Log In
Register
1.29pm
Reviewers
Moderators
1 May 2011
Offline
sir walter raleigh said
the music they released in 1970 in evident enoughlet it be
mccartney
john lennon/plastic ono band
impossible to contain within one band
Sentimental Journey
Don’t go forgetting Ringo. 
The following people thank meanmistermustard for this post:
O Boogie, Ahhh Girl, The Hippie Chick, Beatlebug, BeatleSnut, ewe2"I told you everything I could about me, Told you everything I could" ('Before Believing' - Emmylou Harris)
1.57pm
Moderators
Members
Reviewers
20 August 2013
Offline sir walter raleigh said
the music they released in 1970 in evident enough
let it be
mccartney
john lennon/plastic ono band
impossible to contain within one band
The Beatles got bigger than The Beatles. 
Interesting way of looking at it. 
The following people thank Ahhh Girl for this post:
BeatlebugCan buy Joe love! Amazon | iTunes
Check here for "how do I do this" guide to the forum. 
(2017) 
(2018)
8.05pm
28 February 2016
Offline 
LoveUlikeGuitars said
Expert Textpert said
If you were to lay the blame on any one person it would be Paul. That is why all three except Paul banded together and went with Klein.Also, Paul is the reason all of the other three decided at different times to leave the band. He was always trying to control how Ringo and George played their instruments, always jumping behind the drum set every chance he got, always claiming the A side of the singles.
What did Yoko do? She was just there.
I wouldn’t lay it on one person or a single incident.
I’m sorry, whatever anyone says, Yoko was also part of the problem, just not the whole problem. And as far as I’ve heard, she didn’t just sit there. She was an irritating presence to the other Beatles. Even if John wanted her there, she could have said no. But whatever.
Paul was no doubt childish when he so badly wanted to get his father-in-law to manage the band, and no wonder the others went with Klein. Couldn’t they have just sat like bloody adults and try to consider another party to manage them? Everyone contributed to the breakup one way or the other, and they all acted childish at various times.
However, IT WAS MAUREEN!
I think there’s some merit to Paul insisting that the group consider asking Klein to take less than 20% . . I mean they had leverage and there isn’t a reason they shouldn’t of used it
I wasn’t there so I will refrain from commenting on anyone’s character but I’ve heard recordings from the ‘Get Back sessions’ where she’s intentionally going out of her way to be a distraction and nuisance and she does so in a typical manipulative way that I just completely detest
Also if you look at what happened between Klein and Harrison and compare to what happened between Lee Eastman and Paul McCartney . . you might say Paul made the right choice. Lee Eastman was a showbiz attorney and steered Paul in the right direction for business investments and steered him away from bad investments like building computers. . although, I hear there’s a company called Apple that did really well investing in building computers 😉
“The music publishing I own is fabulous. Beautiful. I owe it all to Linda’s dad Lee Eastman and her brother John. Linda’s dad is a great business brain. He said originally, ‘If you are going to invest, do it in something you know. If you invest in building computers or something, you can lose a fortune. Wouldn’t you rather be in music? Stay in music.’ I said, ‘Yeah, I’d much rather do that.’ So he asked me what kind of music I liked. And the first name I said was Buddy Holly. Lee got on to the man who owned Buddy Holly’s stuff and bought that for me. So I was into publishing now.”
7.00pm
5 February 2014
Offline
There were a multitude of factors responsible for the split. And despite all the ones listed in this thread, I have the feeling there are many more.
But to assume Ono had little to do with it (she was just there) is being a bit feign about her involvement.
Like the Klein/Eastman argument, time has proven her to be a controlling personality, and to suggest she wasn’t actively asserting control over Lennon at that time is fatuous, at best. This led to a John Lennon that would become confusingly rebellious towards his bandmates at odd times. The most telling evidence is Lennon’s manner whenever Ono was not around. Then, people saw the Lennon ‘of old’; jovial, jocular and focused. Lennon was not bipolar. He was giving himself to Ono and would revert to whatever personality pleased her whenever they were together. His reasons for this were no doubt deeply seated, but they were his reasons and his alone, so he is just as complaisant as anyone else.
McCartney, too, possesses a controlling personality and it was evident. But I’m going to assert that McCartney’s need to control were part “power” and part “fear.” It’s well-documented that, after Epstein’s death, all four of them felt rudderless and adrift. But McCartney’s need to remain a part of this band, and that ‘the band’ remain intact created an emotional distress that would often override his sensitivity. I mean, the man has a history of blurting out the most inappropriate comments during the most stressful circumstances!
Harrison may be the only one deserving of the moral high ground. His treatment at the hands of Lennon and McCartney borders on cruel, especially at a time when he was reaching his artistic peak and had already been validated as an equal among his peers outside of the Beatles, yet continued to be regulated to second line status within the band. If anyone held the right to walk away, it was him. His contempt for Ono was probably well-founded in his mind but he also regarded her as an outsider and wasn’t affected by her outside of the studio and the business side, so McCartney’s controlling attitude was more profound for him. It also needs to be noted that Harrison could be a right-bastard at times, often exceeding Lennon’s ability to be biting. And the man could hold a grudge.
