Wow, this video has attracted a bunch of Albert Goldman apologists and Yoko-bashers! I really didn't expect that. As I said in the video, my reasons for disliking this book have nothing to do with thinking John was some sort of demigod beyond criticism; indeed, when I first read it at age 14-15, I adored it because I believed those stories were true and thus made him seem even more human, someone who overcame a lot of ugly things in his past and ultimately emerged a better person. The vast majority of music history scholars (not just people who personally knew John!) view this book as an unreliable source, to put it mildly. Mr. Goldman did similar hack jobs on Elvis (twice!) and Jim Morrison, though his death kept him from publishing the latter unfinished manuscript. The Elvis books likewise are regarded as tabloid trash full of inaccuracies, distortions, and outright fabrications, and I'm saying this as someone who's never been a serious Elvis fan (beyond liking a lot of his songs in general). I'm currently reading through several hundred comments on a lovely New York Times story from 2023 about Yoko Ono, her deep connection to New York City for decades, and how she's retired to the Catskills. The vast majority of the commenters have such lovely things to say about her music, her art, and Yoko as a person. Many of them have great stories about running into her around the city since the Seventies, and how genuine and kind she was in these interactions. As I've said so many times, people who bash Yoko are in a small but loud minority. Most people have long since recognised her for her important contributions to music, art, and peace activism, and aren't levelling criticism based on well-documented sexism, misogyny, and racism dating from the Sixties. How many people would, e.g., accuse her of allegedly controlling John if she were a man? Rude comments and comments personally attacking me will be deleted. That goes beyond having a different opinion and agreeing to politely disagree.
Last comment :) John gave someone a bunch of material- recordings, letters etc for safe keeping. I can’t say who that person is but Yoko is aware of it and has tried but failed to get them back. They will likely all be released once she passes. John was doing drugs - cocaine not H before his death. He was also scheduled for surgery on his nose as it was collapsing. He was a drug addict despite multiple valiant attempts to get clean. Many of his attempts were sabotaged. There is also audio on the internet of John’s audio diary discussing his sexual attraction to his mother (not unusual that’s why the term “Oedipal” exists). This has a lot to do with how he was vulnerable to Yoko. His childhood was very confusing. Mimi & Yoko shared similar traits. We don’t have to wonder if he sat in front of the tv for years doing nothing. We know this for a fact. He made audio diaries which are published on the internet. He also made video recordings- also available on the internet. The footage from Cold Spring Harbor is particularly upsetting. He was an extremely traumatized person and he was exploited by nearly everyone in his life except the Beatles but especially Paul who was probably the only true friend and equal reciprocal relationship he ever had. He was just waking up from these years of essentially living as a lost soul and was meeting Paul in England in January to record again (it was supposed to be December but the studio was booked) Please watch “Understanding Lennon McCartney”. It’s a 7 part series (approx 10 hours) on TH-cam by Breathless390. It’s all archival footage and screen quotes. The filmmaker is not in it nor is there any voiceovers or re-enactments. It’s entirely archival material including some clips described above. What was going on at The Dakota especially 75-80 was very disturbing. Sadly, Lennon was very close to freeing himself before his tragic death that affected and forever changed the lives of millions of people including me.
Hi …. A for effort… the Goldman book is controversial indeed and a lot of the info was factually wrong however there’s more truth to it than fiction. His sources have been corroborated over the 3 decades the book was published. There are troves of unpublished information that has been suppressed by the estate. The diaries exist and Yoko has 700 million dollars to counter any narrative she wants. Huge Lennon fan and historian personally. What Goldman got wrong which is so glaring in the book and non-existent in context is Lennon’s psychological profile. The book is “The Lives of John Lennon” but human lives are constructs of mind heart and soul - all missing in this tome. The psychological profile of Yoko Ono is outlined but not colored in. The formulation of the Lennon-Ono myth lies very much in two distinct events in Lennon’s life. One in early childhood and the other that occurred between the fall of 67 and spring of 68 but began in 1957. When Goldman published the book in 1989 mental health data and diagnoses we are all familiar with now did not exist. Lennon wasn’t that complex of a personality. Yoko on the other hand is. Paul McCartney is more complex than Lennon was but McCartney is a very stable personality. The Beatles breakup started years before it happened officially and that disintegration is key to understanding Lennon. Fred Seaman is and was a reliable source but has been muzzled as recently as 2021. Court docs are on the internet. It is irresponsible to say that everything in the book is fiction and all the sources were liars as they were not. Troves of supporting documentation is now available if you know where to find it.
This sentence fragment says all one needs to know: "controversial indeed and a lot of the info was factually wrong". John was a human being, not a god, and he had all the failings common to humans. Same as me, same as you, same as every biped on the planet!
