War Is Over (Not Really)
As longtime readers know, I’m a huge Beatles fan but I can’t stand people who worship John Lennon. One of my biggest pet peeves is the Lennon worshippers who insist that his half-assed performance art (like the infamous “bed-in”) was a shining example of political activism. In her review of the new documentary “The U.S. Vs. John Lennon”, my good friend Amy Nicholson perfectly lays out the problems with the Cult of Lennon :
That John Lennon wanted an end to the Vietnam War is unassailable. So did 66% of Americans. And it’s equally clear that Lennon had no more power to change the tide of 1972 than Ringo Starr. Nixon beat the noble anti-war candidate George McGovern in a landslide, sweeping every state except Massachusetts. Sometime in New York City , Lennon’s political album from the same year, was soundly drubbed and neglected. Glossing over this, Leaf and Scheinfeld are capitalizing on three decades of distance to tout myth, not fact, as they pile up some entertaining archival clips and turn them into a pedestal.Beyond his musical talent, John Lennon’s best contribution to the anti-war effort was himself. He lived in the headlines, sighing that the media wouldn’t give him and Yoko peace, but making sure their cameras captured his every opinion. His presence ensured publicity, and as activist Tariq Ali says, Lennon wasn’t about to “stand here and do nothing.” Instead, Lennon lounged in hotels and did nothing, with his Hair Peace/Bed Peace bed-ins. Later, he roused himself to post blithe billboards across several continents that chirped “WAR IS OVER (if you want it).” That most people did want war over, yet war still raged, reduces his “edgy” statement to condescending nonsense—let them eat platitudes. While anonymous students and veterans marched in the streets, this film gives us Lennon and wife Yoko Ono squatting in a bag surrounded by newsmen. They couldn’t be more insulated from reality.
What makes Leaf and Scheinfeld’s panegyric so maddening is the knowledge that there were hundreds of thousands of men and women who shared his convictions, but lacked his wealth or access. These people got jail sentences, pepper sprayings and beatings—punishments Lennon never faced. To suggest, as the film does, that Lennon be ranked with Gandhi and MLK is rankling to those who believe that there’s more to martyrhood than a bullet and more to courage than lying in bed with a guitar.
John Lennon was a great musician, but based on the almost religious devotion that he’s inspired, it seems that his biggest talent was in self-promotion.
8 comments »
Copy link for RSS feed for comments on this post
Leave a comment
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
Say what you want about the effectiveness of his shenanigans, but jeez, would you have prefered him – perhaps the most popular entertainer worldwide – to have simply ignored the war and rested on his wealth and eaten bon bons? The fact that he used his celebrity to keep the war in the headlines makes him, um cool.
No he’s no Gandhi, but then Gandhi couldn’t write songs for crap.
-J
Comment by John I — September 15, 2006 @ 7:45 am
Instead, he struck arty poses and mouthed platitudes between bon bons?
I don’t have a big opinion one way or the other. In my mind Lennon and the Beatles were always overrated, so I enjoy a good takedown piece like the one above.
Comment by Mr Furious — September 15, 2006 @ 8:05 am
Yeah, I’m kind of down with John I on this one. John Lennon wasn’t a hero in the vein of Gandhi, but he did try as hard as he could, for a guy who’d been detached from reality for so long, to foment political change. And I would disagree that it is only the anonymous protestors on the front lines who make changes–progress is a multi-tiered front, and includes both numbers AND actions AND multi-media encouragement. If even one kid decides to become politically active after hearing John and Yoko’s “Give Peace a Chance,” we need to give him credit for that. I wish that we had celebrities in our time buying billboards encouraging us to become politically active. And like John Sinclair, people are being jailed all over the place nowadays for bullshit reasons–who now writes songs for them?
Comment by dAnimal — September 15, 2006 @ 9:32 am
I agree, but I wish more people would point out that the “War Is Over (If You Want It)” billboards just happened to correspond with the release of John Lennon’s single “Happy Christmas (War Is Over)”. Not that I’m doubting Lennon’s sincerity, but there’s more to that campaign than just a touchy-feely token gesture against the war.
Which, if you think about it, isn’t much different than the “War Is Over” billboards that popped up last month. It’s not like the people at Lion’s Gate films are making a stand against the Iraq war, they just see the growing anti-war sentiment as a prime demographic that they can target. In ‘69 they were selling a record, in ‘06 they’re selling a movie.
As a Beatles fan, the thing that really bothers me is that Lennon’s activism is taken more seriously than Paul McCartney’s far more strident activism to ban landmines and for animal rights. McCartney isn’t interested in playing games with the media and making an artistic statement, he just wants to make a shitload of money to help his pet causes. (More on this here)
Comment by greg — September 15, 2006 @ 11:25 am
Whoa, I like what I commented in 2003 better than what I commented this year.
Oh my god, I can’t believe how fast the last three years flew by!
Comment by dAnimal — September 15, 2006 @ 2:04 pm
John was not just a product of his time-he and the Beatles created the times in which they made their art. Unfortunately, a lot of avant-garde art from that period is dated and really, really grates. I don’t think Lennon was as much of a famewhore as he appeared-he was the only celebrity supernova at that time, and a “Bed-in” or “Bag-in” or whatever got press because it was him, he was as famous as anyone, and he was making news simply by being outside the stream that was main. And he was more politically acted upon than anybody is these days-can you imagine the Bush administration trying to deport Bono?
Comment by tommytimp — September 16, 2006 @ 6:09 pm
Maybe the movie is a piece of shit. I haven’t seen it, so I don’t know. But I do know about the environment in the anti-war movement in the late 60’s because I was one of the anonymous marchers who got teargassed. I was grateful to have Lennon doing whatever he did to call attention to the our effort, even if he may have looked foolish. I don’t hold it against him that he wasn’t at the rallies, because he did stuff that most of us couldn’t do, and just by standing up and being counted I’ll bet he swayed the opinions of many who would otherwise have ignored us crackpots.
Comment by Larry Jones — September 17, 2006 @ 5:09 pm
Q: What did Yoko Ono get for Christmas 1980?
A: Five slugs and one dead beatle!!(heh)
Comment by Twisted_Colour — September 18, 2006 @ 12:44 am