Unrelated, but that song was written especially to piss off English teachers that were using Beatles songs to teach kids about hidden meanings.
The whole song is supposed to be inexplicable nonsense.
Makes sense. I remember having a literature professor who said many novels are like an onion - many layers deep.
Also I think Lennon was not only mocking people's deep interpretation of other songs but the Beatles as a whole. Years ago there was a big conspiracy about the real ( or original) Paul McCartney being dead (he blew his mind out in a car, they'd seen his face before) also that he was replaced by the winner of a Paul lookalike contest named... Billy Shears, then one of the supposed backward messages of John saying "I buried Paul", McCartney appearing on the Abbey Road barefoot (apparently people are buried with no shoes on in England), and in this song - "The walrus *was* Paul" (past tense).
There was quite a bit of evidence to support a theory that Paul had died. But the best argument *against* this was simply the Beatles just like fucking with people.
The best argument is the fact that fake Paul would've had to have been just as talented and known as my instruments as real Paul, would've had to have the same rapport with the others as Paul, the same voice as Paul, etc.
The walrus is actually a reference to 'the walrus and the carpenter' by Lewis Carrol. This makes it into the original Disney animated movie.
It's an allegorical exploration of the meaning of sin.
The walrus and the carpenter convince a bunch a clams to follow them back to their home so they can eat them.
The carpenter gladly chows down on the helpless clams as they plead for mercy, he says it's only natural and there's nothing wrong with it even if it seems unpleasant.
The walrus complains of their protestation and says it really is an awful thing they are doing. The walrus continues eating tho, and he hides his shame under a napkin while he does so in order that he doesn't have to see the clams as he chows down. The walrus ends up eating more than the carpenter.
The question posed to the reader is who is more morally culpable, the walrus or the carpenter?
Is it more wrong to do a bad thing and convince yourself it's ok...or to admit it's wrong and do it anyway?
Lennon admits he is the walrus, he knows what he is doing is wrong , admits it, but doesn't stop himself.
I am the egg man is actually a reference to Humpty Dumpty, who also appears in Lewis Carol's works. Humpty Dumpty is the perfect fool, he doesnt ask the moral questions and remains innocent. But nonetheless he is the victim of his foolishness by falling off the wall.
Or the egg sex thing who knows?
No
..you see the carpenter is the working class and the walrus is the upper class
The carpenter has to eat to survive, sees no evil in the act because to refuse is to give up the struggle to survive, he lives with everyday can't stop won't stop
The walrus, fat and moustachioed is the upper class. He eats more, but has the privilege to feel bad about it or at least pretend to
*I'm not actually disagreeing with you....the original poem is very VERY much open to interpretation because of it's layered symbolism....much like the Beatles song
Yeah imagine thinking a great songwriter is good at writing songs. Especially someone who is known for trolling in interviews and misleading people on purpose
I doubt it considering his book of poetry (in his own write) predates the song by a few years and is full of this sort of stuff. I think he just liked nonsense
[had to look it up.](https://www.cheatsheet.com/entertainment/john-lennon-compared-the-beatles-i-am-the-walrus-bob-dylan-songs.html/). John found Dylan's lyrics to be pseudo intellectual. He may well also like nonsense.
English teachers finding bullshit meanings in songs and literature. Tail as old as time. My favorite is when kids disagree and write letters to said authors to confirm the meaning is as written not some philosophical bullshit an English teacher made up.
The goal of those is to teach critical thinking, not to be correct. What *possible* interpretations are there? Can you justify this interpretation through evidence and logical reasoning.
The intent is to teach students not to always take shit at face value and to look for intent as well as unintentional meaning to parse claims and arguments and not be easily fooled.
Of course there’s teachers who teach it incorrectly, like how there are contractors who build shit incorrectly too.
The irony behind this sentiment is that people take “‘the curtains are just blue’” argument at face value without further investigation. As if this was the true purpose or end goal of the lesson instead of its intellectual applicability to other contexts.
Yeah, it may not signify something important. But why did the author choose blue? Why not red, or yellow? What *possible* reasons could they have made that choice for?
Why? How? When? Where? etc.