Hello Ursula, serendipitous that I tripped over your video this morning. Thank you for reminding me of this old biography! I'm going to dig it out and read it again. It came out when I was 20. At the time it was considered scandalous not just because it revealed truly negative things about John, like his histories of sexual, physical and emotional violence, but mostly because it spoke to a fandom who wished John to be the myth he constructed and marketed rather than just a man with flaws and virtues like any other, of topics that at that time suffered an extreme degree of social stigma: John's bisexuality (at the height of the aids crisis), John's struggles with mental illness (back then it was seen as a character flaw) and his long involvement in substance misuse (at a time when almost nothing was understood about self-medication or addictive disorders). In the decades since Goldman published, confirmation of John's bisexuality has come repeatedly from Yoko and from John's friends; no one writing seriously on the topic now fails to account for how John's life was shaped by his mental illnesses; and attempts at understanding and analysing the effects of John's constant substance use from his teens to his death are being made. Crucially, in 2024 these things ARE NO LONGER SEEN as nasty stigmatising things to say about a person. Being bi or gay is now recognized as common, normal, and respectable. Dealing with mental illness is also now recognized as common and having no more moral implication than dealing with diabetes or asthma. Substance use and misuse also, is now better understood than ever. It's easy to make an argument that a man 45 years dead has no current cultural relevance. I believe tho, that John Lennon does have current cultural relevance. Not as his mythic celebrity persona, but as the real man with a very complicated life who is now an important historical figure- and because of those very things that were considered scandal in 1988. It is a mistake to attempt revival of mythologies marketed for 1970s fandom hype when there is so much to be gained in the reality of the 21st century from examining historical truths calmly and with compassion. Goldman didn't like John, and that bias is stated in his book. But in this world where lawsuits fall as easily as rain, this biography was cleared by the legal department of his publisher, and the book did not result in a single lawsuit being lodged by anyone. All respect of course to people you met in the early 2000s who said it was all lies, Goldman did have a great deal of evidence behind what he published: He conducted 1,200 interviews for this biography during the early 1980s when memories were very fresh. The Albert Goldman Papers, which include a great deal of audiovisual material, are considered extraordinarily valuable and are housed at Columbia University Library, Altho you have not examined them, nor for that matter have I, I expect Mccartney, who has his reasons for closeting John, has had his lawyers examining them since before publication. The Goldman collection has since been used by others as sources for their books on John and the Beatles. Indeed, it's difficult to find a serious work that does not cite it.
John was long dead by the time of Golman's "work", so "attorneys" would have had no problem with it. You can slander the dead with all the gusto you like, so long as no living person is splattered with your mud. History is a long stretch of just such "scholarship", with all the opprobrium the quotes can impart!
The fact that no lawsuit came about is not an indication that this is accurate. As pointed out below, it's hard for an estate to sue over libel when the person being libeled is dead. It's also extremely difficult for a famous person to sue. In this case we have both. So, no lawsuit does NOT equal a true and accurate account.
@@TheAnarchitek the hatchet job was more on Ono than Lennon if read now with all the information publicly available. Lennon himself admitted and publicly confessed most of the then incinderary information revealed in n the book though much of this wasn’t in the public domain 35 years ago as it is now. Goldman’s most glaring failure in this book is not his research or reporting (though again some of his reporting was factually incorrect). If you overlook those inaccuracies (which exist in every single Lennon biography including the one his dear sister and lovely ex-wife wrote unintentionally) you’ll see the failure of this book lies in Goldmans own narcissism and failure to view the extraordinary circumstances and traumas of Lennon’s life in any meaningful way. Goldman was brutal and unforgiving, devoid of any shred of empathy or understanding the shades of gray between the black and white words he wrote on every page or the powerful shadows and terrors that Lennon lived with. Lennon was extremely paranoid as he himself admitted repeatedly throughout his public life but he had good reason to be. Goldman painted Lennon as a one dimensional phony, echoing the sentiment Chapman used as his reason for assainating Lennon. Goldman assassinated him again nearly ten years after his murder and attributed dark characteristics to Lennon that Goldman himself had. Lennon was not this person at all. He was at times, and as we all are in our worst moments a cruel and sometimes indecent person but those were things that tormented him. He was a person filled with shame and fear and made many attempts to undo damage he had done if he could. He lived in fear and also stated this publicly many times. His song lyrics aren’t empty shallow words. He wrote the truth about himself and had great depth of insight into his own unfair projections onto those he hurt the most and was always striving to be worthy of the love and adoration the world gave him and to use his status to impact society in a positive way though he could not carry the weight of all that. The gift Lennon had, besides being the greatest rock n roll singer that ever lived and one half of the most significant songwriting partnership in history was his ability, through his soul-energy to deeply penetrate the collective consciousness in a way that could change entire centuries of culture impacting everything from centuries of hierarchal class structure, social norms, art, fashion, politics, spirituality, traditional family systems and of course music. His legacy is enormous and has impacted every new generation that came to life after he died and why we are still discussing him today. The Lives of John Lennon is an important book only for the depth of research that went into it so it is like an outdated reference book. For fact checkers of dates and timelines it’s a wealth of information. Yet it has no heart at all - that’s not the fault of his sources, many of whom were tricked and even threatened (watch Sam Greene interview on “Lennon Goldman: The Making of a Bestseller”. The book has no heart because Goldman had no heart.
@@crissyrumminsfredrickson9230 John was a very complicated person, born in Libra, cardinal Air, in wartime, raised in the havoc of WW2 and the post-war England, he became filthy rich at a young age, beloved by millions to distraction, and took LSD every day for far too long. He pioneered the art of being a mega-personality, explored the oundaries of poor taste, and generally lived life to its fullest. He was beset by the same fears that hammer us all, plus some he brought to the table. He spoke my language, for seventeen years, and I will never forget the night I heard the horrible news an idiot had killed him.
Kyoko is Yoko's daughter by her second husband, Anthony Cox. They lost touch for decades, after an ugly custody battle that ended in Mr. Cox kidnapping Kyoko and joining a religious cult. In the Nineties, mother and daughter finally reconnected, and they now have a very close relationship.
She has a daughter, Kyoko, by her second husband, Anthony Cox. Because of an ugly custody battle that culminated in Mr. Cox kidnapping Kyoko and joining a religious cult, they didn't have a chance to reconnect until the Nineties. They have a very close relationship now.
