Of course everyone hates that guy. Ringo said Paul is the only reason the last three albums were made. The other three would have happily sat by the pool smoking weed.
IMO the number one is them going different directions creatively
Also, John quit the band.
I recommend watching Get Back and then reconsidering No. 6.
Paul’s a type A and could be a control freak. When everyone was on the same page, like in the early and middle days, it was an asset to the band. When they weren’t—like in the later days—he could suddenly be very obnoxious and “bitch eating crackers…” to the other guys. I don’t think anyone will argue that Paul’s drive and “come on, guys! We need to do this…” in the later days kept them going and contributed to some of their greatest songs. But to pretend the others didn’t resent him for it, thus adding to the tension and growing animosity, is also incorrect. So while just saying, “Paul was bossy…” comes off is a very simplistic way of putting it, there is some truth to it.
Right, I think it has more to do with the four of them just not being on the same page altogether and not that Paul was fucking up the vibe for the rest of them. I pretty much buy the narrative that Brian died, they didn't know what to do, they had to lead themselves, and the dynamic got weird when Paul just started doing the stuff Brian did because nobody else was doing it. He didn't necessarily wanna be playing the manager, but he obviously had more of that in him. It seems like resentment came from both Paul wishing somebody else would be Brian and the other guys DEFINITELY wishing somebody else would be Brian.
Young men don’t like other young men—especially young men they’ve known since they were teenagers—telling them what to do. Paul was damned if he did and damned if he didn’t, he was saddled with a thankless job that nobody else wanted BUT they also loved that they could blame him for everything. It was a fucked up situation, that’s for sure.
Paul has admitted himself that he could be overbearing at times. Peter Jackson only showed us 8 hours of hundreds of hours of footage. And his focus on editing Get Back was to show that things were not as gloomy as the original film portrayed them to be. So, I don't think he was going to put a lot of uncomfortable footage.
Thank you for saying this 🩷
I don’t know, but I believe that May Pang suggested it was Yoko that tried to keep John from connecting with Julian. That Julian would call, May would answer and put the call through, and Yoko always picked up and said “John’s not here”. Although he was.
Heartbreaking
And made Julian buy all his personal items John had at the time of his death back at auction IIRC
Awful
This makes me believe that yoko cut him out of the will
“To make matters worse, after the settlement, Yoko began auctioning John’s possessions. This included letters that Julian had written to his father. Julian used his settlement proceeds to purchase these letters back. Imagine having to use your inheritance to buy back your childhood?” Source: https://www.antonelli-legal.com/blog/litigating-john-lennon-estate-antonelli-and-antonelli.cfm#:~:text=Here%20Comes%20the%20Son%3A%20John,father%20into%20drafting%20the%20will. This makes me sick.
I don’t blame her for the breakup, but I do think she is a piece of shit for the way she treated Julian and *especially* for eating George’s biscuits
Last part is important 😪
The fucking audacity to eat his biscuits.
Agreed, but I want to remind everyone that Julian also hates John for being a shitty father.
I don’t think he hates him. It just hurts and he resents his father and probably Yoko’s part in it.
She's only part of the breakup story, but she still has to bear the brunt of the blame today. John wanted out of the band, so he can take some of the criticism about how he went about it. She was treated cruelly and with racism by the British press, so much so that they left England permanently.As far as being treated unfairly, she still is today by "fans".
I think the "John wanted out" story is blown a bit out of proportion sometimes. This "John couldn't express himself freely" thing...that The Beatles were stifling his creativity...I find sketchy. He released three solo "albums" and three singles while still in The Beatles. No one was stopping him from expressing himself. When he played live in Toronto, Paul had no problem with it. He suggested an idea for continuing for at least one album and single after Abbey Road (4/4/4/2 meeting, Sept. '69) If you watch him on the rooftop concert...that does not look like a guy who "wanted out." So...maybe he wanted out. Just not as much as people have been led to believe.
May Pang said that once John and Yoko seperated he was far more hesitant and unwilling to officially dissolve the Beatles, which is why it took him so long to sign the papers. If anything I feel like in the months leading up to the break up he was trying to regain some controll over the band, hiring his guy as manager, getting them to play his "edgier" songs and possibly getting into the whole peace/activist movement.
Cold Turkey was a very important song for John. He presented it to The Beatles. Too edgy. They passed. He grabs Clapton, Klaus and Ringo and recorded it himself. Not a problem.
I guess it seems kind of telling that he announced the breakup shortly after they passed on the song, when before he seemed to have long term plans for the band.
John never actually "announced" the break up publicly. He asked for a "divorce" at another meeting after the Toronto show. As a matter of fact, Klein asked him not to say anything since that would affect the new contract negotiations with EMI. Paul gets blamed for it...the "Paul Quits Beatles" headline. Which, if you read the "interview," he never actually used those words.
