Although the title was widely perceived to be a coded reference to LSD, ‘Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds’ in fact took its name from a drawing of a schoolfriend by the four-year-old Julian Lennon.
I had no idea it spelt LSD. This is the truth: my son came home with a drawing and showed me this strange-looking woman flying around. I said, ‘What is it?’ and he said, ‘It’s Lucy in the sky with diamonds,’ and I thought, ‘That’s beautiful.’ I immediately wrote a song about it.
There can be little doubt, however, that the song was directly influenced by John Lennon’s continual experimentation with LSD, which hit a peak in 1967. However, in 1980 he claimed the main inspiration came from Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland.
The images were from Alice In Wonderland. It was Alice in the boat. She is buying an egg and it turns into Humpty-Dumpty. The woman serving in the shop turns into a sheep, and the next minute they are rowing in a rowing boat somewhere and I was visualising that. There was also the image of the female who would someday come save me – a ‘girl with kaleidoscope eyes’ who would come out of the sky. It turned out to be Yoko, though I hadn’t met Yoko yet. So maybe it should be Yoko In The Sky With Diamonds.It was purely unconscious that it came out to be LSD. Until somebody pointed it out, I never even thought of it. I mean, who would ever bother to look at initials of a title? It’s not an acid song. The imagery was Alice in the boat. And also the image of this female who would come and save me – this secret love that was going to come one day. So it turned out to be Yoko, though, and I hadn’t met Yoko then. But she was my imaginary girl that we all have.
All We Are Saying, David Sheff
John Lennon’s handwritten lyrics for Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds
‘Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds’ is structured in two distinct parts: the dreamlike verses in 6/8, with their gently psychedelic imagery; and the switch to 4/4 for the chorus.
The song was mostly written by Lennon, with a little help from Paul McCartney.
I showed up at John’s house and he had a drawing Julian had done at school with the title ‘Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds’ above it. Then we went up to his music room and wrote the song, swapping psychedelic suggestions as we went. I remember coming up with ‘cellophane flowers’ and ‘newspaper taxis’ and John answered with things like ‘kaleidoscope eyes’ and ‘looking glass ties’. We never noticed the LSD initial until it was pointed out later – by which point people didn’t believe us.
Anthology
And the Lucy of the title? Her name was Lucy O’Donnell, and she attended Heath House, a private Weybridge nursery school, with Julian Lennon. She didn’t realise she had been immortalised in a Beatles song until she was 13, in 1976.
In 1980 John Lennon criticised the arrangement and studio production, claiming it didn’t do justice to the song itself.
I heard ‘Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds’ last night. It’s abysmal, you know? The track is just terrible. I mean, it is a great track, a great song, but it isn’t a great track because it wasn’t made right. You know what I mean? I feel I could remake every f*****g one of them better. But that’s the artistic trip, isn’t it? That it why you keep going, always trying to make that next one the best.
All We Are Saying, David Sheff
John Lennon’s handwritten lyrics for Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds
In the studio
The Beatles spent an eight-hour night time session on 28 February 1967 rehearsing the song, without any recording taking place.
The next day, 1 March, they recorded seven takes. The Beatles taped just the rhythm track: piano, acoustic guitar, organ, drums and maracas. Lennon sang the lead vocals off-microphone to guide the recording. Take seven had a tambura, the Indian drone-like instrument.
John Lennon recorded his lead vocals on 2 March, with harmony backing from Paul McCartney. They both manually double-tracked their performances, and then McCartney’s bass and George Harrison’s lead guitar were overdubbed.
With that they were finished. ‘Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds’ was one of the fastest recordings made for Sgt Pepper.
A composite of the rhythm track from take six, the tambura from take seven and the overdubbed chorus vocals was released in 1996 on Anthology 2.
John Lennon’s handwritten lyrics for Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds
What’s the instrument that plays the opening riff?