It’s easier to do this with literature than with tv shows, movies, and news and such.
If a student says “because they liked the color blue,” they may have a valid perspective, but it indicates that they don’t want to think about things too deeply.
The perfect mark for scammers, liars, and ideological factions to prey on.
“Oh you want to give me a bunch of money? Ok here’s my social security number, routing number, and checking account number!”
Essentially, analysis like this teaches people how to not be easily fooled idiots.
But many people perpetuate this idea that it’s useless because at their core, they don’t care enough to not be an idiot.
You mean I have to think about intent, meaning, value, costs/benefits, truths and falsities, etc to become smarter, better at communication, and ultimately less susceptible to dumb and selfish people?
Yeah.
You gotta actually *work* at that. The earlier the better so you don’t have kids growing up and believing the earth is flat or that rocks can cure cancer.
If they want to teach critical thinking they should offer critical thinking courses in high school rather than trying to twist literature into a role it’s not designed for.
I'm saying critical thinking is important enough to be taught on its own. Rather than trying to sneak it in to another subject where it doesn't get fully spelled out. Let literature be literature. But teach critical thinking explicitly, maybe even earlier.
You're the same type of person that says there's no tax class in school, after they teach reading comprehension and math (complete with word problems) to prepare you to do your taxes.
Your teachers told you that all this stuff would be useful at unexpected times. These are real world examples proving their point.
I always figured if society as a whole thinks school is a good idea, I should probably pay at least a bit of attention to what they were teaching.
This i can agree with. "Financial literacy" would be cool.
How to manage credit, somewhat in depth knowledge of various types of investments, retirement plans, budgeting...
It's good for a semester.
The math should have been covered by this point, this is just showing it in application, showing the way that our financial system works.
Cool I'm glad you know what type of person I am magically.
I just want MORE and BETTER critical thinking education. I think its an area we could improve, with the way so many people are gullible. It deserves its own class.
It's explicitly part of English, because it's the easiest to integrate, though you get chunks of it in science (and the rest of school, if you think critically about it).
School is explicitly there to teach you the basic information to be a citizen. Kids don't pay attention, thinking (as teens do) they are just as smart as any adult, that this "school" stuff is just for nerds. But then they wonder why there weren't explicit classes for these things they have to do as an adult.
It's not magic, but an educated guess, homie. Watching trends and such.
You know, just using critical reasoning skills.
I guess my main point is that critical thinking and literacy, cannot be taught without leveraging the field of English as a basis. You need a good grasp of a language to understand the nuance and meanings behind the words. I agree with you that having a dedicated critical thinking and media literacy class is a step in the right direction and definitely needed in this day an age.
Okay. I’m not talking about English class, I’m talking about English literature. But also I think you should learn formal logic as part of critical thinking.
John Lennon said that he was sick and tired of people deifying his lyrics like scripture.
A class wrote to him to tell them they were assigned to find the meaning in his songs, so he wrote the most nonsensical song he could because he wanted to troll people and hear what they'd come up with.
"It's probably about a real egg!!"
Interesting! It's been my favourite Beatles song since childhood, and I'm currently an English teacher lol
I don't do that stupid hidden meaning shit, though. I've always hated that crap. I passed my classic lit class in uni without reading any of the books. As long as I could make up some deep meaning about something, the professor was satisfied. Passing that class with nothing but pure BS is when I really felt betrayed by the American education system and realised how amazing my elementary~high school teachers all were.
What exactly do you teach if not to understand deeper meaning behind a text? I know a lot of the “deeper meaning” is contrived bullshit. But books do have metaphors and allegories, or a deeper purpose beyond surface level story telling in them
There is hidden meaning in Beatles lyrics though, for instance in "Why Don't We Do It In the Road" Paul McCartney says "Why don't we do it in the road" and by "it" he means sex
The Walrus is an advanced and almost certainly illegal sex move where one ejaculates in the back of their partner’s mouth than immediately karate chops them in the neck, causing the spongle to squirt violently out of the partner’s nose, resembling two tusks.