I agree with you it was just fast way to make money and none of it was ever proven and finally its easy to write about people who are dead they can't defend themselves
One of the best and most level-headed insights into John and greatest refutations of nonsense surrounding this most inscrutable of all the Beatles. Thank you.
Interesting how Goldman makes up lies about the Beatles and gets away with it! Who was the editor or publisher? What was their agenda! And who is this Goldman!
Goldman also did TWO sleazy hack jobs on Elvis (as if just doing one wasn't good enough for him), and was working on a character assassination of Jim Morrison when he died. His earlier biography of Lenny Bruce is somewhat better-regarded, though that too has a number of criticisms from people who knew Mr. Bruce personally. I have no problem with biographers being honest about someone's faults (when they're actually documented, not made up) and not treating their subjects like demigods, but I do have a huge problem with biographers who revel in the worst of human nature and do little more than write a book-length tabloid article trashing someone.
Mc Cartney was savvy enough to dismiss Goldman's book as it damaged the Beatles legacy, the claims made by Goldman are now accepted by serious biographers , those not beholden to Yoko or Paul.
The only people who take this trash seriously, are those who didn't live through the era, or those who have never had to cope with the kinds of tragedy that marked John Lennon's life, from abandonment by parents to immature to cope with his growth, to the death of his mother in a senseless accident. Those of you crying "Wolf!: have never had to cope with anything more severe than a hangnail. If you had, you'd have sympathy and understanding for a child who grew up in World War 2, and the aftermath (for Britain). For most Americans, there is no comparable tragedy, other than personal losses, so y'all don't have the gene!
I'm an old fart so I remember when this came out in 1988. It caused quite a sensation then and the general consensus is much as you described it as a piece of trash. I'm just surprised you dug it up now, 36 years after it's publication when it's on the dustbin of history where it belongs.
I just had to stop the video. Goldman’s book is a masterpiece of rock history. The author interviewed hundreds of people who knew John and were close to the scene, and he reports what he was told and he reports facts based upon official documents. Let’s be precise-no one in the immediate Beatles family granted Goldman an interview. The wives did not grant him an interview. Their perspective would have been a valuable addition to the story. I won’t delve into any particular passage but do want to mention that John’s vacation with Epstein was the subject of a discussion between Shotton and John, and Pete Shotton has written about what John told him in confidence. So one of three things are happening: either -) John made up a story to Shotton, to impress Shotton; or 2) Shotton is a complete liar; or 3) John did have a moment with Brian which probably led to nothing (as reported by Goldman). Also, you appalled at the idea that John was using drugs while with Yoko. Are you familiar with the recorded session where John says to Stevie Wonder, “do you need a toot?” John was using drugs (by his own admission) all though out the seventies. I want to point out that Goldman did the legwork. He went out and interviewed people. He sat down with Nielsen and May. He talked with Yoko’s employees and they had no reason to lie. I will leave you with one thought: the person who tells the truth is the most unpopular person in the room. I also want to add that serious Beatle biographers use this book as a starting point. Why? Because the research was done right and the information is reliable. How do I know? One of the best biographers-who is currently writing a treatise on the second period of Beatlmanja-told me so in writing. While the biographers do not accept every part of Goldman’s book, or the focus on the negative, they do respect the research, (most committed to audio tape!!) and the level of detail. John was not a loving person or a nice hippy, but a fractured human being with many many faults and negative personality traits.
@@janissa-i4g I guess history wasn't your strong suit. "Yellow journalism" came out of the 1880s newspaper wars (that made Hearst filthy rich), and were pretty much responsible for getting the US into the Spanish-American War. They are the panderers, the "inquiring minds" (that only feed on garbage), and the hate-filled, eager to fire up readers, because it means money in their pockets. Fox (it's NOT the) News--it's ONLY infotainment, OANN, Breitbart, Clarion Media, Salem Media, et al. And half-wits like Rush Limpdick, Steve Bannon, Glenn Beck, and the other Profits of Doomsellers.
@@janissa-i4g In journalism, yellow journalism and the yellow press are American newspapers that use eye-catching headlines and sensationalized exaggerations for increased sales.
Reading his bok John now, Goldman seems to be very mentally ill and the facts we know now in 2024 is alot better checked than in 1988. Its hard to read for there are so many lies/errors
Goldman was interested in selling books, and the way to do that was to feed the egos of the outraged American Right (especially the Evangelical Right). Would you trust a biography of Kamala Harris written by Donald Trump? It would sell though.
I think that while this book has a lot of issues pertaining to methodology, I still think the John in this book is more realistic than the John that is often portrayed in popular culture.
John was the only Beatle not to grow up in rented accommodation, he had a middle class accent until his late teens, he however felt like a working class fish out of water as both his parents were working class. His Fatheri s I think viewed too harshly as a deadbeat, Albert was dumped in an orphanage with 4 other siblings on the death of his mother, John was needlessly cruel to a man less privelaged than himself.
Children carry the scars of their upbringing into their adult lives, until they mature beyond the point of hurt. John was cut down in the middle of his life. My ex did the same thing to our children, and I will never forgive her for it. I suspect their is a special place in Hell for those who abuse children, either for pleasure, or out of stupidity.
Goldman died around the same time as Kurt Cobain and no one cared enough about him to have his body shipped home - unwept and unhonoured indeed. Goldman was on a mission to undermine popular music - he failed. I dont trust Christopher Sandford either.
Christopher Sandford is trash. I don't know how he even got published. His book on Kurt Cobain claims that Kurt raped a girl during an SNL performance which he completely made up and is based on absolutely nothing. There's so much made up shit about Cobain in that book that makes him look like a sex offender.