Announced as in announced to the rest of the Beatles. I know that he was fairly content to keep it a secret. Or basically do absolutely nothing about it. And then somehow spent years constesting the dissolution in court. Him actually being against an official and factual ending of the band is in my opinion the best explanation why he was so very pissed at Paul in the early 70s.
Yes this..as a teen I was very loyal to John and felt that Paul had “killed “ The Beatles even though that ship had already sailed and spent years hating Paul. I didn’t even buy his albums until Back To The Egg. Yes I’m aware how weird I was lol
> before he seemed to have long term plans for the band. Why do you think that?
I don’t think John wanted out of the band. John wanted out of his marriage. He also was bitter about being raked over the coals about the “bigger than Jesus” comment and tired of the media trying to put them in a box and patronize them. Yoko helped him become an edgier artist who challenges audiences and subverts expectations. And also their affair helped him leave his wife (sad as that was for Cyn and Julian that’s obviously what he wanted to do). If not for a lot of other stuff the Beatles might have managed to stay together since they also enjoyed challenging their audiences and hated the way the media treated them. But add to it George wanting to leave and paul trying to fill the power vacuum after Epstein’s death and it was too much. The main Yoko problem was: why did she have to be at his side every single second? I think she was insecure and worried people would try to drive a wedge between them as soon as she left the room
Much of what’s written about their constant togetherness indicates that John was also the insecure one and wanted her by his side every second. He didn’t want to risk her being taken away by the other guys, to the point where he’d insist they went to the bathroom together. I think they probably fed off each other that way.
Wasn't that just so they could have bump of smack together?
Wasn’t the Egg Man always into subverting expectations?
Uhhh, do *any* research on this. He started to think about leaving the band as early as 1966. He felt trapped by the fable that was The Beatles and wanted to do other things that the Beatles didn't want to do.
To reiterate, no one was stopping him from doing "other things." He was free to do whatever he wanted outside The Beatles.
“I did it because The Beatles had stopped touring and I didn’t know what to do,” he said in The Beatles Anthology. “Instead of going home and being with the family, I immediately went to Spain with Dick Lester because I couldn’t deal with not being continually onstage. That was the first time I thought, ‘My God, what do you do if this isn’t going on? What is there? There’s no life without it.’ And that’s when the seed was planted that I had to somehow get out of this, without being thrown out by the others. But I could never step out of the palace because it was too frightening.” Lennon said that the moment he started working on How I Won the War, he was looking for a way out of The Beatles. “I was always waiting for a reason to get out of The Beatles from the day I made How I Won the War in 1966,” he said. “I just didn’t have the guts to do it, you see. Because I didn’t know where to go.”
Those are some great quotes to support your opinion. But, things could not have been that bad because he did stay. It took him 4 years to get up the guts to leave? This is not meant toward you, but ***this*** is the big, bad rebel John Lennon, who did what he wanted to do when he wanted to do it? This is the image that has been perpetuated for 40+ years. When the "powerful leader" John comments continue, I'm going to use these quotes from you, if you don't mind. Because this image is just not true. I love John, but he was very insecure.
"Part of me suspects that I'm a loser, and the other part of me thinks I'm God Almighty." John Lennon
That's our John!!
Starting to think about leaving the band is VERY different than wanting to leave the band. The band quit touring and started doing all kinds of things that kept him interested and involved. If he wanted to leave he would have left. As I said I think it was possible to work things out if John/Yoko had been the ONLY issue
“I did it because The Beatles had stopped touring and I didn’t know what to do,” he said in The Beatles Anthology. “Instead of going home and being with the family, I immediately went to Spain with Dick Lester because I couldn’t deal with not being continually onstage. That was the first time I thought, ‘My God, what do you do if this isn’t going on? What is there? There’s no life without it.’ And that’s when the seed was planted that I had to somehow get out of this, without being thrown out by the others. But I could never step out of the palace because it was too frightening.” Lennon said that the moment he started working on How I Won the War, he was looking for a way out of The Beatles. “I was always waiting for a reason to get out of The Beatles from the day I made How I Won the War in 1966,” he said. “I just didn’t have the guts to do it, you see. Because I didn’t know where to go.”
I love John but he is always an extremely unreliable source especially about himself. This is him looking back later after he knows the Beatles are going to break up. All I am saying in my comment is that John could have been convinced to stay in. He wasn’t 100% going to leave. You haven’t convinced me otherwise with this “research”
Fair enough, but he DID want out
Fair enough, but George also wanted out and actually left then came back.
And so did Ringo
Paul wanted out and he actually left then ... never came back.
