Log In
Register
10.36pm
22 December 2013
Offline
One of the many repercussions felt by BeatleFans after John was so shamefully taken from us All Those Years Ago, was the fact that the wheels were in motion for staging what sounded to be John’s most ambitious concert plans ever, a World-Wide Tour to be titled ‘One World, One People’ http://www.tpimagazine.com/Chr….._tour.html sadly, now we can only wonder at what could’ve been, one things for certain, it would’ve been FAB…:-)
The following people thank Billy Rhythm for this post:
Lennonista6.59pm
24 April 2013
Offline 
Great article about the planned tour. I have never read that one before. Such a friggin’ tragedy, it sounds like John’s creative juices were in full flow and I’m sure it would have been quite an experience. One could only imagine how he would have integrated the use of video, but I’m sure it would’ve been a “scene.” I definitely would have been there… and probably sitting in the first 10 rows, because I had a part-time job at a ticket agency in 1981 so I would’ve had first dibs. 
8.41pm
Reviewers
17 December 2012
Offline
It’s an interesting article about what might have been, and of course we never got to find out whether any of these ideas would have made it through to the finished show.
One suggestion the article does make that rings false to me is the idea that John would have played South Africa. The Cultural Boycott because of Apartheid was well in place by 1980. Started by the Musicians Union in the UK in 1961, with more groups joining as the years went on, The Beatles had refused to play South Africa in the ’60s, and took a similar stand in the US by refusing to play for segregated audiences in the South.
The suggestion that John would have been one of those artists that broke the Boycott just seems like a slur on John’s reputation to me.
"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
8.55pm
22 December 2013
Offline Ron Nasty said
One suggestion the article does make that rings false to me is the idea that John would have played South Africa. The Cultural Boycott because of Apartheid was well in place by 1980. Started by the Musicians Union in the UK in 1961, with more groups joining as the years went on, The Beatles had refused to play South Africa in the ’60s, and took a similar stand in the US by refusing to play for segregated audiences in the South.
The suggestion that John would have been one of those artists that broke the Boycott just seems like a slur on John’s reputation to me.
It’s hard to say, as always is the case with these “what could’ve been” scenarios, but one thing’s for certain and that’s that John & Yoko were always on the cutting edge when it came to using music for smashing down barriers. Songs like ‘Give Peace A Chance ‘, or ‘Happy Xmas (War Is Over)’ have proven to be far ahead of their time in their ability, which appears to only strengthen as the years go by, to drive home “the message”. The ‘One World, One People’ “theme” almost certainly appears to be targeting the issue of racism head on. The fact that Little Steven Van Zandt would use his ‘Sun City’ song to target the South Africa problem by 1985 adds to this notion that John & Yoko may indeed have been ahead of the curve here, they were very aware of the global political climate, probably even more so than ever before from the ‘Dakota Years’ where they both had considerably more time to stay on top of current affairs….:-)
8.56pm
17 January 2014
Offline Yeah interesting point about South Africa. He could of tried to possibly try and have an unsegregated concert there. Or it could just be incorrect info that made its way through the grapevine into the article. I doubt South Africa would of let him in trying to promote One World, One People. Interesting part about the Beatles Reunion, some believe it was to stop Beatlemania show. Jack Douglas claims that John wanted to get the boys back together to help Ringo after his last few disasters. Which would patching things up further to support that there could of been a legit reunion concert.
9.29pm
27 January 2014
Offline I’ve seen that before. He was in talks with the art director form The Wall tour. He also wanted to have a multimedia presentation.
If I seem to act unkind, it isn't me, its just my mind that is confusing things
3.47am
17 January 2014
Offline Billy Rhythm said
Ron Nasty said
One suggestion the article does make that rings false to me is the idea that John would have played South Africa. The Cultural Boycott because of Apartheid was well in place by 1980. Started by the Musicians Union in the UK in 1961, with more groups joining as the years went on, The Beatles had refused to play South Africa in the ’60s, and took a similar stand in the US by refusing to play for segregated audiences in the South.The suggestion that John would have been one of those artists that broke the Boycott just seems like a slur on John’s reputation to me.
