ok i'm out of this conversation

Severe hype backlash. He called Strawberry Fields one of the worst Beatles songs, I think it's pretty obvious that the portion of the brain that enables critical thinking is not engaged in the writing of his posts regarding Lennon.

i think Lennon had excellent talent for melody (though far far short of McCartney's level) and i've said many times I think he did some cool absurdist stuff during the second half of The Beatles' run. and hell, he even had a couple really personal, vulnerable songs during his solo run that were great. so i honestly don't really have a huge problem with him, personally. i have a HUGE problem with the fact that he is seen as some monumental poet and his shitty political stuff (some of the worst hippie bullshit ramblings in history) is plastered on the sides of walls and on posters and spouted off like he's a genius. same with Jim Morrison and his nonsense. imo John Lennon was nothing more or less than a talented but inconsistent songwriter who happened to be in a group that caught fire more than any group ever has. i don't think he's a God or even a top tier rock artist. and its not just me being a contrarian. i really feel that.

hype backlash is absolutely a part of my dislike of Lennon. if not for the hype, i wouldn't care about him. if he were considered a slightly above average songwriter, i probably would never say anything about him. because that's what he is.

Remember guys. Monumental poetry is writing songs about raping your mother and killing your wife.

Why are you so incapable of tolerating the fact that not everybody agrees with this?

just for a point of comparison- Ray Davis. take Ray Davies body of work and stand it next to John Lennon's. Davies has twice the number of great songs and half the number of annoyingly self-indulgent nonsense. the only thing that separates them is that Lennon was fortunate enough to be next to one of the greatest songwriters in the history of pop music and therefore was showcased on several top-notch albums as a result. fame goes to Lennon, talent goes to Davies.

what makes you think i can't tolerate it? i just strongly disagree and make that known. you don't like it, argue back.

cause you don't understand the context?

If quantity alone makes you a great songwriter then you all need to STFU about Nick Drake... granted if that guy was alive today writing a good song would still be beyond his ability.

for the record, i don't hate the fact that any individual has a personal connection with any artist, Lennon or not. i hate the fact that certain artists are held up as untouchable. even artists i like, like Dylan or Johnny Cash or Hendrix or Miles or whoever. i hate that our culture puts artists on pedestals and you are considered crazy if you think they are just human beings with some talent who were in the right place at the right time.

The guy lives out his depraved psyche through his music and disguises it as complex storytelling. If being a sick, disturbed human being is all it takes to be a great artist then GG Allin is one of the greats.

and i hate that we all spout that (true) stuff about how art is subjective, and then turn around and all prop up the same 50ish artists over and over again because its easier to agree with the mass opinion then to have your own.



*again, not a shot at you personally if you like Lennon. just a shot at our culture of group-think.

being sick and disturbed doesn't make you a great artist (nor do i believe Eminem is sick or disturbed), but being willing to vent the most personal, vulnerable thoughts and feelings you have without compromise DOES make you a great artist, imo. the fact that he was a virtuoso at his craft is just the cherry on top.

Because nothing says blind conformity like calling the artist with the 26th highest rated album on RYM a talentless hack on a regular basis.