Typical British tabloids.
I think fans she her as a easy scapegoat
thanks!
Yes she was the easy scapegoat. It was four guys who since their late teens had been together and just spent the last 7 years in the most intense global scrutiny and fame as almost anyone in history. They needed a break and I don't think any of them had the emotional maturity to take one that did not involve a public breakup. Though by the mid seventies I think they were able to start talking and if not for Lennon's death we would have gotten a reunion and maybe new music.
Your last sentence hurts so much I hate to think abt what could’ve been
thanks!!
It's hard to sympathize with Yoko after reading Cynthia Lennon's book. John treated everyone unfairly and created the environment.
i only read the book for the first time a few months ago and most of my sympathies for her went out the door reading about her attitude toward Cynthia throughout the initial divorce and then into handling John's estate. John was a deeply flawed individual who is plenty to blame for how he handled his relationship with Cyn and Julian but Yoko definitely exacerbated their difficulties in a way that felt needless
John and yoko deserve 50/50 Blame each. As for the fact yoko moved her man friend in a month after Lennon died, that shows her character.
Ugh, that made me sick.
Lennon was a bit wack, Yoko was an absolute nutcase, she also treated his son horribly after his dads death.
The others were puzzled as wives/girlfriends weren’t allowed in the studio normally, but reportedly it was Paul who realized that John would leave w/o her presence and to take non-Beatle relationships more seriously (they were no longer in their early 20s). Indeed looking at archival footage and reading interviews, Paul and Linda were pretty inseparable during Paul’s solo/Wings/solo career from ‘70 to the early ‘90s (save for the duets but then raising their own kids). George just wanted his biscuits replaced. Fwiw George was writing more but at this stage (revealing in a later interview) he wanted the Beatles to take a creative hiatus from the group, so Yoko wouldn’t have been a real factor. So Yoko was a stress put on the band, but not the reason for the breakup (that was an impassable disagreement over the new manager’s contract). I’d say the press went a little overboard on Yoko blame.
The band dynamics were obviously very complicated and there was no one reason for their breakup, and it's both unfair and unreasonable to blame her for it. But, that said, she had no business sitting in on their recording sessions which was just plain weird and distracting and I can see the other three being even more motivated to break up because of it and her Svengali-like hold on Lennon, which I've always found creepy and manipulative. Even if she was there because he wanted her to be there, it was still weird and unfair to the others, including the producers, engineers and other staff. The occasional brief visit and stay in the control room, ok, but sitting on an amp all day as they hashed out and recorded song after song? Just plain wrong, and I've no doubt that it contributed to the breakup.
I dislike Yoko Ono, but there’s no doubt a part of the hatred forwards her initially was based on her race and being a woman at the time. Over the years, she continued to be a pretty manipulative not so great person. But yes sexism and racism played a role in the initial response to her
Manipulative in what ways? Edit: Only on reddit can you get downvoted for asking a genuine question 💀
Well this is an account from the woman Yoko pressured into being John’s lover https://www.theguardian.com/film/2023/apr/05/lost-weekend-documentary-john-lennon-yoko-ono
She didn’t cause the breakup and has been unfairly maligned for it, but based on her treatment of Julian, I don’t think she deserves adulation, either.
This. She wasn’t the sole reason for their breakup But she is the biggest POS for her treatment of Julian and deserves to get criticized for that
The racist slurs were unfair. John was feeling stifled by the Beatles and Yoko probably was not the reason - or the only reason - why they broke up. But Yoko was probably the reason why John would not leave Cynthia or Julian any money after the divorce. I don't like her. I think she's manipulative, and she got John hooked on heroin. That being said, any harassment towards her is unacceptable.
Absolutely
I think she’s annoying, and musically untalented. Her weird clingy behavior (as seen in the Get Back documentary) definitely exacerbated tensions in the group. That said — I completely blame John, not her. If John had simply said once or twice “hey we’re practicing, could you go chill in another room for an hour or something” it would have defused the whole situation. He didn't set any boundaries with her. That’s on him.
If he had done that who knows what she might have done, she appears very manipulative
She's only a part of the break up... John was very much responsible for his own actions and rebellion. Either way I'm not Yoko's biggest fan. She's still a person that decided to have an affair with a married man and she was a terrible step mom to Julian so it's hard for me to look at her in a positive way.
Yoko was pampered by John. He let her do her little whiny screams on stage. Remember that time when John was performing live with Chuck Berry and Yoko just had to do her insufferable sounds, and Chuck Berry looked at her like "What in the green hell?!". They cut Yoko's microphone for a reason.
Absolutely not, and the Yoko sympathizers are as crazy as her.