I believe it’s a Lowrey DSO Heritage Deluxe electronic organ played by Paul McCartney. The sound is a combination of the harpsichord, vibraharp, guitar and music box stops on the instrument.
lowery organ (introduction)
I recently read Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland and Through the Looking-Glass because John Lennon liked them. They were weird, but not in the trippy way I was expecting. I was waiting for that river sequence in Looking-Glass and it was probably the most confusing part of the book. Humpty Dumpty isn’t involved however, he comes in later. I guess he remembered it wrong. Being 17, it’s hard for me to imagine things happening so long ago I can’t remember.
I don’t think that this song was co-written. Yes, Paul said so but it’s not new that he claims to have worked on various Lennon solo numbers.
However, I have the booklet of Sgt. Pepper. And there it is written:
“Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds”
writer: John, lead vocal: John.
Yeah, who’s Paul claiming to have more knowledge about that session than you!
There’s a reason they their songs as “Lennon/McCartney” (although Paul infamously changed the names on “Wings over America” for his own songs), they were co-writers.
Sure, in their later period they did more and more solo numbers, but still the other(s) would come up with ideas.
If Paul specifically names the words he came up with, what gives you reason to doubt it?!
Most of his “claims” fit John’s opinions.
Read “Many years from now” and you will learn some REAL stuff, not just some “John was cool, Paul was sappy” clichee.
I think this booklet is a more reliable source than an authorized biography by Mr McCartney.
I will never buy this book. It makes me angry. There are so many songs which are generally seen as solo numbers of John. But in this book Paul claims to have have worked on “Help!”, “Lucy in the Sky”, the first half of “A Day in the Life”, “I Feel Fine”, “Being for the Benefit of Mr. Kite!” etc.
I mean is there a song Paul McCartney doesn’t take credit for? And the source is who? HIMSELF! He is the only one who said so. John never mentioned him when he talked about “Lucy in the Sky”.
I don’t think that everything what Paul said is wrong. He is the composer of “Eleanor Rigby” and he helped to finish “Norwegian Woods”. But sometimes he gets unreliable.
And: It’s kind of odd that he is only saying he contributed after Lennon died, but when he was still alive he never said he contributed to any of these songs. And that makes me angry.
By the way: in the last three years (1967-1970) they worked rarely together. Example: the only co-written song on the “White Album” is “Birthday”. The rest were solo efforts
Although I agree with you about Many Years Ago, I must differ with you on John and Paul co-writing songs in the last three years.
Along with Birthday, there are two other co-written songs where both partners made a substantial contribution—Baby, You’re A Rich Man and I’ve Got A Feeling.
You’re right. But they didn’t really work together on these songs. It’s the same as “A Day in the Life”. They connected two song fragments. And on “I’ve got a feeling” it works really good. But it’s right. They both contributed something.
LOL!
Of COURSE he helped writing “Help”, they did it together in his house during one of their USUAL sessions. Macca would give Lennon high percentage on those songs, sometimes he says he didn’t contribute anything at all, so that answers your question with a big “Yes”.
And remember: it was PAUL who came up with the fantastic intro to “LitSwD”!
And of course he NEVER claimed he wrote the first half of “A day in the life”! Ridiculous! Get your facts right before getting angry, dude!
While most of their “White album” songs were indeed solo efforts, sometimes even without another Beatle on the record, there were most obviously many ideas by the others used in the final song (e.g. John’s great piano intro to “Ob-la-di Ob-la-da”).
Paul also asked John for lyrical advice for “Hey Jude”. Just another example.
“Many years from now” is a fantastic book, and Macca sounds very honest and humble to me.
But some Lennon-fans will never respect him, so no point in discussing here…
Yes, I’m a Lennon fan. But I respect Paul and his work. Nevertheless I’m sometimes a bit angry with him. He wrote great songs – Penny Lane, HelloGoodbye, Hey Jude, Let it Be – only a few examples.
Take a look at the article of “A Day in the Life” on this page. There McCartney says:
“The verse about the politician blowing his mind out in a car we wrote together.”