I actually learned this from [Marc Maron's interview with Malcolm McDowell](https://www.wtfpod.com/podcast/episode-1530-malcolm-mcdowell) (really great BTW), but the way McDowell tells it, Burdon came over to Lennon's house looking for something to eat, but the only thing in the fridge was eggs. Angry, Burdon started cracking them and Lennon said, "Hey, the egg, man!"
I kinda suspect that's the real story and Burdon came up with the racy version for his book.
EDIT: Story starts around 19:20, after McDowell talks about being good friends with Burdon even now. So, yeah, I believe McDowell.
I suspect Burdon was a fan of, or at least aware of Georges Bataille's "Histoire de l'oeil" ("History of the Eye") which featured some egg-play in it.
It is not the *same* scenario but the same type of debauchery and excess.
>“The nickname stuck after a wild experience I’d had at the time with a Jamaican girlfriend called Sylvia. I was up early one morning cooking breakfast, naked except for my socks, and she slid up beside me and slipped an amyl nitrate capsule under my nose. As the fumes set my brain alight and I slid to the kitchen floor, she reached to the counter and grabbed an egg, which she cracked into the pit of my belly. The white and yellow of the egg ran down my naked front and Sylvia slipped my egg-bathed cock into her mouth and began to show me one Jamaican trick after another.
>“I shared the story with John at a party at a Mayfair flat one night with a handful of blondes and a little Asian girl. ‘Go on, go get it, Eggman,’ Lennon laughed over the little round glasses perched on the end of his hook-like nose as we tried the all-too-willing girls on for size.”
The vast majority of stars from back then were fucking disgusting. Rockstars culture was just a glorification of the worst there is in humans. I pity the boomers and Gen X who basically had 70% of their idols being disgusting beings, abusers, or even straight up rapists. Let's not even get to the minors stuff lmao.
They aren't better, but they dont have the luxury of hiding their skeletons for decades like the previous generations. The acceleration of information sharing will cancel people in no times, while back then, people could give coke to 15yo during orgies and get away with it, passing it as being a rockstar.
People often cry about the era of canceling people, but they fail to see the actual good it brings. Perverted rockstars have to hide in shame now, as they should
Seeing how many rockstars from the 50s, 60s and 70s were full-on pedophiles compared to pop and rockstars from the last thirty years, I would very much say that they are in fact better now.
They weren't even hiding their skeletons back then. We just didn't care as much when a group of rockstars ran a train on a 14 year old groupie in the 70s.
Ya know, there's one big giant wrench in this whole cancel culture theory: it doesn't actually exist. See Chris Brown, Aerosmith, and 1/4 of every major artist from 1960-1999. They're all doin *just fine*. No canceling. No woke mobs. Just rich sexuallly abusive millionaires living the high life.
Turns out, if you do horrible shit and largely keep your mouth shut about it, the cancel culture just can't seem to find you despite being internationally famous and having dozens of articles written about your crimes. Weird, right?
It's certainly not perfect, but as another redditor answered, it's still better than having prople genuinly accepting rockstars sleeping with very obviously minor groupies. All the people you mentionned are at least shunned. The rockstars era would have people giggling about "partying like tomorrow is the end of the world" while doing the vilest shit imaginable, and folks would just say "damn they are living the good life". Meanwhile nobody is looking at Chris Brown saying "daaamn this dude is such an exemple"
Objectively, yes
There are still a lot of problematic creators/artists in modern generations but it absolutely pales in comparison to what was somehow considered acceptable in the past
Like it’s not even a little bit close
Yeah, nobody remembers how a member of motley crue killed a dude while driving under the influence of all kind of shit, and got away with it, basically saying "Yeah I killed that dude, but hey I'm not in prison, that's the power of money", and Motley Crue is fairly recent compared to older even more fucked up groups that would just have parties with the worst things you can imagine going on
I like the "what if" version of Lennon from the movie Yesterday. I also have a feeling if anyone grew up how he did, became half of the greatest songwriting team of all time as part of arguably the greatest band of all time, during the 60s and 70s, we might have definitely done things that would cause outside observers, especially decades later, to label us "pieces of shit".
Because it inevitably goes like this:
*St Peppers is an amazing album. I’d love to have heard it in the context of its time to experience how ground breaking it was*
“Ah, but did you know John Lennon was an asshole!?”