It’s hard to say, as always is the case with these “what could’ve been” scenarios, but one thing’s for certain and that’s that John & Yoko were always on the cutting edge when it came to using music for smashing down barriers. Songs like ‘Give Peace A Chance ‘, or ‘Happy Xmas (War Is Over)’ have proven to be far ahead of their time in their ability, which appears to only strengthen as the years go by, to drive home “the message”. The ‘One World, One People’ “theme” almost certainly appears to be targeting the issue of racism head on. The fact that Little Steven Van Zandt would use his ‘Sun City’ song to target the South Africa problem by 1985 adds to this notion that John & Yoko may indeed have been ahead of the curve here, they were very aware of the global political climate, probably even more so than ever before from the ‘Dakota Years’ where they both had considerably more time to stay on top of current affairs….:-)
I was recently looking at one of the pages on here and it mentioned that the Beatles were banned in South Africa from 1966-1970. It was because of Johns more popular then Jesus comment. He was also banned as a solo artist. https://www.beatlesbible.com/1…..les-music/ I wonder if the ban was ever lifted? Otherwise definitely not an option.
10.11am
Reviewers
17 December 2012
Offline Musketeer Gripweed (kezron9) said
Billy Rhythm said
Ron Nasty said
One suggestion the article does make that rings false to me is the idea that John would have played South Africa. The Cultural Boycott because of Apartheid was well in place by 1980. Started by the Musicians Union in the UK in 1961, with more groups joining as the years went on, The Beatles had refused to play South Africa in the ’60s, and took a similar stand in the US by refusing to play for segregated audiences in the South.The suggestion that John would have been one of those artists that broke the Boycott just seems like a slur on John’s reputation to me.
It’s hard to say, as always is the case with these “what could’ve been” scenarios, but one thing’s for certain and that’s that John & Yoko were always on the cutting edge when it came to using music for smashing down barriers. Songs like ‘Give Peace A Chance ‘, or ‘Happy Xmas (War Is Over)’ have proven to be far ahead of their time in their ability, which appears to only strengthen as the years go by, to drive home “the message”. The ‘One World, One People’ “theme” almost certainly appears to be targeting the issue of racism head on. The fact that Little Steven Van Zandt would use his ‘Sun City’ song to target the South Africa problem by 1985 adds to this notion that John & Yoko may indeed have been ahead of the curve here, they were very aware of the global political climate, probably even more so than ever before from the ‘Dakota Years’ where they both had considerably more time to stay on top of current affairs….:-)
I was recently looking at one of the pages on here and it mentioned that the Beatles were banned in South Africa from 1966-1970. It was because of Johns more popular then Jesus comment. He was also banned as a solo artist. https://www.beatlesbible.com/1…..les-music/ I wonder if the ban was ever lifted? Otherwise definitely not an option.
@Musketeer Gripweed One thing to note, The Beatles music was never banned in South Africa, it was banned by the state broadcaster. This did not prevent other stations playing it, in much the same way as the BBC banning A Day In The Life because of its drug references did not prevent independent radio in the UK from playing it. The South African Broadcasting Corporation ban ran from August 1966 to around the same time in 1969. John, in fact, giving an interview to Harry Flower for the SABC on 12 December 1969 during which the recently lifted ban was discussed, with Flower mentioning they were planning a special on Abbey Road .
While, on the surface, the reason given for the ban was John’s “Jesus” comment, it has often been suggested that the real reason behind the ban was their refusal to play South Africa, and their critical comments of the apartheid policy. They were, by 1966, increasingly vocal about their opposition to segregation, and in that regard South Africa was in their sights.
There was a controversial show on their first US tour – the Gator Bowl, Jacksonville, Florida on 11 September – where they heard it would be segregated. Once they heard, the response was swift, with a press statement issued on the 6th in which they made clear, “We will not appear unless Negroes are allowed to sit anywhere.” They demanded assurances from the promoter, John stating clearly, “We never play to segregated audiences and we aren’t going to start now.”
Given the assurances they demanded, they played, but they never played Florida again.
Paul, reflecting on this in 1966, said, “We weren’t into prejudice. We were always very keen on mixed-race audiences. With that being our attitude, shared by all the group, we never wanted to play South Africa or any places where blacks would be separated. It wasn’t out of any goody-goody thing; we just thought, ‘Why should you separate black people from white? That’s stupid, isn’t it?'”