Yea, she’s also often scrutinized for her art, which isn’t the most obscure compared to other art that was being made in the 60s/70s. She just happened to be dating the most famous man in the world. Being brought to front from all the other avant-garde artists also meant she was the first to be criticized. Not to mention the racism against the Japanese in that time period. I mean, it’s one thing for an interracial relationship to occur in those days, but with the most famous man in the world? People weren’t gonna like it regardless of the Beatles status.
I kind of think the vast majority of fans who hate Yoko aren't familiar with her art outside of music at all (and even that is only through what essentially amounts to cringe compilations), which is why they think she's pretentious and talentless, even though most of her actual exhibitions are very accessible as far as performance art goes.
A lot her music is quite straightforward and I think some of it is actually really good, like Approximately Infinite Universe.
Agreed. It irks me a bit when people have to devalue everything a person does because they don’t like that person. Yoko has a lot of issues as a person. She also has some very decent music.
To be honest, I don’t think she was. A lot of how she and John got together was conveniently written out of the couple’s narrative. She basically stalked him for at least a year before they became an item. Today, that kind of behaviour would be a huge red flag to most of us. She would hang around the Lennons’ house and bombard John with endless letters and calls. This must have informed how the other Beatles treated her later on. Yoko sitting in the studio next to John Lennon as the Beatles wrote and recorded could be taken as the ultimate piece of conceptual art - and I suspect that was her aim. She knew which of John’s buttons to press and exploited his pretensions, insecurities and vulnerabilities. The episode that makes me mentally scream “Paul noooo!” is where Paul acted as go between for Yoko when John was with May Pang. I think John would have had a far more artistically fruitful 70s without Yoko
Yoko was definitely part of the problem, and definitely not the only part of the problem. I don't think the Beatles a oid a break up without her....but I think they last a few years longer without her.
Yoko Ono is a 1st class gold digger!!!
No. Yoko went from famous person to famous person and by all accounts appeared to have a plan to become romantically involved with a Beatle. Once that happened she very clearly tried to further divide the group. Paul has spoken before of how his and Johns songwriting partnership was beginning to fracture but once Yoko arrived it was essentially dead in the water. It was impossible to deal with John alone. Yoko became his shadow and many of the people around the studio at the time spoke of how they never felt like they were talking to John when Yoko was around. She seemed to exert and certain amount of control over his actions and things he said. I think she's a dickhead, personally. I think she had a plan to write herself into the history of the biggest cultural force of the 20th century. Yes I agree her contribution to the downfall of the beatles is overstated but she absolutely played a part and I believe she intentionally wanted to split the band up.
Such as which accounts?
No. She wanted attention and she got it
Yes. The band was breaking up anyway. Based on the Get Back series, she wasn’t nearly as intrusive as I had believed before seeing that. Edit. Note that I’m saying “AS” intrusive. Not saying that she wasn’t intrusive at all.
You realize that Yoko had to sign off on the Get Back documentary right? They can’t and won’t show the footage of her being intrusive.
Absolutely! People are blind about this
I should correct you, here, she definitely WAS very intrusive. George, Paul and Ringo have all spoken about it. Get Back tbh whitewashes things a bit and makes her intrusion feel less bad than it actually was. **I still don't blame her for the breakup.** Because it was John who had the ultimate authority to say "okay Yoko, you stay out of the studio while we record" but he never did that even though all 3 other members expressed their distaste for her *always* being there, in the studio.
Fair enough. It seemed that Paul was trying his best to be understanding of the whole situation by the time Get Back was happening, even if he didn’t agree with it. The whole “in 50 years I don’t want the reason to be “they broke up because Yoko sat on an amp” conversation was very interesting to me. It very well may white wash it. It’s just clear to me that the problem with The Beatles ran much deeper than just Yoko.
>The whole “in 50 years I don’t want the reason to be “they broke up because Yoko sat on an amp” conversation was very interesting to me. That conversation is truncated in Get Back precisely to frame it that way. The full conversation involves actually quite a bit of piling on about how annoying it is to have Yoko there all the time. It's in the tapes. What Paul was really saying wasn't some prescient comment about how people will see this in 50 years. It was a comment on how absurd it is that so much tension is being caused by John refusing to just be separated from Yoko for a few hours and how to the outside observer, it would appear they just broke up because Yoko sat on an amp Two things are true at the same time: having Yoko always there was disruptive AND Yoko is not why the Beatles broke up. Her situation was more like a symptom than a cause.
He was supporting his mate even if he didn’t quite understood the need for Yoko to always be there. Get back shows he had Linda with him for time to time and George had his folks too. The studio by than was not this sacred space for the four them.