So I wasn’t wrong. I have read a lot about this song. I know the facts. But Pauls statements are ambivalent. Elsewhere he said it was mainly Johns song (which is true in my opinion) and he just had the middle section. And makes him a bit unreliable.
John played the piano on “Obladi-Oblada”. But what is your source concering the composer. What makes you think John wrote it. I think Paul showed him what he wanted to have.
It’s always the same. Only because Paul played the Mellotron intro of “Strawberry Fields” it doesn’t mean that he wrote it. The same is true of “Lucy in the Sky”. Paul played the organ but who said that he composed what he played. Maybe he said but I don’t believe him.
And what you said about “Hey Jude”. Are you serious? Of course John helped with the arrangement of the song. But that’s normal. They were partners and in the studio they worked a lot together. But would you mention him as a composer of the song (although all songs are credited to Lennon/McCartney)?
Another example: Lady Madonna. John contributed the line “See how they run”. But would you mention him as a composer because of one single line. Then we could say all of their songs were co-written.
‘…because Paul played the Mellotron intro of “Strawberry Fields” it doesn’t mean that he wrote it.’
There were, oftentimes, other people around when the Beatles worked out their parts. For example, people witnessed Paul inventing the mellotron part in SFF:
“It was Paul, as usual, who discovered the musical potential instead of just the novelty value. Dialing up the flute sound, he began experimenting with the chords to John’s new song. Within a remarkably short time he’d worked out an arrangement that beautifully complemented Lennon’s haunting vocal line.”–Geoff Emerick and Howard Massey, Here, There and Everywhere (London, 2007), pp. 135-36.
According to Emerick, John was particularly complacent during those sessions wherein LitSwD was completed:
“Instead of being opinionated about everything, he was becoming complacent; in fact, he seemed quite content to have someone else do his thinking for him, even when we were working on one of his own songs. … he was becoming increasingly disengaged …”–Emerick and Massey, p. 174.
It is quite believable, therefore, that Paul did mainly develop those parts which he played on LitSwD.
Geoff Emmerick is completely unreliable. Any historian would tell you that. The amount of bias in his book is ridiculous. He throws John, Ringo and both Georges under the bus. While making himself look as the most important artist at the session besides Paul.
Ok, I didn’t know that article.
If he says so, I have no reason to doubt it. Why do you?
Why are you angry about that? Does that make John a less great composer?
It is still “mainly John’s song” obviously, although Macca contributed greatly with his middlepart.
George Martin says that Paul improvised the intro for “Lucy”.
And of course that does NOT make him the writer of the song. That’s why your statement about that booklet looks so ridiculous to me.
John improvised the intro to “Obladi”, but what makes you think that makes me think he was the main composer?! It doesn’t matter at all what you think, it was still like that:
John came to the session in a good mood and hammered that intro like never before and thus kick-started “Obladi” which was kind of stuck before.
In fact we totally agree:
Apart from many songs in their early phase which they wrote 50:50 together there is always one MAIN songwriter, which is also the lead singer.
But the other one(s) would almost always contribute something, sometimes more, sometimes just a single line (“You know, what I mean”!). I can only repeat, that is excactly why it’s ALWAYS “Lennon/McCartney”.
It was YOU who implied, that “writer: John” meant NOBODY else contributed ANYTHING to the song, ESPACIALLY not Paul McCartney, ESPECIALLY not because he said he did.
Apart from that: I think that Paul always suffered from being considered just the “nice” one, while he was the main force behind almost everything up from Sgt. Peppers.
So he had the feeling that John got all the praise, so sometimes he thought it important to point out his own contributions.
What’s so hard to get and understand about that?
Concerning your last part: I think Paul was very ambitious. Perhaps a bit too ambitious. I think he wanted to surpass John. That makes him – in my view – a bit uncool. He was energetic. John was more relaxed. But I know you have a different opinion.
I have another argument. Paul didn’t like the “White Album” because everybody worked solely. If it would have been more a group thing he would have had more influence on the songs of the others. So he was upset because of that. On the other hand he recorded songs without integrating the other members. Especially John was hurt because of that. But this discussion is too generally.