@Billy Rhythm Sorry not to have responded sooner to your Little Steven comment, somehow missed it at the time. Surely you are missing the point of Little Steven’s song by suggesting possible plans by John to play Sun City in 1981 might show him to be ahead of the curve. Little Steven’s song was railing against those artists, like Queen, the Osmonds and Frank Sinatra, who broke the cultural boycott and played there:
“You can’t buy me, I don’t care what you pay
Don’t ask me, Sun City, because I ain’t gonna play…”
Had John played there in 1981, he would have been among the artists that Little Steven was criticising for breaking the boycott, which would hardly add “to this notion that John & Yoko may indeed have been ahead of the curve here”.
And John was certainly aware of the situation there, having visited Cape Town in June 1980, and remaining outspoken about the situation.
John photographed leaving South Africa, June 1980.
"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
5.23am
17 January 2014
Offline Ron Nasty said
Musketeer Gripweed (kezron9) said
Billy Rhythm said
Ron Nasty said
One suggestion the article does make that rings false to me is the idea that John would have played South Africa. The Cultural Boycott because of Apartheid was well in place by 1980. Started by the Musicians Union in the UK in 1961, with more groups joining as the years went on, The Beatles had refused to play South Africa in the ’60s, and took a similar stand in the US by refusing to play for segregated audiences in the South.The suggestion that John would have been one of those artists that broke the Boycott just seems like a slur on John’s reputation to me.
It’s hard to say, as always is the case with these “what could’ve been” scenarios, but one thing’s for certain and that’s that John & Yoko were always on the cutting edge when it came to using music for smashing down barriers. Songs like ‘Give Peace A Chance ‘, or ‘Happy Xmas (War Is Over)’ have proven to be far ahead of their time in their ability, which appears to only strengthen as the years go by, to drive home “the message”. The ‘One World, One People’ “theme” almost certainly appears to be targeting the issue of racism head on. The fact that Little Steven Van Zandt would use his ‘Sun City’ song to target the South Africa problem by 1985 adds to this notion that John & Yoko may indeed have been ahead of the curve here, they were very aware of the global political climate, probably even more so than ever before from the ‘Dakota Years’ where they both had considerably more time to stay on top of current affairs….:-)
I was recently looking at one of the pages on here and it mentioned that the Beatles were banned in South Africa from 1966-1970. It was because of Johns more popular then Jesus comment. He was also banned as a solo artist. https://www.beatlesbible.com/1…..les-music/ I wonder if the ban was ever lifted? Otherwise definitely not an option.
@Musketeer Gripweed One thing to note, The Beatles music was never banned in South Africa, it was banned by the state broadcaster. This did not prevent other stations playing it, in much the same way as the BBC banning A Day In The Life because of its drug references did not prevent independent radio in the UK from playing it. The South African Broadcasting Corporation ban ran from August 1966 to around the same time in 1969. John, in fact, giving an interview to Harry Flower for the SABC on 12 December 1969 during which the recently lifted ban was discussed, with Flower mentioning they were planning a special on Abbey Road .
While, on the surface, the reason given for the ban was John’s “Jesus” comment, it has often been suggested that the real reason behind the ban was their refusal to play South Africa, and their critical comments of the apartheid policy. They were, by 1966, increasingly vocal about their opposition to segregation, and in that regard South Africa was in their sights.
There was a controversial show on their first US tour – the Gator Bowl, Jacksonville, Florida on 11 September – where they heard it would be segregated. Once they heard, the response was swift, with a press statement issued on the 6th in which they made clear, “We will not appear unless Negroes are allowed to sit anywhere.” They demanded assurances from the promoter, John stating clearly, “We never play to segregated audiences and we aren’t going to start now.”
Given the assurances they demanded, they played, but they never played Florida again.
Paul, reflecting on this in 1966, said, “We weren’t into prejudice. We were always very keen on mixed-race audiences. With that being our attitude, shared by all the group, we never wanted to play South Africa or any places where blacks would be separated. It wasn’t out of any goody-goody thing; we just thought, ‘Why should you separate black people from white? That’s stupid, isn’t it?'”
