Ah, I see. Stephen McGann. Rescheduled as a children’s show? And thanks for the Nimble laughter.

i seem to have left mine somewhere!! along with my wisden’s and my bradshaw perhaps!!

MJ.

My gut feeling is that an implied “I” has different effects from a stated “I” but I’ll have to think about how/why/what.

Wait, did he sound brimming with delight in “Ticket to Ride”? Or “Not a Second Time” or “You Can’t Do That” or “I’m a Loser” (another song in which he presented himself as something other than invulnerable) or “Hey You’ve Got to Hide Your Love Away” (not to mention “Anna” and “You’ve Really Got a Hold On Me” and “Money”)? The incongruities (if that’s what they are) are in the music from the get-go - “Please please me like I please you,” i.e., why aren’t you keeping your end of the bargain? - the color and the flash and the fantastic harmonies and the “Yeah Yeah Yeah” all accompanying the doggedly unhappy love life and the pang that’s always in John’s voice.

This is what a lot of pop does, like putting tension in the plot, which is why I wouldn’t think “incongruities” is the right word.

Also, the “I” remains in John’s songs, implied when not stated, though as he goes on he’s addressing the listener more, starting with “Nowhere Man,” so the “you” isn’t necessarily some girl, it’s, you know, you. “If you go carrying pictures of Chairman Mao…” and it’s John talking to you. Except when he’s talking to himself, trying to convince himself it’s gettin’ better all the time (and he’s no longer cruel to his woman, no longer beats her and keeps her apart from the things that she loves?) (yeah, he divorces her instead).

Even in this context, though, the song “Help!” would appear to have pushed the envelope, given its chronological place within the cannon, just shy of mid-career, and its rather “psychiatric” choice of words.
Check your lyrical concordance; it’s the only Beatles song where you’ll find the words “independence,” “self-assured,” or “insecure.”

- But don’t be fooled into thinking that we’re dealing with a kind of perverse impulse to recklessly cast John “against type,” running the risk, big time, of blowing such a carefully cultivated image.

- Rather it’s precisely *because* of the cross casting here that the overall production it work as well as it does! Consider the alternatives. Tough guy singing tough songs is okay but predictable. Nebbish singing nebbishy songs is, yech, pathetic. Nebbish singing tough songs not fully believable. But take the one who always jokes and laughs like a clown and have him admit to his private indulgence in copious tears that fall like rain from the sky — and now you’ve really got something. Maybe those PR folks really knew what they were doing :-)

Re. Lennon - yes quite possibly. The band’s expected work schedule must have been huge (3-4 years in the public eye is the current pop band lifespan before frustration and burnout seem to inevitably set in, and I doubt the circuit was much easier in the mid 60s) and this as much as boredom with the material would make someone feel old.

I have to wonder if, to some degree, Lennon was responding in agitation to being forced into performing such juvenile nonsense, hence the sense of feeling “so much older.”

While this is a very good Beatles recording, what keeps it from being a great one are those incongruities Tom has observed.

Doctor Mod

I wonder what proportion of the ’60s #1s were brought back into service for TV themes, ads, soundtracks etc in the 1980s?