sgt pepper drum

[pepper]

something's been bothering me about the date. everybody agrees it's either 11/9 or 9/11, but it doesn't make sense.

if you simply transcribe I one I X from roman numerals (I I I X), you get 1 1 1 10.

but if you convert them to arabic, you get either 3/10 or 2/9. 

in reverse it's simply one number: XIII - 13.

11/9 or 9/11 would mean you're transcribing one part and converting another. it's not logical.

[linus]

Good point!
See, we need fresh minds in this community.
Like most things esoteric in nature, that are well-made, there are multiple meanings and layered sub-texts co-existing in one piece of work. For example 'normal people' and PIAers see one thing, traditional PIDers see another thing - Early on, the 1one1X was interpreted as 3 living Beatles and a dead one. Which is part of the message they were conveying, I believe.
Then as one ponders it further and/or studies Gnosticism they see deeper meanings.
And, how many layered 'meanings' are there in Kubrick films, or in most films for that matter. They're not just 'about' one thing, but rather a multitude of things all at once. That is what makes them so compelling, even if only on a subconscious level.

Because of the essay written by college student Fred LaBour, So many everything has been mis-interpreted and misconstrued in regards to the messages encrypting in the Beatles' work. ( possibly misconstrued intentionally, I would even argue, to some degree)

[pepper]

thanks, linus! i'm blushing.

but i'm not a fresh mind. my dad told me about pid/pwr when i first discovered the beatles as a kid. i thought he was delusional. 


i'm glad we can help each other understand the full picture. i have some other ideas cooking, i'm not sure if any of them are truly insightful, but i hope i'll manage to share them soon. i've spoken to my former linguistics professor about reverse speech recently, so if anyone's interested, let me know .

and about the date, if that's a date at all, and if it's really september 2, i couldn't find anything official on beatles' whereabouts for that particular day. 

on october 3, epstein was forced to officially answer the rumours about paul leaving the band  from the hospital (recovering from an od, coincidentally, as i'm sure you know.) 

[Deleted]

Jun 14, 2013 12:17:29 GMT -5 linus said:

Good point!
See, we need fresh minds in this community.
Like most things esoteric in nature, that are well-made, there are multiple meanings and layered sub-texts co-existing in one piece of work. For example 'normal people' and PIAers see one thing, traditional PIDers see another thing - Early on, the 1one1X was interpreted as 3 living Beatles and a dead one. Which is part of the message they were conveying, I believe.
Then as one ponders it further and/or studies Gnosticism they see deeper meanings.
And, how many layered 'meanings' are there in Kubrick films, or in most films for that matter. They're not just 'about' one thing, but rather a multitude of things all at once. That is what makes them so compelling, even if only on a subconscious level.

Because of the essay written by college student Fred LaBour, So many everything has been mis-interpreted and misconstrued in regards to the messages encrypting in the Beatles' work. ( possibly misconstrued intentionally, I would even argue, to some degree)

Gnosticism means to "know"


"PIAers see one thing, traditional PIDers see another thing "

Rather unfortunately, the two could n'vr see there was only one thing.

hey, I'm happy for you.

[pepper]

from lady madonna:

Friday night arrives without a suitcase
Sunday morning creep in like a nun
Monday's child has learned to tie his bootlace
See how they run

september 2 1966 was friday

[linus]

Speaking of wonky interpretations of the mirrored Sgt. Pepper drum; and I usually get derided for saying this, but, the phrase "he ^ die" is in future tense not past tense.

I understand that the word hearts mirrors to he ^ die, but if they wanted to say "died" they would've found the right phrase to make it happen. Nobody was holding a gun to their heads to put hearts in the name (no pid pun inteneded).















kid's magazine

[pepper]

 those boys loved playing with guns... shoot me, but i see a bunch of phallic allusions (not to mention hapenis being a warm gun)...

as for hearts club band, alice in wonderland aside, i always thought they wanted to make a statement about the beatles as a band: they were just suits with moptops, two-dimensional playing cards in somebody else's game, not different from cardboard people on the cover. and faul is the joke(r)/the fool/the clown though he's supposed to be the king of hearts (club band) (and The King of Hearts did originally have a moustache, but it was lost by poor copying of the original design)(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Playing_card). it was a fake moustache (remember, from sgt pepper backmasking).

also, maybe they thought of the album as their return in spades (revenge) on 'the meanies' who pull the strings (so sgt. pepper took you by surprise).