Albert Goldman: "Closet rock hater and formerly slick phrasemaker for Life Magazine, Goldman is now at work on the 'definitive' biography of Elvis Presley. Look out, fans." "The Book of Rock Lists" (early edition) 😢
I did find one biography of Yoko David Brackett, YOKO ONO: AN ARTFUL LIFE. 2022, Sutherland House, 350 pp. Surprising there haven't been many others. Have to see if my library has it.
The best book on Lennon or any of the Beatles - by far. It doesn't matter what the fans think, this is an extremely well researched book and was never challenged in court despite its candid revelations. Does anyone seriously believe that Yoko would not have challenged this if she thought she had any grounds? In a fascinating account perhaps the most intriguing thing is that Goldman alluded to the fact that someone was obviously funding the impoverished Chapman but the police had little interest in checking further. The telephone logs from the Dakota might have been interesting had they been checked out. As for John sitting alone staring at the television for hours on end, it's been well documented that he was already doing this a lot as early as 1966. Unfortunately even Goldman wasn't able to discover Lennon's all important relationship with Alma Cogan as it wasn't revealed until quite a few years later. A mere 2 weeks after Cogan's early death from cancer, a distraught John Lennon walked into the Indica Galley and into the clutches of one Yoko Ono. The rest is history.
That's complete nonsense. I didn't believe most of what I read in that book in the 80s. Goldman reports that Yoko remarried about a year after John died. You think that's true? The stuff about junk and homosexuality, you believe that? Then you must want it to be true. So you see only what you want to see. You're a terrible human being. Eff off.
The book was released during the 80's mostly to get advantage of John's death sadly, soon before Paul had reconciled and reconnected with him so he passionately bashed the book On the Yoko subject, I do think that there's two extremes sadly that avoid any rational level headed conversation, one that absolutely hates her because of inherently missoginistic and racist reasons and people who deny any valid criticism because they acuse others of racism and misogyny I do think she has her merits on influencing John's career but she also has done some highly questionable things particularly to Julian Lennon and there's inaccurate accounts on how she met John
Yoko's treatment of Julian was definitely on the negative side! I understand stepfamilies can be very difficult to navigate and that trauma can make us behave in strange ways, but she could've been a lot more charitable to him in terms of his inheritance and letting him build a relationship with his father. From what I've read, they've come to an understanding in the decades since, though they still don't have a lovey-dovey, close-knit relationship.
Bashing Yoko is not misogynistic just because she's female. It's misogynistic if the argument is BECAUSE she's female. Look it up. (listen to Seasons of Glass, unrelated, but great Yoko album)
And many of the people bashing her do it just because she's female! As a Second Wave radfem, I'm quite familiar with misogyny and all of its many layers. It's quite well-documented that a lot of Yoko-bashing is founded on sexism, misogyny, and racism, dating back to the Sixties. Some people might not be aware of those origins, but it's definitely well-attested to.
Albert Goldman was one of the worst biographers of all time. He has been described as a journalistic grave-robber since he tended to attack those who couldn't sue him for the lies he made up in his books. He writes tabloids in book form. He also tends not to cite sources, which again, helpful when you are just making things up. I'm sorry you suffered through that book. The Ray Coleman book Lennon is a much better read.
You love Russian Literature, Judaism, the Beatles and you are also beautiful. How can I meet you?!?!?!? :) As to what happened with John and Brian, Peter Brown's book, "The Love You Make," claims they did consumate their relationship and that John used this toold power over the group and Brian, but it really does seem that Brown is wrong. BTW, the harmonica John plays on early Beatle recordings was the one he stole from a music shop when the Beatles were in Haburg. Maybe he REALLY stole it from the sailor he killed (LOL).
Hi …. A for effort… the Goldman book is controversial indeed and a lot of the info was factually wrong however there’s more truth to it than fiction. His sources have been corroborated over the 3 decades the book was published. There are troves of unpublished information that has been suppressed by the estate. The diaries exist and Yoko has 700 million dollars to counter any narrative she wants. Huge Lennon fan and historian personally. What Goldman got wrong which is so glaring in the book and non-existent in context is Lennon’s psychological profile. The book is “The Lives of John Lennon” but human lives are constructs of mind heart and soul - all missing in this tome. The psychological profile of Yoko Ono is outlined but not colored in. The formulation of the Lennon-Ono myth lies very much in two distinct events in Lennon’s life. One in early childhood and the other that occurred between the fall of 67 and spring of 68 but began in 1957. When Goldman published the book in 1989 mental health data and diagnoses we are all familiar with now did not exist. Lennon wasn’t that complex of a personality. Yoko on the other hand is. Paul McCartney is more complex than Lennon was but McCartney is a very stable personality. The Beatles breakup started years before it happened officially and that disintegration is key to understanding Lennon. Fred Seaman is and was a reliable source but has been muzzled as recently as 2021. Court docs are on the internet. It is irresponsible to say that everything in the book is fiction and all the sources were liars as they were not. Troves of supporting documentation is now available if you know where to find it.
Wow, this video has attracted a bunch of Albert Goldman apologists and Yoko-bashers! I really didn't expect that. As I said in the video, my reasons for disliking this book have nothing to do with thinking John was some sort of demigod beyond criticism; indeed, when I first read it at age 14-15, I adored it because I believed those stories were true and thus made him seem even more human, someone who overcame a lot of ugly things in his past and ultimately emerged a better person. The vast majority of music history scholars (not just people who personally knew John!) view this book as an unreliable source, to put it mildly.