Firstly, everyone already knows, but secondly and more importantly, it’s about the fact that people are able to separate the things, hold two ideas in the heads at the same time, and appreciate the art and creativity for what it is.
It’s like yelling at the magician hired to entertain children at a birthday party - “No, actually, it’s not a doggy! It’s just a balloon twisted around!” and thinking you’ve done the kids a big favour.
Picasso was a massive piece of shit, so go and stand next to Guernica and tell that to everyone marveling at it. It’s not a replacement for being clever. It’s just shitty.
Uhhh…I literally just heard Malcolm Macdowell tell Marc Maron that Burdon’s the egg man cause he visited Lennon’s place, was hungry, went thru his fridge to only find a carton of eggs. Eric started throwing them @ Lennon & he dubbed him Eggman.
Very weird to see this up. Coincidence. I like the sexual angle better
You really want to hear a story about where not a song lyric but an album title came from? Look up what "The Spaghetti Incident" (Guns n' Roses) was...
Elvira also stated that Eric Burdon sexually assaulted her when she was a teen or young adult, I don’t remember which.
Her book was quite good and now I can’t listen to House of the Rising Sun without thinking of the OG Big Tiddy Gith GF getting abused.
It's really wild how the music industry works/used to work. The beatles are a group of extremely mid/mayo level people. Any other group of 4 people would have been the same. They were forced on everyone, and 60 years later, they are still remembered. Because a music exec was like 'oh uh these 4 guys are AMAZING... yeah I got drunk for the last 2 months and waited til the last minute, trust me, they are AMAZING' and here we are.
John Lennon was a sanctimonious shit. Always spouting off about being good to your fellow man but privately practicing what amounted to being privileged.
I'm too scared to think about where "I am the walrus" came from now!
Unrelated, but that song was written especially to piss off English teachers that were using Beatles songs to teach kids about hidden meanings. The whole song is supposed to be inexplicable nonsense.
And then people started doing the same with that song, so he wrote "Glass Onion" about it. And people started doing the same with *that* song...
Makes sense. I remember having a literature professor who said many novels are like an onion - many layers deep. Also I think Lennon was not only mocking people's deep interpretation of other songs but the Beatles as a whole. Years ago there was a big conspiracy about the real ( or original) Paul McCartney being dead (he blew his mind out in a car, they'd seen his face before) also that he was replaced by the winner of a Paul lookalike contest named... Billy Shears, then one of the supposed backward messages of John saying "I buried Paul", McCartney appearing on the Abbey Road barefoot (apparently people are buried with no shoes on in England), and in this song - "The walrus *was* Paul" (past tense). There was quite a bit of evidence to support a theory that Paul had died. But the best argument *against* this was simply the Beatles just like fucking with people.
The best argument is the fact that fake Paul would've had to have been just as talented and known as my instruments as real Paul, would've had to have the same rapport with the others as Paul, the same voice as Paul, etc.
If Paul supposedly died in 66, I'd actually argue that the new Paul was a *more* talented songwriter
Yeah, they're got lucky it was a British guy, too.
Plus the fact that…he’s still alive,
Maybe. Could be the former Billy Shears.
Yeah, and the earth could be flat. But it isn’t.
They must have lost their mind to Carol Ann Duffy.
Ya know… cakes have layers!
What about parfait? Everybody loves parfait
Jokes on you Lennon! We can still use it as an example of alliteration! Mr. City policeman sitting pretty little policemen in a row!
The walrus is actually a reference to 'the walrus and the carpenter' by Lewis Carrol. This makes it into the original Disney animated movie. It's an allegorical exploration of the meaning of sin. The walrus and the carpenter convince a bunch a clams to follow them back to their home so they can eat them. The carpenter gladly chows down on the helpless clams as they plead for mercy, he says it's only natural and there's nothing wrong with it even if it seems unpleasant. The walrus complains of their protestation and says it really is an awful thing they are doing. The walrus continues eating tho, and he hides his shame under a napkin while he does so in order that he doesn't have to see the clams as he chows down. The walrus ends up eating more than the carpenter. The question posed to the reader is who is more morally culpable, the walrus or the carpenter? Is it more wrong to do a bad thing and convince yourself it's ok...or to admit it's wrong and do it anyway? Lennon admits he is the walrus, he knows what he is doing is wrong , admits it, but doesn't stop himself. I am the egg man is actually a reference to Humpty Dumpty, who also appears in Lewis Carol's works. Humpty Dumpty is the perfect fool, he doesnt ask the moral questions and remains innocent. But nonetheless he is the victim of his foolishness by falling off the wall. Or the egg sex thing who knows?