Obladi-Oblada: OK, John was responsible for that intro. But nevertheless he hated that song. And I would not use the word “compose”. It’s just a very simple chord change. I’ve tried it on the piano.
A Day in the Life: I’ve said it before. Pauls statements are ambivalent. Sometimes he said this and sometimes he said that. John said the only contribution from Paul to his part was the line “I’d love to turn you on”. And George Martin said they wrote their parts separately. I’ve read this so often. Paul is the only one who has a different opinion.
Lucy in the Sky: I think you underrate the significance of this booklet. It was made by the people who made Sgt. Pepper. Would you say the recording dates are also wrong? They are written in this book. Another example:
“She’s Leaving Home”
writers: Paul, with John. lead vocals: Paul, with John.
That makes sense. It’s mainly Pauls song but John contributed the countermelody in chorus. This is a significant contribution.
Back to Lucy. Of course the other members contributed something. But in form of arrangements. The intro repeats during the verses. So it’s a very important part. It is the base for Lennons vocals. So it’s hard for me to believe that another one wrote it. I think John wrote this song on the piano. He wrote most of his songs on the piano. And if Paul would have been responsible for that intro he would have been mentioned in this booklet.
But it’s your choice. If you want to believe Pauls book do so.
As is often the case, Paul’s comments leave it open as to whether he contributed only to the lyrics or to the melody also. LiSwD is a perfect example. The way Paul tells it seems to leave open the possibility that all John had was the title and Julian’s picture! “Then we went upstairs and wrote the song,” sounds like he might have been in on the writing of both lyrics and melody from the beginning. Its only when he says “swapping lines like ‘newspaper taxi’ etc.” that it becomes ambiguous and you think “Oh maybe he just added some lines.” Ironically, Wikipeida’s article on LiSwD says, “composed mainly by John Lennon” and cites the Barry Miles McCartney autobiography as its source!My impression has been that John had most of the words and the basic melody and if Paul did contribute musically, it might have been that instrumental opening and possibly the melody on the connecting passage “cellphane flowers…” Anybody have any information on the extent of Paul’s contribution to the melody?
I read that too and immediately thought bulldust. Another version of events is in George Martin’s book “Summer of Love:The Making of Sgt Pepper” from 1994. George writes,”Paul has told me of the genesis of this marvellous song [LitSwD]”. He then quotes Paul: “…………We then went up to the music room at the top of the house and he played me the idea he had for it, starting with ‘Picture yourself….'” So importantly he said “played” meaning John had already begun setting his words to music using that chord sequence – also used for the intro – and that he would later use for “Dear Prudence”. And that intro which some want to gush about was no big deal. Just arpeggios based on John’s chords whoever played it. Strum those chords on the guitar and sing those words – the song is already there regardless.
Interesting too that George Martin in his book rates Lennon’s songs as the standouts: Day in the Life, Lucy and Mr Kite inasmuch as he gave them plum positions on the album.
That is all I want to say.
As footage proves, the intro of ‘Strawberry Fields Forever’ is played by Lennon in 1964. Using a melodica.
See comments under that song.
It is documented somewhere that the piano intro to Obla Di Obla Da was played by Lennon in a fit of frustration over the amount of takes it was taking to get the song right to Maccas satisfaction.
John did say in several interviews that Paul co-wrote the lyrics even citing that Paul wrote the lines about “newspaper taxis”.
Its been common knowledge forever that Paul wrote the middle of Day in the Life.I’ve seen numerous quotes from John saying he was stuck & Paul had an unfinished song which was the part he sings in the song starting with,woke up,fell out of bed, dragged a comb across my head.I mean thats beyond common knowledge.As for the other songs, I mean c’mon!its Paul McCartney,he really doesn’t have to or would want to ride on Lennon’s coat tails.You sound absurd suggesting that.