Mr. Goldman did similar hack jobs on Elvis (twice!) and Jim Morrison, though his death kept him from publishing the latter unfinished manuscript. The Elvis books likewise are regarded as tabloid trash full of inaccuracies, distortions, and outright fabrications, and I'm saying this as someone who's never been a serious Elvis fan (beyond liking a lot of his songs in general).
I'm currently reading through several hundred comments on a lovely New York Times story from 2023 about Yoko Ono, her deep connection to New York City for decades, and how she's retired to the Catskills. The vast majority of the commenters have such lovely things to say about her music, her art, and Yoko as a person. Many of them have great stories about running into her around the city since the Seventies, and how genuine and kind she was in these interactions. As I've said so many times, people who bash Yoko are in a small but loud minority. Most people have long since recognised her for her important contributions to music, art, and peace activism, and aren't levelling criticism based on well-documented sexism, misogyny, and racism dating from the Sixties. How many people would, e.g., accuse her of allegedly controlling John if she were a man?
Rude comments and comments personally attacking me will be deleted. That goes beyond having a different opinion and agreeing to politely disagree.
Last comment :) John gave someone a bunch of material- recordings, letters etc for safe keeping. I can’t say who that person is but Yoko is aware of it and has tried but failed to get them back. They will likely all be released once she passes.
John was doing drugs - cocaine not H before his death. He was also scheduled for surgery on his nose as it was collapsing. He was a drug addict despite multiple valiant attempts to get clean. Many of his attempts were sabotaged.
There is also audio on the internet of John’s audio diary discussing his sexual attraction to his mother (not unusual that’s why the term “Oedipal” exists). This has a lot to do with how he was vulnerable to Yoko. His childhood was very confusing. Mimi & Yoko shared similar traits.
We don’t have to wonder if he sat in front of the tv for years doing nothing. We know this for a fact. He made audio diaries which are published on the internet. He also made video recordings- also available on the internet. The footage from Cold Spring Harbor is particularly upsetting.
He was an extremely traumatized person and he was exploited by nearly everyone in his life except the Beatles but especially Paul who was probably the only true friend and equal reciprocal relationship he ever had.
He was just waking up from these years of essentially living as a lost soul and was meeting Paul in England in January to record again (it was supposed to be December but the studio was booked)
Please watch “Understanding Lennon McCartney”.
It’s a 7 part series (approx 10 hours) on TH-cam by Breathless390.
It’s all archival footage and screen quotes. The filmmaker is not in it nor is there any voiceovers or re-enactments. It’s entirely archival material including some clips described above.
What was going on at The Dakota especially 75-80 was very disturbing.
Sadly, Lennon was very close to freeing himself before his tragic death that affected and forever changed the lives of millions of people including me.
Hi …. A for effort… the Goldman book is controversial indeed and a lot of the info was factually wrong however there’s more truth to it than fiction. His sources have been corroborated over the 3 decades the book was published. There are troves of unpublished information that has been suppressed by the estate. The diaries exist and Yoko has 700 million dollars to counter any narrative she wants. Huge Lennon fan and historian personally. What Goldman got wrong which is so glaring in the book and non-existent in context is Lennon’s psychological profile. The book is “The Lives of John Lennon” but human lives are constructs of mind heart and soul - all missing in this tome. The psychological profile of Yoko Ono is outlined but not colored in. The formulation of the Lennon-Ono myth lies very much in two distinct events in Lennon’s life. One in early childhood and the other that occurred between the fall of 67 and spring of 68 but began in 1957.
When Goldman published the book in 1989 mental health data and diagnoses we are all familiar with now did not exist.
Lennon wasn’t that complex of a personality. Yoko on the other hand is.
Paul McCartney is more complex than Lennon was but McCartney is a very stable personality. The Beatles breakup started years before it happened officially and that disintegration is key to understanding Lennon. Fred Seaman is and was a reliable source but has been muzzled as recently as 2021. Court docs are on the internet.
It is irresponsible to say that everything in the book is fiction and all the sources were liars as they were not. Troves of supporting documentation is now available if you know where to find it.
This sentence fragment says all one needs to know: "controversial indeed and a lot of the info was factually wrong". John was a human being, not a god, and he had all the failings common to humans. Same as me, same as you, same as every biped on the planet!
Hello Ursula, serendipitous that I tripped over your video this morning. Thank you for reminding me of this old biography! I'm going to dig it out and read it again.
It came out when I was 20. At the time it was considered scandalous not just because it revealed truly negative things about John, like his histories of sexual, physical and emotional violence, but mostly because it spoke to a fandom who wished John to be the myth he constructed and marketed rather than just a man with flaws and virtues like any other, of topics that at that time suffered an extreme degree of social stigma: John's bisexuality (at the height of the aids crisis), John's struggles with mental illness (back then it was seen as a character flaw) and his long involvement in substance misuse (at a time when almost nothing was understood about self-medication or addictive disorders).
In the decades since Goldman published, confirmation of John's bisexuality has come repeatedly from Yoko and from John's friends; no one writing seriously on the topic now fails to account for how John's life was shaped by his mental illnesses; and attempts at understanding and analysing the effects of John's constant substance use from his teens to his death are being made. Crucially, in 2024 these things ARE NO LONGER SEEN as nasty stigmatising things to say about a person. Being bi or gay is now recognized as common, normal, and respectable. Dealing with mental illness is also now recognized as common and having no more moral implication than dealing with diabetes or asthma. Substance use and misuse also, is now better understood than ever.
