Is The Butcher Shop Record A Clue?

[LarryC]

Just an honest question here as I have no intention of stirring up anything more than just a little debating. There has always been something about the butcher shop photo on the the album "Yesterday...and Today" that has bothered me. As memory serves, that was one of the first clues uncovered in 1969 when the PID story broke...the fact that there was supposedly a bloody pic of the lads on an album jacket which had been covered because it was too gruesome. Then there were certain things about it which were said to be clues in the photo...such as Paul holding the head of a doll, his watch indicating 5:05, etc.

The thing that has been buggin me, however, is not so much the clues, or the fact that the original photo was covered, etc. What bugs me is there seems to be a consensus by most believers in PID that Paul was killed sometime in the Autumn of 1966...or at the very least at the end of the Summer of 1966. The Yesterday...and Today album was released in the US in June of 1966, and the boys were still touring at this time.

Maybe I'm rehashing something which has already been addressed, but because I have not seen any comments along these lines I thought I would pose the question. I mean IF this photo session is supposed to be indicative of PID, then it would have to be considered one of a prophetic nature, wouldn't you think? Or maybe I'm just really missing it here...which I will admit that I am quite capable of doing ;D

[DarkHorse]

In my experience in PID circles I've never heard of the Butcher album cover being a clue.

[eyesbleed]

I've never given credibility to any of the pre-Sgt.Pepper "clues".
The Revolver album & that cover are both supposed to contain clues, but I just don't agree with that.

[JoJo]

I agree with Eyesbleed, anything pre late summer of 1966, (which seems to be the jumping off point for most discussions regarding the date) would be meaningless if he is presumed to be alive before that. It was an odd choice for album cover "art" for the Beatles, that's for sure. I wouldn't say that it has never been proposed that pre summer 1966 items weren't clues, the replacement album cover with paul in the trunk was thrown around as a clue, like the trunk was supposed to represent a coffin. Again, the timing wouldn't be right, so i never understood that one.

[DarkHorse]

JoJo said:

I agree with Eyesbleed, anything pre late summer of 1966, (which seems to be the jumping off point for most discussions regarding the date) would be meaningless if he is presumed to be alive before that. It was an odd choice for album cover "art" for the Beatles, that's for sure. I wouldn't say that it has never been proposed that pre summer 1966 items weren't clues, the replacement album cover with paul in the trunk was thrown around as a clue, like the trunk was supposed to represent a coffin. Again, the timing wouldn't be right, so i never understood that one.

When was the replacement album cover put out? Was it the same time as the Butcher album cover or was it added as a replacement later on....say after Sept '66?

[DarkHorse]

eyesbleed said:

Notice how many times in the 'early' Beatles photos John has a smile whereas later on it is not there.

[-Wings-]

The key thing is Paul's appearance. Those of that see a change in him see is after the Melody Maker Awards, but never before.

Of course, then you get into the possibility that The Beatles were hinting that Paul was going to be replaced, which suggests Paul really did "retire" and let somebody carry on his name. Still, the clues would be more along the lines of "Paul...is... living... in... Costa... Rica" rather than "Paul... died... very... bloody."

I don't know.

[JoJo]

DarkHorse said:

When was the replacement album cover put out? Was it the same time as the Butcher album cover or was it added as a replacement later on....say after Sept '66?

Hmm well Larry said it was released in the US in June 1966, (I'm too lazy to check, but I'm sure he's correct) and the uproar over the cover was such that replacement stickers were slapped on just about immediately. That's why you'll find a fair number (not a lot, but they aren't too rare) of "stickered" covers, but almost no clean butcher covers. So I would say that the new cover still had a good lead time to mid September.

[FlamingPie]

-Wings- said:

The key thing is Paul's appearance. Those of that see a change in him see is after the Melody Maker Awards, but never before.

Of course, then you get into the possibility that The Beatles were hinting that Paul was going to be replaced, which suggests Paul really did "retire" and let somebody carry on his name. Still, the clues would be more along the lines of "Paul...is... living... in... Costa... Rica" rather than "Paul... died... very... bloody."

I don't know.

Yes, yes, this is all very confusing. I don't think he retired, because if he did, wouldn't his last song be called "Goodbye" or something like that?

[LarryC]

The replacement cover photo was placed on the LP before it was actually marketed in the US, and from what I've read it was a decision on the part of Capitol Records because they felt it would hurt the marketablilty of the LP, especially in light of JWL's then recent remarks about the Beatles being more popular than Christ.

Ok, the reason I asked this question was because R. Gary Patterson refers to it in his book The Walrus Was Paul, which I am reading very slowly and am about 1/3 of the way through it. When the PID conspiracy first started in the area where I lived in 1969, one of my school mates had the Yesterday...and Today LP and it was stamped with the replacement photo. It was through him that I learned of the PID conspiracy because after he found the photo he became enthralled with it himself. HAHA, we played about every Beatles record we owned backward for hours looking for clues. Of course we only spotted the ones which, by then, were publicized.