'he die' is not the same as 'he died', yes, it always bugged me. if they were so meticulous with smokes and mirrors on the cover, they could have thought of another way to put 'he dieD' somewhere. but then they made this:


they printed 'within you without you' over faul (one of them apparently, there are 3 or 4 paulms on the cover, i'm not an expert in horticulture). that song is a eulogy full of guilt and excuses and self-comfort for keeping the circus going 'for the benefit of mr.kite' who 'performs his tricks without a sound'. but of course, you could say they were just sad because paul abandoned them somehow. or that it wasn't about paul at all.


but there is also 'lucy in the sky with diamonds' for which i have another interpretation (connected to dying, more maybe in another thread...) and 'a day in the life'.


when i first found out dylan thomas was on the cover, i instantly remembered his poems "Do not go gentle into that good night" and "And death shall have no dominion" and maybe that was the point.


i'm not comfortable putting theories before facts. we don't know if paul was just gone from the limelight, dead or seriously injured. but whether we like it or not, the script we believe in, defines our reasoning in interpreting the clues.


'he die' may be a matter of convenience, or paul WASN'T dead AT THE TIME, maybe comatose, paralyzed or disfigured, but dead as a beatle, and as their friend. 

however, i don't believe he died 'a spiritual death', or that he was just gone tanning his arse in tahiti. i like dark humour, but 'paul is dead, paulie is bloody' etc. is not funny. there is genuine sadness in 'a day in the life' or 'blue jay way' for example. it's there, disturbing, raw and intense. whatever happened was not a joke no matter how much acid you drop.


(for a future lurker: just dismiss everything from the pepper pic to here)

[linus]

I would point out that George laughs at the end of "Within You, Without You".
Plus, “And though the news was rather sad, Well I just had to laugh. I saw the photograph.”
And yeah, John says "Happiness is a warm gun", not sadness. "Come on it's such a joy."

Since we’re on interpretations of clues, (and this thought is for everyone, not directed at pepper);
I still don’t see how “A Day in the Life” is about Paul dying. Let’s break down the lyrics:
“I read the news today, oh boy”
If Paul died, was the story printed in the news? Recording for the song began on January 19th, 1967. I know that rumors were printed in a fan magazine in February, and that there was an article in an American paper later - I don’t know the date.
And what is with the glib delivery of “oh boy.”?

“About a lucky man who made the grade”
insert interpretation here.

“And though the news was rather sad, Well I just had to laugh”
In true Beatle form, they are being contradictory here, giving us ambiguous mixed signals. He also seems callous to this news.

“I saw the photograph”
Again, if the song is about Paul, were photos of dead Paul published in the newspaper?

“He blew his mind out in a car"
This either refers to shooting one’s self, or experiencing psychedelic drugs. If it were shooting, the word head or brain would make more sense.

“He didn’t notice that the lights had changed”
This refers to either getting rear-ended, or driving into cross-town traffic. Did he shoot himself or get in an accident? (Or was he in an accident because he was so tripped out on drugs?)
It's safe to assume Lennon means traffic lights, but it's not specified. He could be alluding to the lights in his mind.
Also, the “Blue Jay Way” video suggests being run over by a car. Which is it?


“A crowd of people stood and stared. They’d seen his face before”
This implies that he was recognizable, and well-known enough for them to know they'd seen him before. If the subject of this passage is McCartney, news would’ve spread around the world in hours.
And what are they staring at? An accident, or a guy sitting in a car at a traffic light tripping out?
Even the onlookers seem indifferent, they are just staring. If it was McCartney, I would assume people would be highly reacting and trying to help.

“Nobody was really sure if he was from the House of Lords”
House of Lords members are middle-aged politicians and lawmen. Or perhaps it’s a reference to a child of a House of Lord member. Neither of which describe McCartney.