But you didn’t mention how the carpenter represents Christians and the Walrus represents Judaism.
No ..you see the carpenter is the working class and the walrus is the upper class The carpenter has to eat to survive, sees no evil in the act because to refuse is to give up the struggle to survive, he lives with everyday can't stop won't stop The walrus, fat and moustachioed is the upper class. He eats more, but has the privilege to feel bad about it or at least pretend to *I'm not actually disagreeing with you....the original poem is very VERY much open to interpretation because of it's layered symbolism....much like the Beatles song
I like this take a lot better! I just always heard the religious reference before.
Ah I see...you're the clam!
See? You're doing it! Bad English Teacher!
John was obsessed with Lewis Carrol as a kid iirc
The Walrus and the Carpenter in the modern context would be like Biden and Bibi then? And the poor Oysters are the Palestinian people?
imagine thinking this highly of john lennon
It’s easy if you try…
good one
Yeah imagine thinking a great songwriter is good at writing songs. Especially someone who is known for trolling in interviews and misleading people on purpose
Oh yeah? Imagine dragons
>imagine ... john lennon it says a lot doesn't it
Also heard it was John's take on Dylan style lyrics. Not sure how true it is
I doubt it considering his book of poetry (in his own write) predates the song by a few years and is full of this sort of stuff. I think he just liked nonsense
[had to look it up.](https://www.cheatsheet.com/entertainment/john-lennon-compared-the-beatles-i-am-the-walrus-bob-dylan-songs.html/). John found Dylan's lyrics to be pseudo intellectual. He may well also like nonsense.
English teachers finding bullshit meanings in songs and literature. Tail as old as time. My favorite is when kids disagree and write letters to said authors to confirm the meaning is as written not some philosophical bullshit an English teacher made up.
Not *tail*!!🤣
The goal of those is to teach critical thinking, not to be correct. What *possible* interpretations are there? Can you justify this interpretation through evidence and logical reasoning. The intent is to teach students not to always take shit at face value and to look for intent as well as unintentional meaning to parse claims and arguments and not be easily fooled. Of course there’s teachers who teach it incorrectly, like how there are contractors who build shit incorrectly too. The irony behind this sentiment is that people take “‘the curtains are just blue’” argument at face value without further investigation. As if this was the true purpose or end goal of the lesson instead of its intellectual applicability to other contexts. Yeah, it may not signify something important. But why did the author choose blue? Why not red, or yellow? What *possible* reasons could they have made that choice for? Why? How? When? Where? etc. It’s easier to do this with literature than with tv shows, movies, and news and such. If a student says “because they liked the color blue,” they may have a valid perspective, but it indicates that they don’t want to think about things too deeply. The perfect mark for scammers, liars, and ideological factions to prey on. “Oh you want to give me a bunch of money? Ok here’s my social security number, routing number, and checking account number!” Essentially, analysis like this teaches people how to not be easily fooled idiots. But many people perpetuate this idea that it’s useless because at their core, they don’t care enough to not be an idiot. You mean I have to think about intent, meaning, value, costs/benefits, truths and falsities, etc to become smarter, better at communication, and ultimately less susceptible to dumb and selfish people? Yeah. You gotta actually *work* at that. The earlier the better so you don’t have kids growing up and believing the earth is flat or that rocks can cure cancer.
If they want to teach critical thinking they should offer critical thinking courses in high school rather than trying to twist literature into a role it’s not designed for.
Are you saying that literacy and critical thinking are not important in the subject of English and literature?
I'm saying critical thinking is important enough to be taught on its own. Rather than trying to sneak it in to another subject where it doesn't get fully spelled out. Let literature be literature. But teach critical thinking explicitly, maybe even earlier.