It's easy to make an argument that a man 45 years dead has no current cultural relevance. I believe tho, that John Lennon does have current cultural relevance. Not as his mythic celebrity persona, but as the real man with a very complicated life who is now an important historical figure- and because of those very things that were considered scandal in 1988. It is a mistake to attempt revival of mythologies marketed for 1970s fandom hype when there is so much to be gained in the reality of the 21st century from examining historical truths calmly and with compassion.
Goldman didn't like John, and that bias is stated in his book. But in this world where lawsuits fall as easily as rain, this biography was cleared by the legal department of his publisher, and the book did not result in a single lawsuit being lodged by anyone. All respect of course to people you met in the early 2000s who said it was all lies, Goldman did have a great deal of evidence behind what he published: He conducted 1,200 interviews for this biography during the early 1980s when memories were very fresh. The Albert Goldman Papers, which include a great deal of audiovisual material, are considered extraordinarily valuable and are housed at Columbia University Library, Altho you have not examined them, nor for that matter have I, I expect Mccartney, who has his reasons for closeting John, has had his lawyers examining them since before publication. The Goldman collection has since been used by others as sources for their books on John and the Beatles. Indeed, it's difficult to find a serious work that does not cite it.
John was long dead by the time of Golman's "work", so "attorneys" would have had no problem with it. You can slander the dead with all the gusto you like, so long as no living person is splattered with your mud. History is a long stretch of just such "scholarship", with all the opprobrium the quotes can impart!
The fact that no lawsuit came about is not an indication that this is accurate. As pointed out below, it's hard for an estate to sue over libel when the person being libeled is dead. It's also extremely difficult for a famous person to sue. In this case we have both. So, no lawsuit does NOT equal a true and accurate account.
True we were so young and it was The British Invasion. I never understood how John not financially xa48ng for Cynthia and Julian
Amen and amen! Goldman did a reprehensible hatchet job o John Lennon, for no better reason than money!
@@TheAnarchitek the hatchet job was more on Ono than Lennon if read now with all the information publicly available. Lennon himself admitted and publicly confessed most of the then incinderary information revealed in n the book though much of this wasn’t in the public domain 35 years ago as it is now. Goldman’s most glaring failure in this book is not his research or reporting (though again some of his reporting was factually incorrect). If you overlook those inaccuracies (which exist in every single Lennon biography including the one his dear sister and lovely ex-wife wrote unintentionally) you’ll see the failure of this book lies in Goldmans own narcissism and failure to view the extraordinary circumstances and traumas of Lennon’s life in any meaningful way. Goldman was brutal and unforgiving, devoid of any shred of empathy or understanding the shades of gray between the black and white words he wrote on every page or the powerful shadows and terrors that Lennon lived with. Lennon was extremely paranoid as he himself admitted repeatedly throughout his public life but he had good reason to be.
Goldman painted Lennon as a one dimensional phony, echoing the sentiment Chapman used as his reason for assainating Lennon. Goldman assassinated him again nearly ten years after his murder and attributed dark characteristics to Lennon that Goldman himself had. Lennon was not this person at all.
He was at times, and as we all are in our worst moments a cruel and sometimes indecent person but those were things that tormented him. He was a person filled with shame and fear and made many attempts to undo damage he had done if he could.
He lived in fear and also stated this publicly many times. His song lyrics aren’t empty shallow words. He wrote the truth about himself and had great depth of insight into his own unfair projections onto those he hurt the most and was always striving to be worthy of the love and adoration the world gave him and to use his status to impact society in a positive way though he could not carry the weight of all that.
The gift Lennon had, besides being the greatest rock n roll singer that ever lived and one half of the most significant songwriting partnership in history was his ability, through his soul-energy to deeply penetrate the collective consciousness in a way that could change entire centuries of culture impacting everything from centuries of hierarchal class structure, social norms, art, fashion, politics, spirituality, traditional family systems and of course music.
His legacy is enormous and has impacted every new generation that came to life after he died and why we are still discussing him today.
The Lives of John Lennon is an important book only for the depth of research that went into it so it is like an outdated reference book. For fact checkers of dates and timelines it’s a wealth of information. Yet it has no heart at all - that’s not the fault of his sources, many of whom were tricked and even threatened (watch Sam Greene interview on “Lennon Goldman: The Making of a Bestseller”.
The book has no heart because Goldman had no heart.
@@crissyrumminsfredrickson9230 John was a very complicated person, born in Libra, cardinal Air, in wartime, raised in the havoc of WW2 and the post-war England, he became filthy rich at a young age, beloved by millions to distraction, and took LSD every day for far too long. He pioneered the art of being a mega-personality, explored the oundaries of poor taste, and generally lived life to its fullest. He was beset by the same fears that hammer us all, plus some he brought to the table. He spoke my language, for seventeen years, and I will never forget the night I heard the horrible news an idiot had killed him.
Sean has sister?
Kyoko is Yoko's daughter by her second husband, Anthony Cox. They lost touch for decades, after an ugly custody battle that ended in Mr. Cox kidnapping Kyoko and joining a religious cult. In the Nineties, mother and daughter finally reconnected, and they now have a very close relationship.
Never knew Yoko had daughter
She has a daughter, Kyoko, by her second husband, Anthony Cox. Because of an ugly custody battle that culminated in Mr. Cox kidnapping Kyoko and joining a religious cult, they didn't have a chance to reconnect until the Nineties. They have a very close relationship now.
I agree with you it was just fast way to make money and none of it was ever proven and finally its easy to write about people who are dead they can't defend themselves
One of the best and most level-headed insights into John and greatest refutations of nonsense surrounding this most inscrutable of all the Beatles. Thank you.
Kafka said hell is being where people have a view of you like that.