@Billy Rhythm Sorry not to have responded sooner to your Little Steven comment, somehow missed it at the time. Surely you are missing the point of Little Steven’s song by suggesting possible plans by John to play Sun City in 1981 might show him to be ahead of the curve. Little Steven’s song was railing against those artists, like Queen, the Osmonds and Frank Sinatra, who broke the cultural boycott and played there:
“You can’t buy me, I don’t care what you pay
Don’t ask me, Sun City, because I ain’t gonna play…”Had John played there in 1981, he would have been among the artists that Little Steven was criticising for breaking the boycott, which would hardly add “to this notion that John & Yoko may indeed have been ahead of the curve here”.
And John was certainly aware of the situation there, having visited Cape Town in June 1980, and remaining outspoken about the situation.
John photographed leaving South Africa, June 1980.
Hey good information.So you could still purchase records there and it was only select stations or station? Information I got from was the Jesus comment page on this site. It mentioned he was banned as a solo artist anyone got any more information on that? I’m guessing it would be the same ban you described only to an extent. I am sure that John most of been banned in other countries, not sure though. So I am guessing the ban wouldn’t cause any issues for a concert for him.
6.55am
22 December 2013
Offline Ron Nasty said
@Billy Rhythm Sorry not to have responded sooner to your Little Steven comment, somehow missed it at the time. Surely you are missing the point of Little Steven’s song by suggesting possible plans by John to play Sun City in 1981 might show him to be ahead of the curve. Little Steven’s song was railing against those artists, like Queen, the Osmonds and Frank Sinatra, who broke the cultural boycott and played there:“You can’t buy me, I don’t care what you pay
Don’t ask me, Sun City, because I ain’t gonna play…”Had John played there in 1981, he would have been among the artists that Little Steven was criticising for breaking the boycott, which would hardly add “to this notion that John & Yoko may indeed have been ahead of the curve here”.
And John was certainly aware of the situation there, having visited Cape Town in June 1980, and remaining outspoken about the situation.
John photographed leaving South Africa, June 1980.
Thanks for that nice picture of John, there’s still lots of life showing in those eyes, emanating much Hope For The Future of the human race. I’m not sure how quoting the lyrics of Little Steven’s song shows that I’m “missing the point”, but perhaps quoting the performers’ name of that song would be a better way of getting my “point” across, and they were called ‘Artists United Against Apartheid’ as you very well remember. John & Yoko absolutely would’ve been one of the first to support such a stance, as The Beatles themselves supported in Jacksonville many years before. My guess, based on what little information is available to us after the fact, is that John & Yoko would’ve pressed the issue and shone a global spotlight on the situation as they’ve done so in the past and made it very difficult for the powers that be to continue to exercise such a racist practice when it came to an audience enjoying themselves at a rock concert. Little Steven was able to accomplish immense progress with his respective efforts for Africa and poured much undying passion into the cause, but “imagine all the people” who would’ve moved mountains had John Lennon & Yoko Ono, indisputably the most famous and notorious couple when it came to making such political statements (a class, with all due respect, that Van Zandt wasn’t a member of back in 1981), attempted to stage a concert in a country where the ‘One World, One People’ mandate was the ONLY condition upon admission.
“Changing The World” is all about awareness when a situation is as “hopeless” as the South Africa situation was back in the early 80’s before any real “progress” is made, and John & Yoko were the first to dispense with their clothing (literally!) and get at the heart of the matter when it came to Political BS, and it’s more than just a “safe assumption” that they were likely repulsed by the South Africa political climate and felt compelled to use their influence to make some headway in solving this problem as Little Steven, Bono and many others eventually took on. Yes, John & Yoko were two Artists that were United Against Apartheid, and as they had demonstrated many times before they were “indeed ahead of the curve here”, in my opinion…:-)
7.34am
17 January 2014
Offline Completely off topic just ironic. I know in one of his last interviews either Playboy or Rolling Stone the interviewer asks about The Beatles uniting for a benefit concert. I think they use Africa as an example and John gets mad the guy expects The Beatles to save a country/continent. Not using this to support any side of the above comments just thought it was funny/ironic. John was more mad the guy wanted more from The Beatles when they gave it everything. Didn’t comment on anything to do with Africa in response.
1 Guest(s)