“I’d love to turn you on”
To what? The only previously-mentioned thing this ties back into is the drug reference. The only semi-concrete illustration I can glean from this is that a lucky, well-known, middle-aged man was tripping on drugs in a car, and it made John laugh, even though it's supposed to be sad. Is there only supposed to be one interpretation for this song?

The rest of the song is about wars in books, someone going to work, and the Albert Hall. From the atrocious to the mundane.

I suppose the emotionality of the music and delivery is subjective.
And maybe it’s supposed to be a fictional rendition of the story, and that the point is that he was trying to tell us something. But I'd imagine if they were really trying to tell us something and do justice to their friend, they would’ve been more clear on at least one of the who (murderer), what, when, where, why, or hows of Paul's (still alleged) demise. But they didn’t. Which seems like… for lack of a better term… A cruel joke.
Because of their ‘clues’ we aren’t sure if he was in an accident, got ran over, got shot, shot himself, got beheaded, got hit in the head with a hammer, if it was in Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. or January etc. etc. Doing justice for a friend in this manner would entail stringing a consistent thread throughout one's means of encoding clues.
Even the supposed age on the white VW on Abbey Road is incorrect if it is referring to Paul. (Not to mention, if LMW stand for Linda McCartney Weeps, would her last name really have been McCartney? Wouldn't it have been Sheppard, or Campbell, Ackerill, Danelli, Aspinall, Lane, or Knotts etc. etc.?
And say what one will about jokes, and acid – but keep in mind, these ‘clues’ were being dropped by a guy that said himself that he was dropping acid almost every day since he started taking it in ’66.

Nothing about the Beatles adds up. Not the ever-changing account of their series of events, their physical attributes, their messages ("Say the word love - you better run for your life little girl". "I won't do you no harm - Maxwell's silver hammer made sure that they were dead") or even their 'pid clues'.


The public was told how to react to the clues with "miss him". I would challenge people to break down the scripts and look at it from a fresh perspective every day, and keep digging before cementing on a decision. I suppose everyone has to have their own answer to what happened, just be aware of the people featured in the Sgt. Pepper crowd, and that "the joker laughs at us".
Nobody has figured out when there was a death, why, how, where, by who, and who replaced him, and who replaced the guy that replaced him. Or why there seems to be more than a few Pauls in the vintage magazines, etc.
Saying "Paul is bloody" backwards in a pop song sounds like a rather macabre way to eulogize a friend. (Not that interpreting lyrics backwards is an exact science). They could've used that opportunity to be a little more specific about his death. Perhaps the point wasn't to give us specifics, just let us know that he died. But why just cryptically tell us he died, and leave it at that? And use his death as the motif of their art?
Seems like the more classy thing to do would be to leave that dirty job for their press conferences, or something.


I would say nothing the Beatles did was a joke.
The clues and motifs that are coming out of the woodwork, the ones that aren't scripted in standard pid lore, are the ones I believe are at the heart of the matter.

Food for Thoth



Like I said in another thread, perhaps The Rolling Stones were telling us that pid is an unsolvable maze, a mind-game (as John later sings).

This maze is featured on the inside gatefold of The Rolling Stones’ 1967 album Their Satanic Majesties Request, which feartures all four Beatles on the front cover, as Sgt. Pepper features a S.Temple doll wearing a Stones sweater.
This album was released exactly 13 years to the day before the death of John Lennon. This is also the same day The Beatles released their MMT film.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Murder_Considered_as_one_of_the_Fine_Arts


And here we see John lying underneath his car.

"He blew his mind out in a car"
So, was Paul in a car when he died, or was he ran over? Within the car, or without the car?
Is he saying Paul is dead, or John is dead? Is this even supposed to be a clue? Where does one draw the line between what is a clue and what's not?
Lennon is either being contradictory with his clues, or he has a morbid sense of humor, or both.