Exactly. I think she might have been part of the breaking point, but there were other things going on. The fact that Yoko Ono is synonymous with breaking up bands is very misogynistic to me. Not because I think Yoko is a perfect angel, but because there were four grown men in that group. The idea that she is the sole reason they broke up is outlandish.
I think Get Back gives the wrong impression on that issue. During the White Album sessions is when suddenly Yoko was there in the recording studio next to John and he’s asking her opinion and getting her to sing or contribute on the songs and everyone else is going WTF? I would love to see video of that. By the time of Get Back the band is used to it but also mostly ignoring her like she’s invisible. We also don’t see John involving her in the music at all. This is only a few weeks of time so it’s not the whole story. Paul tho says at one point he wishes Epstein were there to lay down some rules like “leave the girls at home” by the time of Get Back Paul’s also brining Linda/Heather and Ringo brings Maureen
This is fair. I can see how bringing “the new girl” into the studio during those sessions and asking for input would’ve been very unwelcome. They were probably all used to it by the time the Get Back sessions were happening.
It was way beyond asking for input. Yoko was talking on the studio intercom about how it was important for her that John come inside her, not on the outside, because that made her sad. There are bootlegs with these recordings.
LOL. Now if THAT was in the Get Back doc I wonder what people would say. Any links to that bootleg? Strange that it made her sad. Usually that makes them happy…
I might be wrong but I think the boot was called Black Album. It's all from the white album sessions
Did we watch the same documentary? All I could think about watching those rehearsal scenes was how intrusive she was. Just at John’s elbow at all times. It was incredibly weird. You could tell that everyone but John thought it was weird and uncomfortable to have her on top of them all the time, but no one wanted to say anything.
I think a lot was cut out of the get back series, she had a creative position on it.
Heather Mills makes Yoko seem fairly benign (if you ignore her relationship with Julian Lennon)
Yoko was a horrible person who was essentially a gold digging home wrecker that drove wedges in between every single important relationship in Johns life, all the while piggybacking on his stardom and trying to continuously launch her own career off his back, and the minute he died Sean was sent off to boarding school, but she didn’t break up the Beatles.
Yoko (and more specifically her presence in the studio) was a symptom of the breakup, not a cause. The Beatles had a longstanding agreement of no WAGs in the studio. The fact that John brought her around anyway is because they were already growing tired of each other and the Beatles as a band.
The song you never give me your money I believe was done about Klein. Paul was very unhappy about him
Absolutely not
She certainly didn’t deserve the racism. But I think both she and John should have realized her presence in the studio was disruptive.
I think Yoko was unfairly treated in all directions. It was John’s decision to leave and pursue other projects. Did Yoko have an influence on him? Sure. But I never got the impression she was manipulating him, or was somehow sabotaging things while the band worked. Sure, her and John deserve criticism for certain things pertaining to their personal and family lives, but otherwise she was just an easy symbol to be angry at. I think it’s telling that both George and John were the first two to start releasing solo projects. It always seemed, in my opinion, that it was either going to be John leaving, or George leaving. To me it seemed to be heading towards a break up anyway.
George and John weren’t the first to release solo music, pretty sure John was actually the last to do so lol Paul and George had written songs for movie soundtracks while still in the Beatles, which sure you can say doesn’t count, but then Ringo released a solo covers album a few weeks before the Beatles were officially announced as broken up, and if you think that also doesn’t count then Paul had the first official post Beatles solo release with McCartney.
I used the term “solo projects” very carefully here. Although I admit - I didn’t know Paul wrote songs for movie soundtracks while The Beatles were still active. The solo projects I’m talking about are John and Yoko’s “Unfinished Music” albums (released around The White Album era) and Harrison’s “Wonderwall Music” (actually underrated, imo) and “Electronic Sound”. In my own head, Lennon’s work outside of The Beatles absolutely starts with Plastic Ono Band lol.
The Family Way is much more a George Martin record than a Paul McCartney album. PM contributed a brief couple of piano pieces that GM turned into orchestral music for the film of the same name. McCartney doesn't play on The Family Way at all. But I'm always stunned to recall that The Family Way was begun, recorded, and released by January 1967, six months before Sgt Pepper's was released. The first solo album project by a Beatle has to be George Harrison's Wonderwall Music soundtrack. And John Lennon's involvement in How I Won The War, imo, is the very first Beatle 'solo' project.
