PAUL: As Long As You’re This Close All Day, Something Grows. And Then When You’re Not This Close

John in the 1970s

so if the lyrics of Now and Then were started to write in pre 1975...Would it lose something special about mclennon.im not for sure but im a little upset truly🥲

I mean...the phrase"Now and Then" in pre 1975 maybe couldn't relate to Paul directly.

Also the"for Paul"analysis.Sean claimed that John didn't write it on original cassette.thus what Paul got wasn't the original tape but a copied and the handwriting couldn't be John's?

It is really confusing and im gonna crack

John Lennon and George Harrison in the Beatles home movie at the Gresham Hotel, Dublin, 7th November 1963 (x)

Oh, for what it’s worth, no less than John Lennon loved the song. I spent a long time talking to [photographer] Bob Gruen once, it was great as we talked about a lot of stuff that he doesn’t usually get grilled on. One of the things that came up was the times he spent with John listening to the radio. Bob singled this song out as one he and John would listen to and how much John loved the song. John took the song quite personally, and saw it as Paul sending a message to him: ‘Yeah, I know you think I only write silly love songs, but I love you.’ Bob said John specifically mentioned the ‘I love you’ refrain as being a message from Paul to him. We can speculate all we want, but I have no reason to doubt the word or memory of a guy who sat in the Dakota bedroom with John and listened to this song with him.

— gswan, c/o Steve Hoffman Music Forums. (October 28th, 2010)

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

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

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

1. Paul rejected John’s advancements

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

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

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

1. Paul rejected John’s advancements

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

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

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

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

2. John wanted more, but Paul didn’t

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

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

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

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

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

(*No pun intended you pervs🤦‍♂️)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

But yeah - those are the main theories I think.

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

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

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

“How Lucky Was I, to have those men in my life?”

I think Paul really spoke for all of us 😭

(The cropped versions are wallpaper friendly! 🥰)

John smiling at Paul like this will sustain me for 100 years and I hope it sustains Paul too

Continuing yesterday's post. This is take three of "My Life" the early version of "(Just like) Starting Over". The lyrics were completely different from the final version. The early version shows the romantic plea, the offering of one's life to someone you love deeply. In the vein of "Can't Help Falling in Love With You" - "Take my hand, take my whole life, too"

Hey it says pause on the…. Argh! My life. Take three. Where is the mic? Oh, there it is. My life take it, it's mine to give Take it, let me live in you My life, take it, it's yours Do what you will, I dedicate it to you. What's the use in waking? If you're not there To share the dreams and nightmare My life, take it for better or worse Why waste time? We both know Together is the only way we'll make it Anyway, take it, my life. My life is you. What's the use in waking? If you're not there To share the dreams and nightmare I've only myself to… I've only myself to give For better or worse I dedicate, My life to you.

I’m curious about something. Is there concrete evidence of John attempting to strike Linda? I’ve. seen it mentioned various places but I’m a little skeptical. If it’s true that seems like it would be very hard for Paul to forgive. Your thoughts? Thanks.

Hiya @missu4everjohnny,

So for anyone reading this post who might not already be familiar with the story in question, Ill give you some brief business context: 

The company Northern Songs was set up in 1963 by Dick James and Charles Silver, in order to publish Lennon/McCartney songs.

February 1965 it became a public company on the London Stock Exchange.

John and Paul each have 750,000 shares (15% each), while George and Ringo have 40,000 (0.8 %) each. During his divorce, John sold over 100,000 of his shares in order to set up a trust fund for Julian. Paul on the other hand bought 1000 shares (or 0.02% of the company). 

By January 1969, Dick James had a growing concern about John Lennon’s recent behaviours, and the negative consequences they may have for the Northern Songs company in terms of stock value.

March 1969, Dick James and Charles Silver sell their shares in Northern Songs to ATV for £1,525,000, giving John and Paul no notice or the chance to buy them out. That way, ATV acquired 1,604,750 shares, which, in addition to the 137,000 they already had, gave them nearly 35% of the company.

John and Paul, who were both away on their honeymoons as they received the news about Northern Songs, felt betrayed and upset by James’s choice to sell his shares. 

In April 1969, John found out that he had 644,000 shares (£1.25m), while Paul had 751,000 shares (£1.4m). John was furious with Paul. 