It seems like Lennon stopped caring about the pid thing after the Beatles broke up, but McCartney continued to carry it on, quite ironically. McCartney was either, continuing the 'joke', or as a replacement, was trying to implicate himself - which defies logic, or there is a bunch of esotiric s**t beneath all of this. Or, again, all of the above.
In fact, the only time I can see that Lennon makes referrence to McCartney in his solo career work is in "How Do You Sleep?", in which he comments on "Yesterday" being written by the subject of this song. If Paul died and was replaced, according to "How Do You Sleep?", it was before "Yesterday" was written. And it implies that the replacement wrote McCartney's most loved song (after Blackbird and Hey Jude). According to pid lore, isn't the replacement supposed to be a terrible song-writer?
Or if he is referring to 'the real Paul', he's not taking a very friendly tone towards him.

[Deleted]

Jun 17, 2013 13:56:38 GMT -5 linus said:

Like I said in another thread, perhaps The Rolling Stones were telling us that pid is an unsolvable maze, a mind-game (as John later sings).

No. It very solvable

www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/solvable




Maybe I'm a mazed.

"And here we see John lying underneath his car."

"He blew his mind out in a car"
So, was Paul in a car when he died, or was he ran over? Within the car, or without the car?

The death was in the car yet outside the car, both with the car and without.

[pepper]

at the beginning of my last post, i should have said, in the light of pwr theory, these lyrics can be interpreted as follows...

please, don't get angry, linus .

i agree, john did have a morbid sense of humour. 

and you are right, those songs, and others, really could be about anything else. they were heavily drugged from that period on anyway, god knows what they were thinking at the time. 

'he die' could be an anagram as well - (h)e hide, or
DEIHE (german DEICHE, phonetically the same) = dykes. 
pepper might be an elaborate joke (ha ha ha paul is dead, 'i am the walrus' ending). 

that is another perspective, sure... we were wrong, and absolutely nothing happened to paul. it is possible he wanted to get rid of the image of the cute beatle, so they put 'paulie is bloody' etc. in songs to subliminally turn away the screaming teenage audience. (or people from tavistock or whoever responsible for their success were planning all along to dazzle the world with the impeccable fab four, only to see if the sheep would follow them after a radical image shift to a drug-fueled brave new world?) again, we are left to speculate.

i have to say, for the sake of objectivity, that there is a reasonable explanation for every change we witnessed. if it seems that paul's personality changed over time, well why the hell not? money and success change everyone. drinking and drugs CAN mess up your face, especially a fine featured one like paul's. coke destroys the nose completely. he may have thought his ears were funny-looking, so he got them fixed. it's obvious sir paul had some surgery done anyway, but maybe to try to regain his good looks.

however there is a little something lurking in the back of my mind - why jpm sometimes looks like post '66 paul?? everybody makes comparisons and fades based on face and height (which can be altered with special shoes, yeah, yeah...). when in pre '66 pics paul seems like faul/bill/whatever, everybody jumps - 'doctored!' again, maybe so. and maybe another paul was interchanged with the real one from the very beginning (highly unlikely). i'm talking about this:

  
both names on the hotel receipt are misspelled: mccartny and starky. the date on the photo is 1/10/63, so this should be paul. and there is a pale forehead where the bangs were when he was in the sun. is it paul or faul?

i don't want to discredit anybody's hard work, but last year, i was thinking about features which are impossible or unlikely to copy using plastic surgery. so, i thought of feet. don't kill me! i'll post these pics as soon as i dig them out, but. the feet were the same. long and narrow, with long toes (big toe extra long and thin) and distinctive arch on the inner side of the foot. 
how?? are they the same person after all? twins? (highly unlikely) is spelling a clue as well? there were mccartney and mccartny, starkey and starky? or a greek receptionist couldn't even copy english names from passports? (probably)


people who don't care about pwr don't even think of artwork and lyrics as clues. so, was everything really just a perverted joke? and we see a pattern beacuse we look for clues? fools playing with mirrors and splotches of colour?
i don't know.



but let me quote little something from 'the killing' by kubrick:
I have often thought that gangsters and artists are the same in the eyes of the masses. They are admired and hero-worshipped, but there is always present an underlying wish to see them destroyed at the peak of their glory.

and let me add: 'Great heroes need great sorrows and burdens, or half their greatness goes unnoticed. It is all part of the fairy tale.' ― P. S. Beagle







 

[pepper]

Attachments:

[linus]

Jun 17, 2013 21:12:26 GMT -5 pepper said:

please, don't get angry, linus .