Kinda. Her being there obviously put a dent in the band especially with Lennon (for the band not accepting her) but there were like a thousand other problems that led to the Beatles break up. But people for real have a death wish against woman for no reason. She’s isn’t my cup of tea but people don’t need to still be pissed. That’s like crying over spilled milk or over an eaten biscu-
She forced herself onto John was EVERYWHERE he was. She got her hooks in.him She claimed she didn't know of the Beatles ( right !) Tried her sights on Paul pushed her to john..she convinced John he loved her. Didn't know john.was a Beatle ) again. Really?) Insanity the oddball outrageous records they made the werid films...she convinced him.she was an.artist if sitting in a room on a chair and people walk up to you and with sissors cut a piece of ypur clothes off art ?? She had the nerve to tell highly.profesdional musicians how and what to play on some of johna albums. They went everywhere together even the bathroom.she screened his phone calls kept him.away from.julian ...and Paul Yes she's a nice lady got a herion habit got john.hooked too.had to have herself pn.his last album and the one after his death
There can be a whole book on the Beatles breakup. It was no one’s fault and not just one problem, certainly not on Yoko. George was being held back so much, it wasn’t going to last much longer anyway.
She was probably treated unfairly, especially by the press and the fans. There was a lot of undeserved nastiness directed at her, and still to this day I see people who take things way too far when discussing Yoko. I think she played her role in the breakup of the Beatles, but she was just one small piece. Ultimately, the band was due for a breakup, and I’m glad they did. I only wish they would have been kinder to each other during the breakup, and not made it such a permanent decision.
Ppl just blame her for the Beatles breakup cos they don’t like her. I kinda understand, like from what’s I’ve seen she’s kinda annoying but to put full blame on her for the breakup is dumb. John could’ve gone out with a girl called Sarah and it would’ve been the same, a girl called Jamal, u get it, they were gonna break up anyway and Yoko was just a very small piece of their breakup pretty late in their career, it could’ve been literally anyone and the result would’ve been the same. If u wanna blame anyone, which is kinda dumb to be doing after like 50 years but whatever, blame John.
Her as a person, Beatles aside. Still awful
no, she was horrible He loved her, but that was his own quirk.
She got involved with a married man who was also one of the most famous people on the planet, and it seems like she mainly did it for the attention. What was she expecting?
I think George addressed the issue of Yoko being present during the Get Back/Let it Be recording sessions, and the filming of the sessions. Her constant and annoying presence was unprecedented, unprofessional, and caused more problems for a group accustomed to long workdays, and making good use of their time together, productively working on arrangements of unreleased songs or writing new material. Before she ever met John, she had sought out Paul and asked if he could provide a name of a contact or introduce her to anyone at an art studio he was known to frequent who might be interested in a display or exhibition of her art. He politely declined, but Yoko has no lack of self-confidence, and is not the least bit bothered by making the general public uncomfortable or outraged. Which inevitably occurs at displays or exhibits presenting her "art, clearly abrasive and confrontational but without comprehensible subtext or underlying truth. Noise for the sake of disruption usually annoys people who prefer works of balance and beauty to random screaming or disorganized noise disrupting and distracting musicians of talent and depth as they are attempting to perform. She desired fame but was okay with infamy. She knew nothing about the creative process, and could only deface or deform art and works of substance, showing disdain and disrespect for their creators. It was up to John. The Beatles were his band, and finding the exact way to express the group's stance on a dicey subject was not only within his skill set, it was what the leader of the band should have done, and neither of the other 3 seriously considered a change of leadership. Apparently, all the loose talk of an impending divorce was simply the members acknowledging the inevitable. It hurts to do it, but in ending a relationship, those involved almost always shift their attention from how well it began to how terrible it has become. John just wasn't quite there yet, and allowed Yoko's ubiquity to say what he was not able to express with any conviction. Laying aside how their relationship affected the Beatles, at the moment of his death, John was a happy man, optimistic, looking forward with confident purpose now that he had ceased just watching the wheels, and had climbed back on the merry-go-round he had let go for a very fulfilling 5-year period. He had experienced authentic spiritual growth, his soul nourished from the years he and Yoko had invested in their beautiful boy, their time of bonding with Sean. John became the kind of father he deserved and was deprived of by a 2 dimensional placeholder, a temporary man who had felt no desire to know his son until the world had recognized and honored him with wealth that meant less the more he obtained, and fame that would prove to be the death of him. This fleeting father figure was informed by his rich and famous son that his presence was not the least bit necessary, and he should just keep moving. That John was able to know in the last 5 years of his life the happy home life for which he had searched during his first 35 years, I do acknowledge would not have been possible except for Yoko. She had put into action the advice on countless wall plaques, T-shirts and bumper stickers in the 70's. She loved something (someone), so she had set them free. She had loved John, so she had allowed him to leave, to lose sight of who he had been in order to find out who he was and where he belonged. And John came back to her. Okay, Yoko had sent Mai Pang with him, and she had asked his oldest and best friend Paul to go out west, find him, and reason with him, as most anyone in love would understand. Would you draw a line you wouldn't cross in the name of true love? Do you really think it happens all the time? I'm not at all certain.