Interesting how Goldman makes up lies about the Beatles and gets away with it! Who was the editor or publisher? What was their agenda! And who is this Goldman!
Goldman also did TWO sleazy hack jobs on Elvis (as if just doing one wasn't good enough for him), and was working on a character assassination of Jim Morrison when he died. His earlier biography of Lenny Bruce is somewhat better-regarded, though that too has a number of criticisms from people who knew Mr. Bruce personally.
I have no problem with biographers being honest about someone's faults (when they're actually documented, not made up) and not treating their subjects like demigods, but I do have a huge problem with biographers who revel in the worst of human nature and do little more than write a book-length tabloid article trashing someone.
Mc Cartney was savvy enough to dismiss Goldman's book as it damaged the Beatles legacy, the claims made by Goldman are now accepted by serious biographers , those not beholden to Yoko or Paul.
Goldman did a similar hit job on Elvis.
The only people who take this trash seriously, are those who didn't live through the era, or those who have never had to cope with the kinds of tragedy that marked John Lennon's life, from abandonment by parents to immature to cope with his growth, to the death of his mother in a senseless accident. Those of you crying "Wolf!: have never had to cope with anything more severe than a hangnail. If you had, you'd have sympathy and understanding for a child who grew up in World War 2, and the aftermath (for Britain). For most Americans, there is no comparable tragedy, other than personal losses, so y'all don't have the gene!
I never bought or read a copy because Goldman made John look like a castrated man and beta male personality,he was especially cruel with Yoko too
I'm an old fart so I remember when this came out in 1988. It caused quite a sensation then and the general consensus is much as you described it as a piece of trash. I'm just surprised you dug it up now, 36 years after it's publication when it's on the dustbin of history where it belongs.
I just had to stop the video. Goldman’s book is a masterpiece of rock history. The author interviewed hundreds of people who knew John and were close to the scene, and he reports what he was told and he reports facts based upon official documents. Let’s be precise-no one in the immediate Beatles family granted Goldman an interview. The wives did not grant him an interview. Their perspective would have been a valuable addition to the story. I won’t delve into any particular passage but do want to mention that John’s vacation with Epstein was the subject of a discussion between Shotton and John, and Pete Shotton has written about what John told him in confidence. So one of three things are happening: either -) John made up a story to Shotton, to impress Shotton; or 2) Shotton is a complete liar; or 3) John did have a moment with Brian which probably led to nothing (as reported by Goldman). Also, you appalled at the idea that John was using drugs while with Yoko. Are you familiar with the recorded session where John says to Stevie Wonder, “do you need a toot?” John was using drugs (by his own admission) all though out the seventies. I want to point out that Goldman did the legwork. He went out and interviewed people. He sat down with Nielsen and May. He talked with Yoko’s employees and they had no reason to lie. I will leave you with one thought: the person who tells the truth is the most unpopular person in the room. I also want to add that serious Beatle biographers use this book as a starting point. Why? Because the research was done right and the information is reliable. How do I know? One of the best biographers-who is currently writing a treatise on the second period of Beatlmanja-told me so in writing. While the biographers do not accept every part of Goldman’s book, or the focus on the negative, they do respect the research, (most committed to audio tape!!) and the level of detail. John was not a loving person or a nice hippy, but a fractured human being with many many faults and negative personality traits.
You should read Hunter Davies biography of the Fab Four, for comparison. Goldman was a yellow journalist, at best!
@@TheAnarchitek what is a yellow journalist?
yes, you are absolutely right, the truth is often not pretty..., his music is one side, but he as a person and a man had a dark (ugly) side....
@@janissa-i4g I guess history wasn't your strong suit. "Yellow journalism" came out of the 1880s newspaper wars (that made Hearst filthy rich), and were pretty much responsible for getting the US into the Spanish-American War. They are the panderers, the "inquiring minds" (that only feed on garbage), and the hate-filled, eager to fire up readers, because it means money in their pockets. Fox (it's NOT the) News--it's ONLY infotainment, OANN, Breitbart, Clarion Media, Salem Media, et al. And half-wits like Rush Limpdick, Steve Bannon, Glenn Beck, and the other Profits of Doomsellers.
@@janissa-i4g In journalism, yellow journalism and the yellow press are American newspapers that use eye-catching headlines and sensationalized exaggerations for increased sales.
Reading his bok John now, Goldman seems to be very mentally ill and the facts we know now in 2024 is alot better checked than in 1988. Its hard to read for there are so many lies/errors
Mystery Train!!!
Goldman was interested in selling books, and the way to do that was to feed the egos of the outraged American Right (especially the Evangelical Right). Would you trust a biography of Kamala Harris written by Donald Trump? It would sell though.
Your comment says more about the sad level of American intelligence, than it does about John!
I think that while this book has a lot of issues pertaining to methodology, I still think the John in this book is more realistic than the John that is often portrayed in popular culture.
John was the only Beatle not to grow up in rented accommodation, he had a middle class accent until his late teens, he however felt like a working class fish out of water as both his parents were working class. His Fatheri s I think viewed too harshly as a deadbeat, Albert was dumped in an orphanage with 4 other siblings on the death of his mother, John was needlessly cruel to a man less privelaged than himself.
Children carry the scars of their upbringing into their adult lives, until they mature beyond the point of hurt. John was cut down in the middle of his life. My ex did the same thing to our children, and I will never forgive her for it. I suspect their is a special place in Hell for those who abuse children, either for pleasure, or out of stupidity.
Goldman died around the same time as Kurt Cobain and no one cared enough about him to have his body shipped home - unwept and unhonoured indeed. Goldman was on a mission to undermine popular music - he failed. I dont trust Christopher Sandford either.