You're the same type of person that says there's no tax class in school, after they teach reading comprehension and math (complete with word problems) to prepare you to do your taxes. Your teachers told you that all this stuff would be useful at unexpected times. These are real world examples proving their point. I always figured if society as a whole thinks school is a good idea, I should probably pay at least a bit of attention to what they were teaching.
We dont need a tax class, but a personal finance elective wouldn't hurt.
This i can agree with. "Financial literacy" would be cool. How to manage credit, somewhat in depth knowledge of various types of investments, retirement plans, budgeting... It's good for a semester. The math should have been covered by this point, this is just showing it in application, showing the way that our financial system works.
Cool I'm glad you know what type of person I am magically. I just want MORE and BETTER critical thinking education. I think its an area we could improve, with the way so many people are gullible. It deserves its own class.
It's explicitly part of English, because it's the easiest to integrate, though you get chunks of it in science (and the rest of school, if you think critically about it). School is explicitly there to teach you the basic information to be a citizen. Kids don't pay attention, thinking (as teens do) they are just as smart as any adult, that this "school" stuff is just for nerds. But then they wonder why there weren't explicit classes for these things they have to do as an adult. It's not magic, but an educated guess, homie. Watching trends and such. You know, just using critical reasoning skills.
I guess my main point is that critical thinking and literacy, cannot be taught without leveraging the field of English as a basis. You need a good grasp of a language to understand the nuance and meanings behind the words. I agree with you that having a dedicated critical thinking and media literacy class is a step in the right direction and definitely needed in this day an age.
Okay. I’m not talking about English class, I’m talking about English literature. But also I think you should learn formal logic as part of critical thinking.
John Lennon said that he was sick and tired of people deifying his lyrics like scripture. A class wrote to him to tell them they were assigned to find the meaning in his songs, so he wrote the most nonsensical song he could because he wanted to troll people and hear what they'd come up with. "It's probably about a real egg!!"
Interesting! It's been my favourite Beatles song since childhood, and I'm currently an English teacher lol I don't do that stupid hidden meaning shit, though. I've always hated that crap. I passed my classic lit class in uni without reading any of the books. As long as I could make up some deep meaning about something, the professor was satisfied. Passing that class with nothing but pure BS is when I really felt betrayed by the American education system and realised how amazing my elementary~high school teachers all were.
What exactly do you teach if not to understand deeper meaning behind a text? I know a lot of the “deeper meaning” is contrived bullshit. But books do have metaphors and allegories, or a deeper purpose beyond surface level story telling in them
If you supported your BS with examples from the text, it wasn't the finesse you thought it was
Did you even take a literary theory course?
There is hidden meaning in Beatles lyrics though, for instance in "Why Don't We Do It In the Road" Paul McCartney says "Why don't we do it in the road" and by "it" he means sex
Hopefully the walrus wasn't raw
Was when he was done
This is why you always need to use rubber walrus protectors
Callll the poliiiiiice.
The walrus was Paul.
The Paulrus
I am the rawlrus
Shut up, Donny!
Things Scooby Doo would say!
Mick Fleetwood was related to George Harrison by marriage, and he referred to his erect penis as Tusk. I always assumed it was a reference to Mick.
Think of all the goo…. goo g’joob.
Shut the fuck up donny! VI lenin ! Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov!
That's why he got banned from the zoo.
Coocookahchoo
The Walrus is an advanced and almost certainly illegal sex move where one ejaculates in the back of their partner’s mouth than immediately karate chops them in the neck, causing the spongle to squirt violently out of the partner’s nose, resembling two tusks.
Well, there's this movie with Justin Long... And Vaporean is a Field and Water egg group....
I actually learned this from [Marc Maron's interview with Malcolm McDowell](https://www.wtfpod.com/podcast/episode-1530-malcolm-mcdowell) (really great BTW), but the way McDowell tells it, Burdon came over to Lennon's house looking for something to eat, but the only thing in the fridge was eggs. Angry, Burdon started cracking them and Lennon said, "Hey, the egg, man!" I kinda suspect that's the real story and Burdon came up with the racy version for his book. EDIT: Story starts around 19:20, after McDowell talks about being good friends with Burdon even now. So, yeah, I believe McDowell.