Eltonjohnlennon: I whole-heartedly agree with your comment (“…I think this booklet is a more reliable source than an authorized biography by Mr McCartney….” etc). Truly the proper thing for McCartmey to do would have been to remain silent on all Lennon-McCartmey songwriting, since John is gone. Seems a wee bit tacky, albeit ruthless, to start claiming specific lyric fragments and sections of melodies as your own. My 2 cents.
Well it’s not like there aren’t other ways of looking at it. Some have argued that McCartney initially did not elaborate on his role in the songwriting partnership because he didn’t want to incite more controversy in the wake of Lennon’s initial claims about their partnership in light of the band’s breakup, and that much of what he has felt compelled to clarify was in response to how people chose to view Lennon in response to his tragic death. If you look around you’ll find plenty of instances where some of Lennon’s recollections have also been challenged by other sources. Everyone interested in this matter can only form their own views, though personal bias generally plays an unavoidable role in shaping those views I know. But, I believe that since McCartney was there as one half of the partnership he shared with Lennon, he has every right to elaborate on his role in it as Lennon did his when he was still living. Believe what you will, but it is so.
if im not wrong they always shared co-authorship of the songs. And if we are talking about taking credit..how about “yesterday”? ..the song was all written by mccartney but is credited to both of them
You get angry because it doesn’t fit your pre-concieved ideas of how you WANT it to be. But, face it, you’re not correct and your fantasy is just that.
(There is another guy who posts here with the same problem),
It’s worth noting that the booklet also says of the song “Getting Better”- writer: Paul, lead vocal: Paul. Yet Paul has often told the tale of how John came up with the line “It couldn’t get much worse”.
EVERY LENNON/MCCARTNEY BEATLE SONG (Except Yesterday) was written by BOTH Lennon and Mccratney… In Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds, Paul’s only claim is adding ‘newspaper taxis’ and ‘cellophane flowers’. Not much, but he DID contribute. It was a rule they had with each other, because they did publish under Lennon/McCartney.
Hi… I’d like to know who said the first Lucy in the sky. When it said “Lucy in the” sounds like Paul, but “Sky” sounds like John. If you know tell me please. Or your opinion. Thanks
Gotta say Paul has some great bass lines in the song though, doesn’t he?
The whole album is pure bass playing brilliance.
And don’t forget the fabulous intro on the organ!
I agree with you!! And I’ve got a question, when John sings “Look for the girl”.. is that the cymbal Ringo is playing?
I believe if you read the 1970 Rolling Stone interview with John (Lennon Remembers) when Jann Wenner mentions how John’s solo album (John Lennon – Plastic Ono Band) has very straightforward lyrics, Wenner says, “no newspaper taxis” – Lennon responds by saying, “That was Paul’s line” – my guess is Paul wrote some of the lyrics to Lucy In The Sky
Of course. They were collaborating hugely during 1967, contributing ideas freely to each others’ songs. It was only really from 1968, post-India, that they began working alone.
It was rare that one or the other brought a song fully formed into the studio, right from the early days. Often enought, “written by John” (or, indeed, Paul) meant he had the melody, first verse and the chorus, and the rest was fleshed out as they recorded it. To suggest that Paul didn’t suggest any lyrics to Lucy ITSWD seems pretty unlikely to me.
The problem is just that some Lennon-fans don’t get over the fact that Macca was more important then they’d like to make him.
To them John was the leader and Paul the sappy happy douchebag.
And to rate a single word in a BOOKLET over a whole biography by McCartney himself is more than funny.
Oh I didn’t know that the whole biography is about one single song.
I think I might draw this debate to a close, as it’s not really about Lucy In The Sky any more. If you want to discuss John v Paul please visit the forum, as it won’t get published here.
Well said. Anyone who has played in a band knows that if you sit around for 8 hours rehearsing a song the night before, it is common that the song has changes made to the rough sketch brought into the band by one of its songwriting members. Whether it is changes to the music, to the lyrics, to the order of the verses/bridge/chorus, to the addition of a lead break, or whether it is just changing the arrangement – inevitably, a song will be ‘work-shopped’ until it emerges differently to the way it first sounded as a one man demo version. Some groups manage the song-writing credits better than others – some do not share it while others do. Some share the music but not the lyrics. The whole John vs Paul debate always seems a little vacuous, but it is the sort of esoteric speculation which may help some people to shed light on the possible inspiration behind particular songs or even a segment of a song.
