Prove Violence Doesn’t Work: Do Good in John Lennon’s Name This Dec. 8th!

Yoko can give to a Yoko-approved charity – she has more money than the rest of us put together.

Giving to charity is a BAD idea. That we still need charity in the 21st century boggles the mind.

I myself only give to struggling artists and not much, because I’m struggling myself.

Can we celebrate Lennon without involving money?

This is a great idea. Better still, I have until December 8 to think of something. Until then, a donation to the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence will have to do.

I always admired John’s ability to turn things, bend them to serve his own ends, as he did with the whole idea of saturation advertising right after his and Yoko’s marriage. He knew it would be a media circus, so he decided to be the ringmaster and make the whole thing an advertisement for peace. He didn’t even care if it made him look foolish to some people.

I think this was the aspect of his personality that also enabled him to pose publicly in ways we maybe wish he hadn’t, but he didn’t care how we felt about that, either. If he thought it was important, he’d do it; and if it was worth doing, it was worth doing publicly.

It was part of that uncanny ability he had – to take something intensely personal, something we couldn’t possibly have the same feelings about, and make us personalize it anyway. Paul sang about “My Love”, which, for him, was Linda, but he phrased the lyrics in such a way as to make them universal: “My Love” could be Your Love, too. But John sang “O, Yoko” or “Hold On, Yoko”. And even though there’s no Yoko in my life, these songs work for me on a personal level. “Beautiful Boy”, which mentions Sean by name at the end, nevertheless makes me tear up thinking of my own son, but, at the same time, it makes me choke up at the line “I can hardly wait to see you come of age” … because I know John Lennon did not live to Sean Lennon come of age.

I don’t know which is more affecting to me. I guess they are both equally affecting.

I don’t mean this post as a John versus Paul thing, either, because I hate that.

But I think John’s excesses could also be his strengths. The part of his personality that led him to abase himself publicly as he did in that photo you posted a few days ago was also the part that gave us those personal songs that yet somehow strike a universal chord; it was also the part that gave us the bed-ins for peace.

Yikes! Sorry. You can have your blog back, now. Assuming the blogger software doesn’t give me that “Comment too long” error again.

Absolutely, Wolynski! I originally had a bunch of other ideas–just top-of-head stuff–but cut them for space.

You know what Lennon was about; you know the kind of things he’d be doing. Do one, whichever fits with you–some art, maybe?

The point is what gets done, not who does them; a person can die, but what we admire and respect about that person doesn’t have to stop. So go to it, man!

Fo’ realz? Ask away! I’m always happy to write about the Fabs.

As the principal of an elementary school in a tough part of town, I’ve started a mini peace campaign… we’ve trained kids to be Peacekeepers on the yard, and the theme of our holiday program will be “Peace on Earth.” I’m also toying with a “think peace” curriculum for my bigger kids dealing with tolerance and conflict resolution. You’ve now challenged me to try to kick off “think peace” on December 8th…. great idea. Thanks! Oh, and peace.

Really enjoying reading your thoughts, Glaven and Mike. Glaven, your explanation of why you appreciate John’s making the private public helps me get past my instinctive distaste for some of the more extreme posing and think again about what it was John and Yoko were trying to do.

I can’t help also feeling, though, that the public posing — however sincere — also played into a celebrity/commodity dynamic that is pretty destructive. John wanted to sell peace like soap, as he said, but I’m afraid that one thing we’re seeing now is how everything can be commodified and emptied of meaning, the way peace sings have been (in my opinion). That they’re plastered all over clothes, accessories, and housewares at all the giant discount stores can be read as either a) lots of people are for peace, b) this is a symbol that no longer means anything specific enough to offend anyone, or c) some of both. I tend towards c), and wish I felt sure it were more a) than c).

Same goes, for me, with John and Yoko being ringmasters of the publicity circus. It took courage to do what they did with the bed-ins, etc., and they did change peoples’ perceptions in some positive ways. But I think they also helped create the oversharing, reality-show culture we live in now. It’s a very mixed bag (pun intended, I’m afraid).

And John himself recognized this sometimes, of course, since he was too smart not to. However he annoys me (and he really can, sometimes), I respect his stubborn refusal to back down and give up. All the more reason to try to do something positive on December 8.

It is, of course, standard operating procedure for the right wing to kill a liberal/left leader, then put words in his mouth. Thus MLK changes from someone opposed to capitalism, into an opponent of affirmative action; JFK changes from someone deeply committed to ending the Cold War, into an oversexed hawk. When one actually cares to look, the truth is obvious: none of these guys are who the Right says they are.

Regarding MLK, it is settled historical fact that King was not killed by James Earl Ray acting alone, but a conspiracy including elements of the US Government (as per the 1999 wrongful death trial of Jowers v King family). As far as the Kennedys are concerned, it’s fairly certain from the documents that have been released since 1995 that reactionary elements in the USG killed them, too.

I have definite thoughts on Lennon’s death–not that anybody asked–but the take-away from all this is simply: there’s a pattern, here. We cannot locate a better future in the bodies of our leaders. We must do it OURSELVES. To put it another way: the system is very good at co-opting messages, so we have to reinforce ours constantly with personal action. If there’s a peace symbol on your shirt, what does it mean? Whatever you’re doing, however you’re acting.

Probably the biggest impediment to change is the meme of “consuming for good,” which always strikes me as fucking for celibacy, if you’ll pardon the expression. I think if Lennon had lived, the Eighties would’ve showed him the flaws in his earlier advertising-based approach, and he would’ve recalibrated accordingly. Not to sainthood, but in the same old “trying to figure it out” way that he always did.

What these people tapped into is available to all of us. We should do it. Please spread the word about the page!

This comment has been removed by the author.

Thanks, Michael. Apparently my train of thought got a little jumbled. In any case, it’s wonderful that you’re challenging people to make the anniversary of this tragedy into something positive and meaningful.

Thank you so much, Michael. We’ve been honored to receive support from The Fest for Beatles Fans for years and your blog is another wonderful and pleasant surprise. We are committed to enacting laws to prevent dangerous individuals from gaining easy access to guns in our society – and to John’s beautiful vision of a peaceful, nonviolent world. That those who admire him would think of us means a lot. – Ladd Everitt, Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, http://www.csgv.org