I was just curious about the LP cover and I thank you for your thoughts.

[revolver]

One explanation of the butcher cover was that the Beatles were making a sarcastic statement protesting the way Capitol was "butchering" their albums in America, releasing more albums with fewer songs per album. Yesterday and Today was just one example with songs taken from the EMI versions of "Rubber Soul" and "Revolver"

[FlamingPie]

Yeah, the way Capitol was "killing their babies".

[eyesbleed]

Revolver said:

One explanation of the butcher cover was that the Beatles were making a sarcastic statement protesting the way Capitol was "butchering" their albums in America, releasing more albums with fewer songs per album. Yesterday and Today was just one example with songs taken from the EMI versions of "Rubber Soul" and "Revolver"

Yes exactly. That album itself was made up of parts severed from other works to make a sort of "Frankenstein" work....
That cover couldn't have been a more perfect picture of what's on that record.


"Them boys is gettin' a little too rebellious fer there own good!"

[TKIN]

Just more resolution

[TKIN]

Alternative cover

[Spanky]

sunking you were warned about hotlinking on the other forum, don't start doing it here.

[TKIN]

Spanky said:

sunking you were warned about hotlinking on the other forum, don't start doing it here.

That was fixed.
TKIN!

[Harb]

I have 6 PiD clues regarding the butcher cover sleeve on my site.

The album cover was taken during the photographic session called 'The somanbulant adventure' and was done by Robert Whitaker (who I've had the pleasure to meet). It was just done to relieve the boredom and was never intended to be used as an album cover, but Capitol got ahold of the images and used the image shown previously as the new album cover.

Initially 750,000 copies were pressed (mono being pressed on a 10:1 ratio with stereo) and sent to radio stations and major music shops. Feedback was mixed and so Capitol requested that all copies be returned. After a short stint of trying to destroy them they realised that this would be too costly and so decided to simply glue another copy on top.

This new photo was known as the 'trunk cover'.



Here's a picture of my best copy. I have 4 others, one still having the original 'trunk' slick pasted over it.

[superman]

I've heard two stories about the Butcher album cover:

1) It was a "joke" on all the abortions Captiol Records paid for in regards to all the girls the Beatles impregnated in a very short time.

and more likely ...

2) The Beatles were protesting how tracks were taken off or rearragned on their albums when released in America. Thus the Beatles considered their songs their "babies", and they considered the changes (rearranging and song deletion) by the record company to be "butchery".

[B]

Both the trunk cover and the butcher cover seem to have been done to convey the idea that
Paul was in the role of Osiris, though the given story is that the photographer just wanted to try
something different, rather than have the usual Beatle shots.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osiris (mythology section):

(inspiration for the trunk cover)

"...Plutarch recounts one version of the myth surrounding the cult in which Set (Osiris' brother) fooled
Osiris into getting into a box, which he then shut, had sealed with lead, and threw into the Nile
(sarcophagi were based on the box in this myth). Osiris' wife, Isis, searched for his remains until
she finally found him (she found the box/casket) embedded in a tree trunk, which was
holding up the roof of a palace in Byblos on the Phoenician coast. She managed to remove
the coffin and open it, but Osiris was already dead. She used a spell she had learned from her
father and brought him back to life so he could impregnate her. After they finished, he died again,
so she hid his body in the desert."

(inspiration for the butcher cover)

"...Set had been out hunting one night, and he came across the body of Osiris.
Enraged, he tore the body into fourteen pieces and scattered them throughout the land.
Isis gathered up all the parts of the body, less the phallus which was eaten by a fish
- thereafter considered taboo by the Egyptians, and bandaged them together for a proper burial.
The gods were impressed by the devotion of Isis and thus resurrected Osiris as the god
of the underworld."

alternate version:

".... Osiris is described as an ancient king who taught the Egyptians the arts of civilization,
including agriculture. Osiris is murdered by his evil brother Set, whom Diodorus associates with
the evil Typhon ("Typhonian Beast") of Greek mythology. Typhon divides the body into twenty six
pieces which he distributes amongst his fellow conspirators in order to implicate them in the murder.
Isis and Horus avenge the death of Osiris and slay Typhon. Isis recovers all the parts..."
-----------------------------------
I know that it may seem strange that the Beatles would have used images on their albums
that relate to a story from ancient Egypt, but there was a reason for it. Remember that the album
was called "Yesterday and Today", and so it is meant to point to just how "yesterday" they want
you to go back to! ;D We have already kind of figured out here that the object was to point people
back to an awareness of the beginnings of civilization as we know it, because we are now
at the point that it is coming to an end. The Beatles were used to point to the idea of "Alpha and Omega",
the beginning and the end.
What comes next for humanity, presumably, is a 'return to the stars'.

