Was John Lennon a Genius: Final Verdict

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

Let's settle this.

[jajdude]

Maybe?

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

I was going to put in a middle option, but decided against it because that would be what everyone would pick. Pick a side, we're at war!

Though, I'm curious jajdude, why the no vote? In the OP of your thread, you say you think he is a genius.

[MystyrMystyry]

I think it's an exclusivity thing. People don't want to commit to an absolute in case something comes to light that would make him seem less than a genius.

One - there's the problem that in most people's view the artist works alone, and while the Beatles were a collective, they were also each others backing band. Lennon didn't personally compose every drum fill and rhythm that Ringo came up with, just accepted it if it worked, dismissed it if it didn't

Two - Paul McCartney had a say in not only the tunes and harmonies, but the songwriting as well, speaking up if a lyric could've been improved - and often arguing over it until he got his way - or reached a compromise (this worked both ways, and it should be remembered that it was Lennon's contribution that improved a lot of McCartney's business.

Three - the recording studio and audio producer as fifth and sixth musicians, allowing a random collection of raw tracks become a little bit more.

So, it's not easy to define what he would have been if he'd been working solo, but probably not as good as the Beatles collective - though he did get by and he did try with a little help from his friends :)


Then we're left with the after Beatles period which is more about what you're in the mood for rather than anything to really get excited about.


But as the Beatles you can ask how many people/bands did they influence that were anywhere near as good as the Beatles? The answer is none - therefore the Fab Four was much greater than the sum of its parts (syntax mess) and becomes a collective genius which John Lennon was an important part of.


You'd have to look to Mozart and the other great geniuses, to realise how many people were involved in the actual creative process - and it's just the one. One Michelangelo. One Shakespeare. One Bach. One Dickens.

So he was a genius for letting McCartney in the band. A genius for letting Ringo in the band. And a genius for not leaving nor letting any of them go until he felt it had run its course.

But because I've stated elsewhere that the culture that springs forth the genius is at least as important (if Mozart had been born in China his style wouldn't be recognisable, Bach in Arabian minor? Shakespeare writing in Danish???) and if we are to regard the internal Beatles and the Sixties as cultures - then good God, YES! Lennon was a genius!


(As was George Harrison who cleverly kept most of his songs to himself until afterwards)

[jajdude]

I was going to put in a middle option, but decided against it because that would be what everyone would pick. Pick a side, we're at war!

Though, I'm curious jajdude, why the no vote? In the OP of your thread, you say you think he is a genius.

Dunno. Changed my mind? Don't really care? Alright then, I'd say he was a (musical) genius.