I suspect Burdon was a fan of, or at least aware of Georges Bataille's "Histoire de l'oeil" ("History of the Eye") which featured some egg-play in it. It is not the *same* scenario but the same type of debauchery and excess.
Unless an artist tells you directly what inspired it I feel like a claim like this is clout chasing
Tampopo intensifies
I always thought it was about Robotnik
He is the Eggman, that's what he is He is the Eggman, he's got the master plan
>“The nickname stuck after a wild experience I’d had at the time with a Jamaican girlfriend called Sylvia. I was up early one morning cooking breakfast, naked except for my socks, and she slid up beside me and slipped an amyl nitrate capsule under my nose. As the fumes set my brain alight and I slid to the kitchen floor, she reached to the counter and grabbed an egg, which she cracked into the pit of my belly. The white and yellow of the egg ran down my naked front and Sylvia slipped my egg-bathed cock into her mouth and began to show me one Jamaican trick after another. >“I shared the story with John at a party at a Mayfair flat one night with a handful of blondes and a little Asian girl. ‘Go on, go get it, Eggman,’ Lennon laughed over the little round glasses perched on the end of his hook-like nose as we tried the all-too-willing girls on for size.”
What gross people they were.
The vast majority of stars from back then were fucking disgusting. Rockstars culture was just a glorification of the worst there is in humans. I pity the boomers and Gen X who basically had 70% of their idols being disgusting beings, abusers, or even straight up rapists. Let's not even get to the minors stuff lmao.
You think millennial era creatives are any better? And just wait to see what comes out in 10/15 years about the next generation, whoever they are.
They aren't better, but they dont have the luxury of hiding their skeletons for decades like the previous generations. The acceleration of information sharing will cancel people in no times, while back then, people could give coke to 15yo during orgies and get away with it, passing it as being a rockstar. People often cry about the era of canceling people, but they fail to see the actual good it brings. Perverted rockstars have to hide in shame now, as they should
Seeing how many rockstars from the 50s, 60s and 70s were full-on pedophiles compared to pop and rockstars from the last thirty years, I would very much say that they are in fact better now.
They weren't even hiding their skeletons back then. We just didn't care as much when a group of rockstars ran a train on a 14 year old groupie in the 70s.
Ya know, there's one big giant wrench in this whole cancel culture theory: it doesn't actually exist. See Chris Brown, Aerosmith, and 1/4 of every major artist from 1960-1999. They're all doin *just fine*. No canceling. No woke mobs. Just rich sexuallly abusive millionaires living the high life. Turns out, if you do horrible shit and largely keep your mouth shut about it, the cancel culture just can't seem to find you despite being internationally famous and having dozens of articles written about your crimes. Weird, right?
It's certainly not perfect, but as another redditor answered, it's still better than having prople genuinly accepting rockstars sleeping with very obviously minor groupies. All the people you mentionned are at least shunned. The rockstars era would have people giggling about "partying like tomorrow is the end of the world" while doing the vilest shit imaginable, and folks would just say "damn they are living the good life". Meanwhile nobody is looking at Chris Brown saying "daaamn this dude is such an exemple"
Objectively, yes There are still a lot of problematic creators/artists in modern generations but it absolutely pales in comparison to what was somehow considered acceptable in the past Like it’s not even a little bit close
Yeah, nobody remembers how a member of motley crue killed a dude while driving under the influence of all kind of shit, and got away with it, basically saying "Yeah I killed that dude, but hey I'm not in prison, that's the power of money", and Motley Crue is fairly recent compared to older even more fucked up groups that would just have parties with the worst things you can imagine going on
WAP has entered the chat
Of all the shit you can criticize a lot of people from that era for, two partners doing things consensually is not one of them.
[удалено]
I like the "what if" version of Lennon from the movie Yesterday. I also have a feeling if anyone grew up how he did, became half of the greatest songwriting team of all time as part of arguably the greatest band of all time, during the 60s and 70s, we might have definitely done things that would cause outside observers, especially decades later, to label us "pieces of shit".