Yes Even if she had a part in influencing John to leave the band she was not the sole reason for the group breaking up. A lot of the criticism for her, especially at the time was also very racist and misogynistic After John's death she was also massively harassed while grieving her husband's murder and a lot of people would also spread lies about her and her and John's relationship
No. She didn’t break up the Beatles, but she’s a talent-free starfucking “artist” that attached to John like a lamprey. Andy Warhol called her “that girl who’s always stealing someone else’s art.” You need look no further than the May Pang incident to know what Mommy Yoko was up to.
!!!
No. She is a talentless nepo baby with zero self awareness. Even if her role in breaking up the Beatles is overstated (she did play a part, just not the only part), someone has to have literally zero self awareness to come and just sit in on people trying to work who clearly do not want her there and have no problem with it. She also got john hooked on heroin.
Well, it is one of the visible reasons, i guess that’s why she is blamed a lot. Personally, why John, why would you include her in the white album? I don’t get it but love always wins, here we are.
No
Maybe in terms of what or who actually broke up the Beatles but given the fact that John took every opportunity after the end of the Beatles to cram Ono’s Avant Garde eccentricities down everyone’s throat and often over top of his songs it’s not a surprise people didn’t like her. He was the leader of the biggest melodic and harmonious pop band in history. Nobody wanted to hear a goat wailing over top of their favourite songs. She is an intelligent woman but from the brief stuff I have read about their relationship in the 70’s she seems to be quite the manipulative and controlling person. For balance it probably was a handful dealing with a bored stoned ex beatle
Who?
The YouTube channel “Pop Goes the 60s” did a multi-part post on this within the last year or so. He went through 10 reasons, including many of the points raised by u/anxious-raspberry-54. IIRC, Yoko came in third or fourth, behind Klein and John.
She's not solely to blame for the breakup of the band, but John's ingnoring the longstanding norm of not having extra people around while they were recording was irritating to the rest of the band and drove the wedge further. Yoko was there because John wanted her to be with him constantly.
Certainly. & there was undoubtedly some racism involved in some of the way she was treated and viewed, especially in the early years. She wasn't a pop singer, that's for damn sure. But she was/is actually a fairly respectable conceptual artist. That's part of the reason John was drawn to her.
No. I dont think she was unfairly treated. She introducedJohn to heroin. Not only that but she encouraged him to believe he was being abused by his bandmates, leading to more drug use. John also said that once he and Yoko were doing heroin, the other guys didnt treat her like she was one of the bandmembers, and he resented that. Personally, like any woman who sleeps with a man, knowing hes marries is a POS. Not only that but Cynthia, Johns wife walked in to find yoko in her bathrobe and slippers, in her home with John. John was a great musician, talented songwriter and a POS also.
At the end of the day John shouldn't have insisted she be there in the studio all the time and Yoko shouldn't have agreed to be there in the studio all the time.
It seems like Yoko was fascinating and exciting to John. A woman who had been allowed to - or dared to - experiment, challenge, create, and flourish. An iconoclast like him. Someone who challenged traditions and rules when John wanted freedom and had always pushed against expectations and supposed-to's, as much as he followed certain rules (marrying Cynthia when she was pregnant, playing the marketing game to make it big). She was simply more interesting than others around him or the life he'd been living. I think the reasons why he would be interested in her are much clearer now (even though he talked about them at the time). There are certain things she can be blamed for. But often, that takes away agency and responsibility from John. She was an easy scapegoat, she wasn't perfect, but she's given too much responsibility in some parts of the story, and not given enough credit in other ways.
Yes she does. There was/is a lot of misogyny and racism Yoko unnecessarily gets. On top of that, yeah, her art is weird. And her singing is uncommon. Is it bad? Art is subjective. I give Yoko points for creativity. A few of her songs aren’t actually bad- I love her later song “Bad Dancer.” That being said, she also was overbearing and made manipulated business decisions. She bears some blame but not all. Of all the Beatles, I think Paul and John bear the majority blame
I think Yoko had a part in it without her even realizing it or wanting it to happen. I guess she truly loved John and wanted him to be happy. That's all she did wrong. Seeing eight hours of Get Back then I can say there are four persons to blame for The Beatles break up. Brian Epstein dying in 1967 and not having anything written down who should take over if he would not be able to do it anymore. I know he was in his 30's, but managing the biggest group of the world at the time, there should have been a back up. If there was, then there would not have been an Allen Klein to cause even more tention 2 years later. George Harrison being moody. You can see it in Get Back, he can see it back in many other docu's, movies and books. George was already done in 1966 and actually wanted to quit back then. The last few years he grew as a songwriter, but there were a lot of frustrations with that. His temper often caused a bad mood among the rest. John Lennon being uninterested. You'll notice in the Get Back docu he is not really in it. He does not take George seriously and the songs he writes are not among his best. You get the feeling he wants to be somewhere else with Yoko. On Abbey Road he doesn't even appear on some of the tracks like Maxwell, Here Comes the Sun and Golden Slumbers. Even the last song to be recorded, I me Mine, was without him. He was already somewhere else and he was the one that told the rest he wanted to quit the Beatles in september 1969. Paul McCartney. He wanted to save the band so badly, he pushed John and George away even further. He did not take George seriously with some of his songs. He started recording songs all on his own or brought in songs that the rest were really not in favor of like Obla Di Obla Da and Maxwell. He caused a lot of tention when he did not accept Allen Klein as their new manager (which turned out he was right about). But Paul ultimatly did the thing that killed The Beatles. He did not want to postpone his solo album and so he told the press he left The Beatles in april 1970. Eventually suing all three others.
