John Lennon Begins To Realise That Paul McCartney Is Broken. The Beatles, Interviewed By Jeremy James

John looks great but let’s be real, Brian is killing it in the back there. He looks gorgeous and that outfit is fire 🔥

Ed Sullivan and The Beatles backstage before-after the fab four’s historic 1964 appearance on “The Ed Sullivan Show.”

★ John with a cat at Reed Pigman Ranch in Missouri, 19 september 1964

Can we all just weep at John’s body language in 3 & 4: “Constantly transferring your weight from one foot to the other or rocking forward and backward is a comforting movement that indicates you are anxious or upset…[rubbing your earlobes] is a soothing action to counter feelings of uneasiness or vulnerability.”

(Also in no.3, John and Paul’s synchronised head turning, ama cry over that as well, they were so attuned to each other goddamnit.)

Ah yes the typical tumblr experience. Thousands of posts where John is reduced to nothing more than the sum of his faults…crickets. One article about Paul that throws a few softball shots (in a sea of articles defending Paul’s every action as being completely justified) and the comments are full of essays defending Paul. And yet people around here keep saying that Paul is a victim that needs defending because of what happened back in the 80s when John had just been murdered and people in their horror may have gone too far one way. It’s kind of silly when you think about it.

Paul liked to keep his options open and this applied to friendship. Just when you thought you were getting to know him, to feel a commitment from him, he'd slip behind a smiling mask. Finally I came to accept this aspect of his nature and we worked together, travelled together in a relaxed fashion, but never with any developed contact.

Paul had a real appetite for life -- an exuberant optimism and a buoyant enthusiasm that was admirable even if at times it overwhelmed his sceptical partner, John.

...He lived in his head to create music or lived to create music in his head. This process or activity could account for a certain distance in his contact with people, however pleasant and engaging he might appear.

Robert Freeman, The Beatles: A Private View

This whole quote is hilarious. I know Paul is a smart man so it’s frustrating to see him will fully misunderstood John’s quotes. When he talked about the Beatles being bastards, he’s referring to the fact that they had to be tough and have think skins to withstand the hard core Hamburg days and the insane beatlemania days to make it and survive. And he wasn’t always dark about the Beatles. Yes he was dark in the early days when he was hurting but he mellowed so much through the 70s. It makes me understand why John didn’t trust Paul given his willingness to undermine John in subtle ways so he could get ahead. Also if he’s referencing cynicism and darkness, why does George get a pass. That man was far more bitter about his Beatle days but of course Paul doesn’t view George as his competitor in the same way he does John

Q: Do you have days now when you never once think of the Beatles?

PAUL MCCARTNEY: Oh, yeah. Most days. When the Beatles broke up it was painful to talk about. It was just hard. So you found yourself thinking about it. Now, having come all this way, I can remember only the good stuff. I know one or two spicy stories and I have my bitch now and again, but generally I always did dig it; I always did think that what we were doing was great. Even when we broke up, I never thought like John did. Who knows why he thought that! John’s pretty complex. He possibly didn’t even mean it. All the stuff about how we were “bastards”… He brought out the worst side, as if to exorcise it. But I really didn’t agree. It was pretty good, you know. But there are days when I don’t think about it because I’m doing all sorts of other stuff.

— Paul McCartney, Rolling Stone, March 30th 1979

More misinformation. Paul was creatively in the lead because he was happy and yet he was so unhappy during this period he grew a beard and nearly drank himself to death. Just like I don’t like how people oversimplify John to be either a saint or a wife beater, I also hate how they oversimplify Paul to be a hero saving the day or a hack. Can we please enable these men to exist as 3D human beings?

“When John got the drift about how the others felt, instead of keeping Yoko away out of sensitivity for their feelings and out of concern for the group dynamics, he said, “I don’t want to play with youse lot anymore.” Paul desperately wanted things to work out. He was enormously patient. It was only his great love for John and for the whole Beatles thing that stopped it from blowing up sooner than it did. I remember the exasperation on his face away from the studio. At the time he was Abbey Road far more than John, who mostly kept away. John’s input was minimal, except on his tracks, or the ones he featured on. George’s input was pretty strong, but Paul was the most visible one, perhaps to the point of being overwhelming. Not in a nasty way, but just being creatively in the lead. I think this was because his personal life was very happy. John, newly obsessed with Yoko, should have been happy, but was exhausted and in torment. Looking for some release, he and George had even taking up chanting together.”

— Tony Bramwell, Magical Mystery Tours

I love this take! Also I agree diagnosis of a mental health disorder is something between and patient and therapist and not something for an observer. Speculation is fine but formal diagnosis is not.

Hello! Your reblog just now about John’s thinking re: Paul made me think of something I read the other night on Borderline Person Disorder. I am sure none of us feel comfortable diagnosing John and if you want to ignore this question bc it’s a bit sensitive, I understand. But I was reading about the “favourite person” aspect to BPD, in particular the tendency to put that person on a pedestal but then be very hurt if that person does anything wrong, and it did seem to fit the John/Paul dynamic. Do you have an opinion about that? I always love reading your takes on things.

Hello, yes. I think that it’s not something we can know from a distance and without training. Like, it’s clear that John wanted and needed more support than he got. But we can’t say any more than that, and I’m not sure what it would even achieve to do so. Even with a diagnosis, every case would be different so I don’t know what it’d even tell us.

I will say that this behaviour is also just something that a lot of people do. Some people just prefer to have very close, intense relationships than having loads of acquaintances. John also kept a lot of friends throughout his life (Paul included with more or less good will depending on the time period). I think it’s just as fair to say that John was impulsive and loud in his emotions. So when he liked something/someone he’d going to let everyone know, but then he’d also do the opposite

I also wonder how much John did put Paul on a pedestal. Like, he adored him, but the vibe I get from John isn’t so much, “Oh God you betrayed me by being something you pretended not to be”. It’s more, “You never really cared and I should have known that sooner but you kept me around unfairly.” There was also so many ups and downs between them, that I don’t think it’s as simple as John idolised Paul right up until he didn’t any more. I agree with Paul that his impulse to shit all over Paul is more about affirming to Yoko that she’s the only one he cares about. That, I think we know, is a pattern that Mimi likely helped install in him. But anyway.

I completely agree except my favourite is John and no I’m not going to apologise. That man is my soul lol

Having Paul as your favorite Beatle is perfectly natural unless you've been into the Beatles for more than a month in which case it is sufficient to diagnose you with a personality disorder