Notice in the wikipedia article that Osiris's parents were the Earth god, Geb, and the sky goddess, Nut.
This is what John means when he is singing in "Yer Blues":

My mother was of the sky
My father was of the earth
But I am of the universe
And you know what it's worth

Notice also the section in the wikipedia article about "The Ram god". Faul put out an album
called "Ram" to point to this idea again. He also did a song called "Jet" which is sort of
how you pronounce 'djed' which is discussed in that section.

Just to make sure the point was driven home, Wings did a song called "Spirits of Ancient Egypt":

Paul McCartney & Wings - Spirits Of Ancient Egypt [Seattle]
www.youtube.com/watch?v=wjCt0sI-cFA

If the "spirits of ancient Egypt" were gabbing on the telephone, then what he's suggesting is that
they were incarnated as people in the modern era.

[iameye]

b check out this current disney movie about time travel for some goodies...note particularly the ram school mascot


tv.disney.go.com/disneychannel/originalmovies/minutemen/ go to photo on menu for stills of movie

[puzzled]

The photography story sounds feasible, but I want you to consider something.

I was alive in California in the 1960's. You cannot convince me that dozens of people, working for the record company, who all saw that picture in pre-production - that NO ONE thought that fans or parents might be offended by a picture of chopped up babies? They all looked at it and thought "Wow, avant garde dudes..." and it didn't even enter their minds that it was offensive? And then, after innocently sending them out to record stores, were SHOCKED that maybe their customers might not want to buy a record with a picture of butchered children on the front? "Gee, why didn't we think of that? Oh well, if only our advertising and PR department had people that were actually in touch with our demographic - oh well. Back to the drawing board..."

This seems completely unreasonable to me. People were still very conservative at that time, and they had already caught a bunch of heat for the 'Bigger than Jesus' comment, so if the record company was at all concerned about sales, don't you think someone would have commented that it was inappropriate? People whose jobs it is to know what their fans and customers want?

Or, on the other hand, if it was a stab at the record company by the Beatles members, why would they print it? Do we believe that record company executives are so stupid and ignorant that they wouldn't understand the message being sent? It would have been a message for them and not for us, and in that case I think they would have seen that image, gotten the message, and then chosen another photograph for the record album.

I can't bring myself to believe that so many people could be so blind and oblivious to the impact of that image. How empty would those record company employees have to be to look at that picture and have no personal reaction? In 2009 we have become desensitized to a lot of violence in the media - but then we were still watching The Brady Bunch and The Monkeys on tv.

[B]

Monkees ;D And The Brady Bunch didn't come 'til 1969, but we know what you meant.

[puzzled]

Thanks B - I just knew that someone was going to make an issue about that ...and it had to be you....

I couldn't remember what year Gilligan's Island started either

But no matter, if it was later then it even supports my point further. We were being fed white bread and milk. Even All in the Family was an outrageous show at the time - none of those things prepared innocent young minds to ignore images of hacked-up babies.

[iameye]

Jan 4, 2009 14:03:35 GMT -5 B said:

Both the trunk cover and the butcher cover seem to have been done to convey the idea that
Paul was in the role of Osiris, though the given story is that the photographer just wanted to try
something different, rather than have the usual Beatle shots.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osiris (mythology section):

(inspiration for the trunk cover)

"...Plutarch recounts one version of the myth surrounding the cult in which Set (Osiris' brother) fooled
Osiris into getting into a box, which he then shut, had sealed with lead, and threw into the Nile
(sarcophagi were based on the box in this myth). Osiris' wife, Isis, searched for his remains until
she finally found him (she found the box/casket) embedded in a tree trunk, which was
holding up the roof of a palace in Byblos on the Phoenician coast. She managed to remove
the coffin and open it, but Osiris was already dead. She used a spell she had learned from her
father and brought him back to life so he could impregnate her. After they finished, he died again,
so she hid his body in the desert."

(inspiration for the butcher cover)

"...Set had been out hunting one night, and he came across the body of Osiris.
Enraged, he tore the body into fourteen pieces and scattered them throughout the land.
Isis gathered up all the parts of the body, less the phallus which was eaten by a fish
- thereafter considered taboo by the Egyptians, and bandaged them together for a proper burial.
The gods were impressed by the devotion of Isis and thus resurrected Osiris as the god
of the underworld."

alternate version:

".... Osiris is described as an ancient king who taught the Egyptians the arts of civilization,
including agriculture. Osiris is murdered by his evil brother Set, whom Diodorus associates with
the evil Typhon ("Typhonian Beast") of Greek mythology. Typhon divides the body into twenty six
pieces which he distributes amongst his fellow conspirators in order to implicate them in the murder.
Isis and Horus avenge the death of Osiris and slay Typhon. Isis recovers all the parts..."
-----------------------------------
I know that it may seem strange that the Beatles would have used images on their albums
that relate to a story from ancient Egypt, but there was a reason for it. Remember that the album
was called "Yesterday and Today", and so it is meant to point to just how "yesterday" they want
you to go back to! ;D We have already kind of figured out here that the object was to point people
back to an awareness of the beginnings of civilization as we know it, because we are now
at the point that it is coming to an end. The Beatles were used to point to the idea of "Alpha and Omega",
the beginning and the end.
What comes next for humanity, presumably, is a 'return to the stars'.