I agree. The were still very close ,creatively speaking, in 1967. They helped each other a lot on Pepper’s.
Quoting: “There can be little doubt, however, that the song was directly influenced by John Lennon’s continual experimentation with LSD, which hit a peak in 1967.”
Pure conjecture. There’s no way you can know that.
You think Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds might not have been influenced in some way by Lennon’s massive acid intake in 1966-67? I’m willing to stand by the statement.
Indeed, like most artistic endeavours, it was a mix of influences – one of which was certainly drugs (LSD, specifically, of which John was in heavy use at that time by his own admission).
Joe is dead on right – the lyrics of Lucy in the Sky are definitly acid influenced – not the title – but the lyrics are.
It Wasn’t. Your second Quote confirms it was not acid which inspired the lyrics, but the surrealism that also played a part of I Am The Walrus.
Yes, but think about what inspired Lennon to write such surreal works. There’s a massive leap from She Loves You to Lucy In The Sky, and to suggest that his songwriting here hadn’t been affected by taking LSD is just daft. I realise that the lyrics were inspired by Lewis Carroll, but consider the broader picture.
I don’t think Lennon needed acid to write these lyrics. I don’t think it occurred to him to even try until an interviewer of some sort asked him why he didn’t incorporate more of his In His Own Write writing style into his songs. I think the guy who wrote In His Own Write in ’63 or whatever could definitely have written these lyrics with or without LSD. Just my opinion. Incredible website! Thanks!!!
I think if a person is going to stake out a position on whether or not LSD inspired any of John’s lyrics (or melodies for that matter)- I think the person should state whether they themselves have taken LSD.
I have taken LSD – many times – not thousands like John – but I did some in the early 70’s – and I have no doubt that LSD influenced John’s writing.
Lennon’s criticism of the arrangement comes from his long standing belittlement of George Martin and his actual input and influence to The Beatles sound. Both Lennon & McCartney owe a huge debt to Martin, there is nothing abysmal about Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds, it’s sounds more like Lennon’s original vision for the song might not have been up to standard? Lennon does not strike me as the sort of character that would say yes to something unless he really believed in it. If he had objections to Lucy as an arrangement he would’ve voiced it there and then. As for Maccas input? Sure he would’ve thrown in a line or two here and there, i am sure both of them did, but i notice that McCartney is giving himself a lot of credit for what we all know to be John’s songs? Is McCartney trying to re-write his musical history? I wouldn’t put it past him.
John did say the song “Help” went out as a “jolly Beatle #”. I think he wanted it as a ballad. So no doubt with pressure they were under, contracts, & drugs some of his songs didn’t line up 100% with what he had in mind.
I don’t know how they could have improved “Lucy”. I do like the Giles Martin mix on “Love” soundtrack. I think he adds the guitar from “Sgt Peppers Lonely hearts club” song. Nice touch.
Did Harrison really sing backing vocals on this song? I never thought so. Is there anyway someone can clarify this?
who plays the piano? My guess is paul but it could be anyone really; its right after ringo’s count- in to the chorus and the piano chuggs along quietly but it does crash in with a full chord a couple of times
My guess is George Martin, as Paul was busy on the Lowrey organ.
Lennon probably played the piano.
On second thought, George Martin likely played it. McCartney played the Lowrey and overdubbed his bassline later on.
In the 1992 Pepper Documentary “The Making of Sgt. Pepper”, as Paul and George Martin are listening to an early playback, Paul comments, as he forms his hand in a piano chord position, “that’s me” in reference to the clunking piano. Awesome song! Awesome group! Awesome album by FOUR musical geniuses!
I have the same question as Ray two replies up; when does George sing in this song? I don’t hear him. I definitely hear Paul, and obviously John, but not George.