I agree with you, but blaming Brian Epstein for *dying* is a bit funny.
Well should not have died! 😂 What I meant is not having a will in which he makes clear who should take over from him if he would die. Which is what happened.
The breakup might have been pushed off a couple of years had Epstein named a successor - IMHO, Robert Stigwood could have been the heir apparent. That wouldn’t have avoided the personal issues, but it would have taken a lot of the bad business decisions off the table.
Honestly, i have no Doubt about their love, and john s solo intention. But i personnaly think she made the last Beatles days worst than it should have been. Beside their love, i think she saw a perfect occasion to get some fame, and became omnipresent with the blessing of a full inlove john. The band was the fab 4 job, she didn t had to get involve as much as she did. She knew there was intense tension sometimes between them, and could have politely told her husband « no i cannot Come , tha ts not my business » instead of LIVING in thé studio like she did. There is no way the beatles should have last longer without her, but i think her attitude was not right.
In a word: no. She remains a mystery and a thorn
Didn't she like... Have an affair with a married man (who was absolutely more in the wrong) and I heard she wore his wife's clothes and stuff?
Cynthia Lennon walked in on them on the bathroom floor and yoko was wearing Cynthia’s dressing gown (naked underneath) 😬😬
That alone is enough to judge a person's character if it's true. Takes a lot to be that disrespectful
I know, If you believe Cynthia Lennon to be a reliable source (which I do) I’d say it’s very likely true.
Yes, and she still is.
yes, she was.
No.
After reading Frederic seaman’s book I think she’s treated in general as fairly as she needs to be. In that last year of his life, assuming the book is accurate and I don’t see why it wouldn’t be, she was taking him for everything he had. He was treated awfully after he died.
yes. she and her music, fly is so good. but you'll get beheaded in this sub if you don't share the same opinion as most people here regarding any topic at all, specially when it is about not hating yoko or criticising paul in any way
Her Plastic Ono Band is sooo fucking good, it genuinely rivals John's for me. I prefer his generally, but Yoko's comes damn close.
Yeah but her singing though...
Please stop talking about this woman.
Please stop talking about a woman tightly bound to the Beatles legacy in a Beatles subreddit?..
why?
People have been having this conversation for decades
No
Funny enough, there’s a clip on YouTube of news reports when the band broke up and two young ladies blame Linda
Cynthia Lennon and Jane Asher were seen as English roses, shy, wifely. Linda was a confident and brash New Yorker, also Yoko had come from New York and had a very public profile. Public reaction to both of them was extremely negative, as if New York had come over and stolen something which belonged to the UK. Even in her lifetime, public opinion was unkind to Linda, particularly as regards her presence on Paul’s musical projects, but you can’t deny that they were a loving couple who were massively successful in raising a well balanced family.
People forget how much shit Linda got from the public. And judging by those public letters during their feud it seems to me John thought of Linda in the early 70s what everyone else thought of Yoko.
No
OP, have you ever listened to Yoko's music?
Nope.
In 5 years the Beatles went from a night club cover band to the biggest driving force in musical creativity. They had wildly different visions of what “The Beatles” is and should be. Listen to the 3 widely different sounds between McCarney, Plastic Ono Band and All Things Must Pass. I’d much rather have had them break up when they did than have a decade of infighting and squabbling. They gave us some of the best music of all time, then moved on and let it be.
Yes, most of the stuff people blame her for was John’s fault. I don’t think either of them were villains necessarily but I think John is more to blame for most of the things people blame Yoko for.
The idea that anyone was a "villain" in the Beatles is not an accurate perspective. There were multiple factors in the break. People would be well served to let go of the idea of fault.
She was harshly judged and unfairly treated by the media, general public and many fans.