Notice in the wikipedia article that Osiris's parents were the Earth god, Geb, and the sky goddess, Nut.
This is what John means when he is singing in "Yer Blues":

My mother was of the sky
My father was of the earth
But I am of the universe
And you know what it's worth

Notice also the section in the wikipedia article about "The Ram god". Faul put out an album
called "Ram" to point to this idea again. He also did a song called "Jet" which is sort of
how you pronounce 'djed' which is discussed in that section.

Just to make sure the point was driven home, Wings did a song called "Spirits of Ancient Egypt":

Paul McCartney & Wings - Spirits Of Ancient Egypt [Seattle]
www.youtube.com/watch?v=wjCt0sI-cFA

If the "spirits of ancient Egypt" were gabbing on the telephone, then what he's suggesting is that
they were incarnated as people in the modern era.

before osirus was Amon...the ram horned god.

The hippocampus is composed of multiple subfields. Though terminology varies among authors, the terms most frequently used are dentate gyrus and the cornu ammonis (literally "Amun's horns", abbreviated CA). The dentate gyrus contains the fascia dentata and the hilus, while CA is differentiated into fields CA1, CA2, and CA3.
Cut in cross section, the hippocampus is a C-shaped structure that resembles a ram's horns. The name cornu ammonis refers to the Egyptian deity Amun, who has the head of a ram. The horned appearance of the hippocampus is caused by cell density differentials and the existence of varying degrees of neuronal fibers.

"the hippocampus might act as a cognitive map — a neural representation of the layout of the environment. Studies with animals have shown that an intact hippocampus is required for simple spatial memory tasks (for instance, finding the way to a hidden goal)"

"interlocking gyri

Several small gyri in the walls of the central sulcus of the hemisphere; the opposed gyri (singular gyrus) interlock with one another." Origin: L. Fr. G. Gyros, circle




memory almost full

" As the cult of Amun grew in importance, Amun became identified with the chief deity who was worshipped in other areas during that period, Ra-Herakhty, the merged identities of Ra, and Horus. This identification led to another merger of identities, with Amun becoming Amun-Ra. In the Hymn to Amen-Ra he is described as "Lord of truth, father of the Gods, maker of men, creator of all animals, Lord of things that are, creator of the staff of life."[1] By then Ra had been described as the father of Shu, Tefnut, and the remainder of the Ennead, so Amun-Ra likewise, became identified as their father.
Ra-Herakhty had been a solar deity and this nature became ascribed to Amun-Ra as well, Amun becoming considered the hidden aspect of the sun during the night, in contrast to Ra-Herakhty as the visible aspect during the day. Amun clearly meant the one who is hidden. This complexity over the sun led to a gradual movement toward the support of a more pure form of deity.
"


the shape of the letter Shin mimics the structure of the human heart: the lower, larger left ventricle (which supplies the full body) and the smaller right ventricle (which supplies the lungs) are positioned like the lines of the letter Shin.
A religious significance has been applied to the fact that there are three valleys which comprise the city of Jerusalem's geography: the Valley of Ben Hinnom, Tyropoeon Valley, and Kidron Valley, and that these valleys converge to also form the shape of the letter shin, and that the Temple in Jerusalem is located where the dagesh (horizontal line) is.
In the Sefer Yetzirah the letter Shin is King over Fire, Formed Heaven in the Universe, Hot in the Year, and the Head in the Soul.

"The origin of Samekh is unclear. The Phoenician letter may continue a glyph from the Middle Bronze Age alphabets, either based on a hieroglyph for a fish like Nun (samak is fish in Arabic), or a tent peg / some kind of prop (s'mikhah in modern Hebrew means to support), and thus may be derived from the Egyptian hieroglyph djed."

look for the apple www.hebrew4christians.com/Grammar/Unit_One/Aleph-Bet/Samekh/samekh.html

The ASCII code for capital X is 88 and for lowercase x is 120; or in binary 01011000 and 01111000, correspondingly.
The EBCDIC code for capital X is 231 and for lowercase x is 167.




en.wikipedia.org/wiki/𐌲 gyfu = gift don't forget the gift shop

the rune is directly derived from Latin Χ, the pronunciation of which may have been similar to Germanic gs

Xi = 11


pay no attention to me I'll fix this tomorrow. check back....