Christopher Sandford is trash. I don't know how he even got published. His book on Kurt Cobain claims that Kurt raped a girl during an SNL performance which he completely made up and is based on absolutely nothing. There's so much made up shit about Cobain in that book that makes him look like a sex offender.
His Elvis book is the same thing.
Albert Goldman: "Closet rock hater and formerly slick phrasemaker for Life Magazine, Goldman is now at work on the 'definitive' biography of Elvis Presley. Look out, fans." "The Book of Rock Lists" (early edition) 😢
@@patrick-lt2nv Elvis, Hardcover -January 1, 1981, just after J. Lennon shot! is by Goldman.
I did find one biography of Yoko David Brackett, YOKO ONO: AN ARTFUL LIFE. 2022, Sutherland House, 350 pp. Surprising there haven't been many others. Have to see if my library has it.
Thanks for the recommendation!
The best book on Lennon or any of the Beatles - by far.
It doesn't matter what the fans think, this is an extremely well researched book and was never challenged in court despite its candid revelations.
Does anyone seriously believe that Yoko would not have challenged this if she thought she had any grounds?
In a fascinating account perhaps the most intriguing thing is that Goldman alluded to the fact that someone was obviously funding the impoverished Chapman but the police had little interest in checking further.
The telephone logs from the Dakota might have been interesting had they been checked out.
As for John sitting alone staring at the television for hours on end, it's been well documented that he was already doing this a lot as early as 1966.
Unfortunately even Goldman wasn't able to discover Lennon's all important relationship with Alma Cogan as it wasn't revealed until quite a few years later.
A mere 2 weeks after Cogan's early death from cancer, a distraught John Lennon walked into the Indica Galley and into the clutches of one Yoko Ono.
The rest is history.
That's complete nonsense. I didn't believe most of what I read in that book in the 80s. Goldman reports that Yoko remarried about a year after John died. You think that's true? The stuff about junk and homosexuality, you believe that? Then you must want it to be true. So you see only what you want to see. You're a terrible human being. Eff off.
The book was released during the 80's mostly to get advantage of John's death sadly, soon before Paul had reconciled and reconnected with him so he passionately bashed the book
On the Yoko subject, I do think that there's two extremes sadly that avoid any rational level headed conversation, one that absolutely hates her because of inherently missoginistic and racist reasons and people who deny any valid criticism because they acuse others of racism and misogyny
I do think she has her merits on influencing John's career but she also has done some highly questionable things particularly to Julian Lennon and there's inaccurate accounts on how she met John
Yoko's treatment of Julian was definitely on the negative side! I understand stepfamilies can be very difficult to navigate and that trauma can make us behave in strange ways, but she could've been a lot more charitable to him in terms of his inheritance and letting him build a relationship with his father. From what I've read, they've come to an understanding in the decades since, though they still don't have a lovey-dovey, close-knit relationship.
i Refused to read this book because I knew it was a piece of crap
Bashing Yoko is not misogynistic just because she's female. It's misogynistic if the argument is BECAUSE she's female. Look it up. (listen to Seasons of Glass, unrelated, but great Yoko album)
And many of the people bashing her do it just because she's female! As a Second Wave radfem, I'm quite familiar with misogyny and all of its many layers.
It's quite well-documented that a lot of Yoko-bashing is founded on sexism, misogyny, and racism, dating back to the Sixties. Some people might not be aware of those origins, but it's definitely well-attested to.
Albert Goldman was one of the worst biographers of all time. He has been described as a journalistic grave-robber since he tended to attack those who couldn't sue him for the lies he made up in his books. He writes tabloids in book form. He also tends not to cite sources, which again, helpful when you are just making things up. I'm sorry you suffered through that book. The Ray Coleman book Lennon is a much better read.
You love Russian Literature, Judaism, the Beatles and you are also beautiful. How can I meet you?!?!?!? :) As to what happened with John and Brian, Peter Brown's book, "The Love You Make," claims they did consumate their relationship and that John used this toold power over the group and Brian, but it really does seem that Brown is wrong. BTW, the harmonica John plays on early Beatle recordings was the one he stole from a music shop when the Beatles were in Haburg. Maybe he REALLY stole it from the sailor he killed (LOL).
Hi …. A for effort… the Goldman book is controversial indeed and a lot of the info was factually wrong however there’s more truth to it than fiction. His sources have been corroborated over the 3 decades the book was published. There are troves of unpublished information that has been suppressed by the estate. The diaries exist and Yoko has 700 million dollars to counter any narrative she wants. Huge Lennon fan and historian personally. What Goldman got wrong which is so glaring in the book and non-existent in context is Lennon’s psychological profile. The book is “The Lives of John Lennon” but human lives are constructs of mind heart and soul - all missing in this tome. The psychological profile of Yoko Ono is outlined but not colored in. The formulation of the Lennon-Ono myth lies very much in two distinct events in Lennon’s life. One in early childhood and the other that occurred between the fall of 67 and spring of 68 but began in 1957.
When Goldman published the book in 1989 mental health data and diagnoses we are all familiar with now did not exist.
Lennon wasn’t that complex of a personality. Yoko on the other hand is.
Paul McCartney is more complex than Lennon was but McCartney is a very stable personality. The Beatles breakup started years before it happened officially and that disintegration is key to understanding Lennon. Fred Seaman is and was a reliable source but has been muzzled as recently as 2021. Court docs are on the internet.
It is irresponsible to say that everything in the book is fiction and all the sources were liars as they were not. Troves of supporting documentation is now available if you know where to find it.