I can’t really lay anything on Starr. He did quit, but I just believe that was because he could no longer tolerate seeing his ‘brothers’ tear each other apart. To me, that’s all Starr ever really wanted; to play with his brothers. And Peace and Love. All of his personal demons appeared after the split.
There are a host of other contributors. I’ve said before that the only real thing that split up the Beatles was time. I’m still not settled on that because I continue to find facts and details that contributed, some of them causing me to set my teeth. Ono being foremost. If you can’t see that… ah, well.
I do love the ‘Beatleland” analogy. They really were in their own little world.
The following people thank C.R.A. for this post:
Zig, The Hippie Chick7.51pm
28 February 2016
Offline6.02am
12 May 2015
Offline Ono knew what she was doing.
A highly intelligent woman she immediately picked up on the divisions in the group and exploited them accordingly. She would know intimately about johns insecurity about and jealousy of paul,she knew harrison hated her being in the studio and making suggestions to the group,she knew the others resented pauls control of the band and she knew their business affairs were a quagmire. She did her bit to chip away at the groups unity alright.
I get the vibe that mccartney (like ono another domineering character) knew exactly what was up and favouring a softly-softly approach ended up making things worse.
Ono wanted lennon to herself,and naturally so as she wanted to use him to further her own career. Thinking she wasn’t a key factor in the bands break up at the point they did is just fanciful really.
6.32am
Reviewers
17 December 2012
Offline
Of course, what people always do to make Yoko more culpable in their split than she was, is ignore those things that were happening without her having any influence, and also didn’t involve Allen Klein.
Major split between John and Paul, when John discovered Paul had been buying Northern Songs shares behind his back, and owned more of their publisher than he did. Nothing at all to do with Yoko. That was all Paul, on the Eastman’s advice.
Then there is the deteriorating relationship between Paul and George, something that was never truly healed. They came to an entente cordiale but their relationship would never return to their pre-1968 closeness. Again, nothing to do with Yoko.
You watch the fan interview that is part of the video, and for those Apple Scruffs that were there on the day, the villain (though she really wasn’t, no more than Yoko) was Linda.
You can play your “blame Yoko” games all you want, but the truth is that many of those incidents that led to the split had nothing to do with her, and would have happened every time you throw the die in the air.
The following people thank Ron Nasty for this post:
The Hippie Chick, Beatlebug, pepperland"I only said we were bigger than Rod... and now there's all this!" Ron Nasty
To @ Ron Nasty it's @ mja6758
The Beatles Bible 2020 non-Canon Poll Part One: 1958-1963 and Part Two: 1964-August 1966
10.34am
12 May 2015
Offline Here’s the thing though – i’m not trying to make her more culpable than the other factors you mention,but there is no denying she affected the bands dynamic in a really bad way.
They may well have broke up anyway,but they might have stood more of a chance of solving their problems without ono’s constant presence and interference, and it’s no coincidence their working relationship fragmented completely during the White Album sessions. This was a period where she was not just johns guest in the studio but acting like an actual collaborator at times.
She exacerbated the tensions within the band and did all she could to isolate john from his band mates. That’s a fact and has been confirmed by people who were there.
The following people thank castironshore for this post:
O Boogie12.34pm
Reviewers
Moderators
1 May 2011
Offline Whatever way you want to spin it, Yoko’s continual presence in the recording studio and around John caused tension, division and angst between the four, something even John could see further down the line. In my opinion to overlook and excuse it is as wrong as saying it was the biggest or only factor.
The following people thank meanmistermustard for this post:
O Boogie, Beatlebug, Zig"I told you everything I could about me, Told you everything I could" ('Before Believing' - Emmylou Harris)
1.46pm
Reviewers
14 April 2010
Offline Yeah – when it comes to assigning blame to Yoko, it’s either “too hard” or “too soft”.
Why is she never “just right”? 
The following people thank Zig for this post:
BeatlebugTo the fountain of perpetual mirth, let it roll for all its worth. And all the children boogie.
2.40pm
Members
18 March 2013
Offline Yoko didn’t break up The Beatles. The Beatles were going to break up anyways, Yoko was just a factor in it.
I do get annoyed at the people who say Yoko broke up The Beatles, tensions existed as early as 1965/1966 really- when they just got fed up with touring. There’s only so much of girls screaming at you that you can take.
INTROVERTS UNITE! Separately....in your own homes!
***
Make Love, Not Wardrobes!
***
"Stop throwing jelly beans at me"- George Harrison
12.06am
27 April 2015
Offline Yoko herself was worried as to how she was going to keep John entertained after the Beatles broke up. She felt that the responsibility that was shared by 3 people would now fall on her shoulders.
She was pretty right to be worried.
For tomorrow may rain, so I'll follow the Sun