@thecoleopterawithana did a particularly good breakdown on this whole saga, touching on both the business logistics and the emotional responses within it from John and Paul. So massive credit due to them for explaining the Northern Songs situation in a way that My-Little-Pea-Brain can actually understand, and do go give their post a read for a far more comprehensive understanding of all this!

But onto Johns reaction and whether he did in fact attempt to physically assault Linda McCartney. 

Ken McNab writes in his book And In The End: the last days of the Beatles:

Various accounts over the years have suggested the two men almost came to blows. One unverified report has the volatile Lennon shaking his fist at Linda McCartney with Klein holding him back. Sheepishly, McCartney tried to defend his underhand actions: ‘I had some beanies and I wanted more.’ (pg. 101)

And Peter Doggett wrote in You Never Give Me Your Money: 

Then Klein informed Lennon that McCartney had secretly been increasing his stake in Northern Songs. ‘John flew into a rage,’ recalled Apple executive Peter Brown. ‘At one point I thought he was really going to hit Paul, but he managed to calm himself down.’ One unconfirmed report of this meeting had Lennon leaping towards Linda McCartney, his fists raised in her face. (pg. 79)

These are the only two texts I could find specifying the report that John had made an attempt at physically assaulting Linda. Unfortunately, neither writer cites a source for the unconfirmed report, and Ive been unable to locate the claims origins—so I cant tell you how reliable its author is. 

To the extent of my knowledge, no one else present during the occurrence has spoken about the alleged incident either—however, Peter Brown makes note that he believes John came close to physically attacking Paul, although in his original text The Love You Make he doesn't write anything on this:

“You bastard!” John spit. “You’ve been buying up shares behind our backs!”

Paul blushed and shrugged limply. “Oops, sorry!” he smiled. 

“This is fuckin’ low!” John said. “This is the first time any of us have gone behind each other’s backs.”

Paul shrugged again. “I felt like I had some beanies and I wanted some more,” he said. (pg. 305)

So what is the likelihood of this being true, and what do I personally believe?

Honestly, I don’t know. I see it as plausible being that John has a history of physical violence, which Ive written about in more depth here. Im aware that he made conscious-efforts to change his behaviours over the years, and claimed in his 1971 interview with Peter McCabe and Robert Schonfield to have given up violence following the Bob Wooler incident in 1963—but we know from May Pang that there were still occasional incidents of physical violence. During a moment of stress, I could imagine he might have returned to old habits (and please note as well that ‘stress’ would not be a justification of this action in any way) and tried to attack Linda.

If John did make an attempt to physically attack Linda, my guess as to why Paul have been able to forgive (and seemingly forget) about the incident, is because it would have remained a hypothetical. It never really happened, so I feel like it would have been relatively easy for him to brush it off, because there were no actual consequences (or at least, no physical harm towards Linda caused). 

However, I can also see that theres reasons not to believe the story. Both McNab and Doggett write of an ‘unconfirmed’ or ‘unverified’ report, meaning we have no idea who made this claim. As far as we know, the original claimant might not have even been in the room; it could be complete bollocks. 

And although I wouldn’t really be surprised if Paul and even the Eastmans had chosen not to make a big deal out of the incident, Id be surprised if no one else present mentioned it—especially Peter Brown, given that he thought John came close to attacking Paul. 

However, to counter that last point, another theory I have is that if Paul had been standing close to Linda at the time, perhaps it wouldn’t have been clear based on Johns erratic behaviour who he was aiming for—so while some people might have believed John was attempting to attack Linda, others might have thought he was aiming for Paul.

So in short—and I apologise about the very dissatisfactory response—my opinion on this really is just an ‘I Don’t Know’ one. It could go either way imo. It would be easier to discern an answer I think if we had access to the original report, but as far as Im aware, that hasn’t been released. 

Sources:  

Northern Songs breakdown (x) — @thecoleopterawithana

Dick James sells his Northern Songs shares to ATV (x)

The Beatles and ATV fight for the control of Northern Songs (x)

You Never Give Me Your Money — Peter Doggett

And In The End: the last days of The Beatles — Ken McNab

The Making Of John Lennon — Frances Kenny

The Love You Make: an insiders story of The Beatles — Peter Brown & Steve Gaines

For The Record — Peter McCabe & Robert Schonfield