Why do it when you can over do it?
It is not that i don’t like Yoko Ono a lot because i do.
1. Loved her experimental stuff with Lennon, especially Life With The Lions.
2. Loved Fly
3. Can’t say I loved Rape but it is one of the most disturbing things you’ve ever seen (a man with a camera follows a woman in the streets of Manhattan as she gets more and more upset0.
3. Admired her as a pop song writer on the albums with Lennon, though Lennon completely owned em.
4. Was as upset and devastated by Season Of Glass as everyone else.
And since then, while I haven’t loved it all, I have never shrugged at it either.
Except.
Now i think I’ve had enough with her Lennon legacy. It is getting very fucking creepy and it also has the stench of exploitation to the edge of its very being. We are not discussing keeping, say, Harry Nilson or Bobby Fuller in the public memory. Lennon doesn’t need this constant iteration of his music. Nobody is forgetting him. Yoko could have never existed and nobody would’ve forgotten Lennon. Long after we’re dead, people will still remember Lennon the way they still remember Mozart.
So neither Lennon the ethereal spirit nor Lennon the dead legend needs this constant hammering away at his back catalogue.
What it appears to me to be is three things from Yoko: 1) sincerity, 2) Money, 3) Ono’s ongoing inferiority complex due to the outrageous assault she suffered during her early relationship with John. Hence, over overreaction to an innocuous question as to why she still lived at the Dakota