Remarkable, a 3 year old kid (Julian Lennon) drawing “Lucy in the sky with diamonds”.
Maybe he found some of his dad’s LSD? 🙂
Was the drawing literally titled that way? Since when do 3 year old kids title a drawing?
Maybe he said it was Lucy with diamonds flying in the sky. (Different word order, without LSD.)
It could all be a coincidence, but I guess Lennon was at least unconsiously involved in having “LSD” in the title.
And besides that, artist often don’t want to talk about intended second meanings.
If Lennon would say it was a hidden message, who knows what other titles (or even lyric phrases) might spell.
It’s a bit of a Pandora’s Box.
I don’t know. I’ve always found the explanation (the denial) remarkable.
I think it was a convienient back story to head off another scandal similar to the Bigger than Jesus one the year previously. There is no doubt the Song and title is about LSD. The whole album is about turning everyone on, John tells you this at the very end.The cover features all their heroes and a previous way of life who are now portrayed as being part of the psychedelic revolution. Victorian values now transformed. Extremely subversive, no wonder they left Jesus out of the final cover shot.
I`ve read somewhere that George was the one who composed the intro in his guitar. I don`t know.
A great John Lennon composition. He knew this was one of his great works, but he did not like the production of it on Sgt Pepper. Inspired by a painting by his son Julian, this has wonderful lyrics. I love Elton Johns version of this, which I think Lennon played on. I just love the Sgt Peppers Lonely Hearts Club Band, With A Little Help From My Friends, Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds sequence at the beginning of the Sgt Pepper album.
Julian showed him the picture and gave him the title and all, but I doubt Lennon didn’t notice the LSD initials. He was a clever guy who loved his wordplay. This is exceptionally perfect for him because the title not only spells out LSD, but has a vibe similar to an acid trip.
From the BBC News Website June 2nd 2004:
From an interview he gave to Uncut magazine. Paul said re drug use by he and the others,
‘He added it was “pretty obvious” that Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds was inspired by LSD, ‘
Re coke he said,
‘I was never crazy with cocaine, especially when you start getting those terrible come-downs’
Personally, I have always thought the story about Julian and the picture was a ‘wind up’ by John with the others playing along later.
To me the lyrics are certainly acid influenced, how do I know ? Well I just do 😉 ok.
The article is worth reading btw.
It was the combination of two great composers, musisians, which made The Beatles great, and it is irrelevant to speak of which was more importand John or Paul.
PM Faroe Islands
I believe John that the song as inspired by the picture Julian brought home. I just think John was too clever not to have noticed the LSD initials in Julian’s title, and the style in which the song was recorded lends credibility to the notion that he knew.
Please just leave it as it is! John and Paul wrote amazing songs seperately, and would use the others advice and talent to finallize their final product. That’s all to that, the fact John and Paul are both contributers to most songs isn’t an outrage or a mystery, both helped eachother musically. I, on the other hand believe that some lennon songs and mccartney songs should, in our hearts, be left alone to the artist.
George was finishing the lyrics for something and asked Paul for advice. I do believe, if you’re curious look up the video on youtube, Paul came up the line “somewhere in her style she knows I don’t need no other lover” it’s either that line, another line or no line at all. Still when Mccartney or lennon contributed to others music why aren’t they credited? Why only Mccartney amd Lennon?
What about the chorus? To me it sounds that it´s Paul voice which dominates there, and the lead singer usually indicated the composer. You could compare it to “We can work it out”, where John wrote the chorus and dominated the singing.
John sings in the “middle eight” of “We Can Work it Out,” (or “bridge”), not the chorus. That is definitely a McCartney song. It follows the form that they usually used, certainly in the early days, of one writing the verses and chorus and letting the other write the bridge.
Speaking as a musician with a background in jazz music, a music where improvisation based on preexisting chord patterns carries a rich legacy, I don’t think it would be unfair to assume that McCartney had improvised the opening instrumental passage while basing it over the original chord progression as written by Lennon.