Hehe, I’m not at all. I’m happy to converse about this with someone with an open mind. These kinds of things haven't been talked about on here in the 1.5 years that I've been a member.
And again, my replies aren't a reaction to the previous poster, just throwing my thoughts out into the ether, fwiw.

I’m glad you brought up “the walrus”, I forgot to mention that they were vague about that, too. First John says he’s the walrus, then he says Paul was. Either he’s f-ing with the fans, or there’s a lot more going on that we’re not aware of and they’re not telling us. Either way, seems like a mind-f***

Jun 17, 2013 21:12:26 GMT -5 pepper said:

i don't want to discredit anybody's hard work, but last year, i was thinking about features which are impossible or unlikely to copy using plastic surgery. so, i thought of feet. don't kill me! i'll post these pics as soon as i dig them out, but. the feet were the same. long and narrow, with long toes (big toe extra long and thin) and distinctive arch on the inner side of the foot. 
how??

Exactly, there's needs to be more research done in regards to the similarities that can't be duplicated with plastic surgery. It’s great to see someone working hard on research these days, keep it up. The PID community focuses on the minor differences but turns a (thrid) blind eye to the uncanny similarites. (They also are keen to point out the differences between Paul and Faul, but unwilling to use those same standards to point out the differences between Fual and Faul(s), and Paul and Paul(s)).
(Psst… the teeth, research the teeth. Thoroughly and objectively. front teeth always same, molars not.)


For the record, from the early '60s-onward, I’m not pwr, pid or pia, but that doesn’t mean I’m undecided. Unfortunately there aren't enough photos from before that era to know when (or if) something happened. But, like I said, just looking through vintage fan mags is very telling.



Thanks for posting those quotes. I will leave you with some quotes too.

[regarding the PID conspiracy] The appetite for such hidden meanings was proof of a need for mystery and revelation that modern secularism hadn’t been able to fulfill. Ignorant of the Holy Writ, which could bear deep textual analysis, a generation had trained its spiritual curiosity on pop culture, asking it to offer enlightenment and guidance as well as entertainment.
From the book: The Gospel According to the Beatles by Steven Turner.


An even larger question remained though as to why Paul became the subject of this conspiracy. “There was no Beatle whose combination of traits both real and perceived, personal and popular, positioned him better as designated corpse than Paul McCartney,” thought author of Magic Circles Devin McKinney. ”John was too loud, George too quiet, Ringo too human. Paul was perfect – perfectly beautiful, so beautiful he was unreal enough for it to function as pure myth and magic. Like his generation and its great social experiment, he was an infant in a grown body, both flesh an spirit, an ethereal presence circling the earth in a radiant membrane of evanescent purity. What had once made Paul a god among humans now place him squarely on his back upon the alter of myth.”

Paul was also the cute Beatle. If Lennon represented the pleasure principle of the Beatles, McCartney was the group’s sole source of the possibilities offered by pleasure. He embraced the world around him and didn’t perceive it as suspiciously as Lennon or Harrison. But because of their skepticism, Lennon and Harrison also represented the reality principle of the Bealtes (which is perhaps why they became such likely targets of assassins). Paul had represented the Impossible Dream of what the Beatles could actually be. Unlike Lennon, his music had the expressed purpose of not questioning reality, but making reality somehow bearable, or perhaps a happier burden to carry. So he would never be a target of some deranged fan’s wrath. But when the Beatles’ dream had died after 1966, it made sense to some listeners that the impossible dreamer, Paul, should likely be gone as well.
from the book: Artificial Paradise, the Dark Side of the Beatles Utopian Dream by Kevin Courrier


And the two best quotes from this entire forum, imo.

Jun 5, 2013 23:09:42 GMT -5 thefreakatdornish said:

Our cultural for the past 40=50 years has been an "Art Project".