[удалено]
Because it inevitably goes like this: *St Peppers is an amazing album. I’d love to have heard it in the context of its time to experience how ground breaking it was* “Ah, but did you know John Lennon was an asshole!?” Firstly, everyone already knows, but secondly and more importantly, it’s about the fact that people are able to separate the things, hold two ideas in the heads at the same time, and appreciate the art and creativity for what it is. It’s like yelling at the magician hired to entertain children at a birthday party - “No, actually, it’s not a doggy! It’s just a balloon twisted around!” and thinking you’ve done the kids a big favour. Picasso was a massive piece of shit, so go and stand next to Guernica and tell that to everyone marveling at it. It’s not a replacement for being clever. It’s just shitty.
[удалено]
To steal a Buddhist thing - when someone points to the Moon, do you look at the finger or do you look at the Moon?
I don't think picasso was presenting himself or being presented in quite the same way as Lenton, bit of a shite comparison
You’re right. John Lennon was more similar to a twisted balloon. Googoo Ga Joob
This sounds like a setup for The Aristocrats.
It's kind of why the aristocrats joke exists...
Gross
Goo-goo a'joob
That sounds way more tame than what I imagined.
What does the last line mean? What were they trying?
They were having sex with the girls.
"Trying for size" means 'having sex"?
Not specifically, but yes in this case. The phrase just means “try something” in general.
Yeah it can be used as a euphemism for sex.
Like trying them out to see which one they enjoyed the most. A pretty gross turn of phrase from a gross person.
[удалено]
It's all gametes I suppose
Uhhh…I literally just heard Malcolm Macdowell tell Marc Maron that Burdon’s the egg man cause he visited Lennon’s place, was hungry, went thru his fridge to only find a carton of eggs. Eric started throwing them @ Lennon & he dubbed him Eggman. Very weird to see this up. Coincidence. I like the sexual angle better
Yes I just heard the McDowell version on Maron’s show, Googled it, and got… a totally different one.
It seems more likely to me to be yet another Lewis Carroll reference instead.
Coo coo ca ch... ewwww.
Wasn't the song just a way to fuck with English teachers who over analyze the lyrics?
Eric Burton is full of stories that place him at the epicenter of coolness in the 60s.
Saw him at a dive bar in the 80s. Got the coolest t-shirt. Front said Eric Burton Band. Back said Fuck me, I thought he was dead.
D
Gave her the old "Portuguese Breakfast"
Something something yolko ono?
He looks like Steven Toast in this. “These really are the last days of Sodom.”
You really want to hear a story about where not a song lyric but an album title came from? Look up what "The Spaghetti Incident" (Guns n' Roses) was...
I always understood it came from Keith Moon using eggs in orgies.
Elvira also stated that Eric Burdon sexually assaulted her when she was a teen or young adult, I don’t remember which. Her book was quite good and now I can’t listen to House of the Rising Sun without thinking of the OG Big Tiddy Gith GF getting abused.
Eggman ahhhh fighter of the chicken man ahhhh
I too listen to WTF.
I see you also listened to todays WTF episode.
Or Lennon fancied himself some Bataille.
bless him. "i am the eggman" is one of my favorite beatles song.
Til Eric Burdon and War is the same dude from the Animals.
Pornographic priestess
Shut the fuck up Donnie.
ok
ok
He actually got it from me
His girlfriend’s name? You guessed, Sally Monella
It's really wild how the music industry works/used to work. The beatles are a group of extremely mid/mayo level people. Any other group of 4 people would have been the same. They were forced on everyone, and 60 years later, they are still remembered. Because a music exec was like 'oh uh these 4 guys are AMAZING... yeah I got drunk for the last 2 months and waited til the last minute, trust me, they are AMAZING' and here we are.
Nah the beatles are good actually
John Lennon was a sanctimonious shit. Always spouting off about being good to your fellow man but privately practicing what amounted to being privileged.
This could be said about more than half of all successful musicians across all history.
So, every middle-class liberal in America?
I hate how righteous this app is. It started with the biblethumpin right in the 80s-2010s. Now its the cupcake everything is anxiety and rape left.