This is one of the most beautiful and innovative pop songs ever written. I hate to speak ill of the dead, but Ian MacDonald (“Revolution in the Head”) was a tonedeaf idiot with a huge vocabulary. He disses this song, Savoy Truffle and almost anything else with a truly original and innovative chord progression. He calls Lucy “poorly thought out” – sorry Ian – you should have written about culture and steered clear of music. Most of the Beatles greatest harmonic creations are built on two keys a whole step apart (Penny Lane, Martha My Dear, Maybe I’m Amazed, Hey Bulldog, I Am the Walrus, Good Day Sunshine, Magical Mystery Tour, Sgt. Pepper’s Reprise) but Lucy (like Dr. Robert) adds a third key to the mix.
What kind of bass did Paul use during the recording?
Apparently it is his 1964 Rickenbacker 4001S-LH bass.
So your kid draws you a picture and you write a song about it. You later reflect on how the song was about a mystery woman who would later steal you from aforementioned son’s mother. Awful. He was really an awful person. Yoko in the Sky with Diamonds. Lol.
Yoko in the Sky with Dollar Signs.
I agree!! He became such a jerk when he teamed up with Yoko! I’m sure the song is about the picture his son drew and had nothing to do with the bitch Yoko!!
Question – it’s got to be Paul singing lead vocal in the chorus, isn’t it? Or is he singing harmony and he’s turned up predominantly in the mix?
Have the exact same question. From Allan W. Pollacks’ notes:
>>>
First refrain: First phrase sounds like Paul solo but with ADT. Second phrase has John and Paul singing in unison. Third phrase has them singing in parallel thirds; with Paul as usual “on top”, so to speak.
I’m going through hell with this one at a neighboring forum. To my utter shock, LOTS of people think it’s Paul singing the opening lead on the chorus and I just don’t hear it. It clearly sounds like John to me, then John double tracked in unison followed by Paul’s harmonies. I addition to my own ears, there are at least two highly respectable books which support this: The Beatles From Revolver To Anthology by Walter Everett and Recording Sessions by Kehew and Ryan. I’ve been pretty open mindedly wrong on some other “Beatle facts” as a diehard fan for 50+ years..there’s always room to learn more…but I just can’t budge on this one. I’ve also listened numerous times to the isolated vocals for Lucy and actually TRIED to hear Paul on the opening lines of the chorus..and I just can’t. I’d almost bet my entire record collection that it’s John.
Your buds are correct. Paul starts the chorus. It’s easy to identify it as him, in fact. It’s too high for Jon.
Since NPR has put out the Beatles “1st Take” of Lucy, I have to ask: is that really Take One? Mark Lewisohn’s The Beatles: Recording Sessions clearly states “Rehearsals of [Lucy], a marvelous new Lennon song, took so long on this night [Feb. 28, 1967] that no proper recordings were made. these would begin the next day.” Then, on March 1st, the notes say the first seven takes were recorded and there “was no lead vocal as yet…” I know why someone might invent the story of this recently released thing as Take One, but it seems to me a fabrication to label it so. Anyone care to assist me with trying to understand why they would now fabricate a Take One? Or was there a Take One made the night before (2-28-67) and only now it “surfaces”? I am calling “bulldust”!
Todays musicians are so jealous that the Beatles are still leagues ahead of even 2020
They did all their music with the basics
With todays effects and gear and todays music is still mooo mooomoooooooooooING!! and repetitive nonsense. and a doh and a moo and a doh and a moo!! moanoooh moan!! “that is what sums up today.
Also 70s prog rock is still ahead of today’s rubbish “That was inventive and cosmic!!!
The Rolling Stones prove with no doubt that the old school is way ahead.
Oooookay……
Julian should be credited as a composer. He actually created the whole chorus’ lyrics, as he invented the title and the fundament for the song.
Ok, Paul played the lick that defines the song – but did he come up with it? I’d really like to know who devised that weird beautiful intro.
Come on… By that logic, whomever named the street “Penny lane” should also get a songwriting credit.