Nov 10, 2012 1:16:06 GMT -5 seasaltcaramel said:

the beatles is a brand name. it takes a lot of guts and a massive change of perspective to realize those four faces and their wonderful songs hide a machine that prostitutes our identities. you might not understand that - and that isnt alright - but i dont know any clearer way to put it. we have to stop cannibalizing ourselves and invent.

and the double-whammy by Maxwell

Aug 24, 2012 19:13:32 GMT -5 maxwell said:

I love their work, but I don't idolize my idols.

Re: the Beatles' clues, they suggest that Paul died or was possessed. But the Beatles persistently lied about the existence of said clues. So if there is a message, it was not intended for mass consumption.

And lastly, one from me, that goes in tandem with Maxwell's: Idolization, may cause blindness and denial.

[linus]

Jun 17, 2013 19:33:08 GMT -5 IWILL said:

The death was in the car yet outside the car, both with the car and without.

Notice the winged sun-disc on the Tarot chariot.

[pepper]

thanks, linus, i like to discuss and question everything. like you said, many of pid rumours were false from the start.

and thanks for the quotes, i've read them before, but they always resonate at the back of my mind. for many people back then, beatles were a dream come true, working-class heroes indeed. but bloody soul-snatchers as well. they've got mine, i confess, i get completely hypnotized by their music. but at least i'm aware. and awake.

when teeth are concerned, really, it's a matter for dentist's eyes. my teeth don't look the same as they did 5 years ago, i had a lot of work done. so we would need paul's dental records from the 50's onwards from all the dentists who had worked on them. that's a tough one.

great observation for aston martin, as well .

i've been thinking about that walrus thingy when i was translating a paper for a friend. the pacific walrus is called rosmarus divergens in latin. i think that info could be read in any book on biology or sea life in the sixties. and lennon really loved playing with words in a very obscure way. so i was thinking, divergens is actually phonetically similar to divergence (so, a deviation, difference). and walrus has a funny moustache. so that could be it. i am different, paul was different. they might have seen the walrus as their personal symbol, their totem animal, or a daemon according to crowley.
or not?   paul was different, thus replaced? and john was replaced also? ha! (only joking)
the hands of the walrus (john, of course) on the cover of the mmt look like a moustache as well:


and in the same vein, another repeating character in john's lyrics is lucy. ELUSIVE. and what's elusive? knowledge. future. the girl with kaleidoscope eyes:

 
a bee.

pythia, apollo's priestess and oracle in ancient greece was called the bee of delphi. pythia was probably inhaling ethylene (polythene pam), a hallucinogenic gas.

the bee was also a symbol of knowledge and intelligence. 

in some religions the bee was regarded as an embodiment of the soul of a dying person.

the bee was also connected to christ.

and, they came from the tears of the sun god in ancient egypt.


i'm sure bees love strawberry fields. so strawberry fields = elysian fields?


and glass onion might very well be a crystal ball. it's not only used for reading future, but for summoning the souls of the dead.


and how could john possibly have such knowledge of mythologies?
i guess he was an avid reader, and he had that shady alexis mardas at his side at the time.


i just want to say that true artists borrow from others, symbols and myths, but they turn it into something else altogether. so it's not enough to read lewis carrol, or poe, or crowley for that matter to be sure what they meant when they said something. intelligent artists twist and turn (and shake) until they get something private, a little circus for their own pleasure.

and we are left with a looking-glass in our hands.

[pepper]

oh, and as for that photo from greece, paul and ringo were on a vacation with jane and maureen. this is paul, with his bangs down, in greece:



so, unless they sent a double with him (which might raise an eyebrow or two), the pic from my previous post is paul. so how come he looks exactly like 'bill' with his hair up and no make-up? again, if they were not twins, we are talking about the same man. 

so what if paul was using a double occasionally, on his own accord, especially in '67 and '68 when he was maybe too messed up to get off the floor? and a fake moustache was a private joke.

and speaking of moustache, i see the same beard growth in the first picture as in this one, from '69:

[pepper]

another thing which would be hard to copy surgically is the navel-nipples ratio (and god, why would anybody do that, why?!). so:

(and look at those feet! i'm sure that big toe and that arch on the side are unique.)



and hair growth can be controlled, but if you're a guy on a vacation, would you really care about trimming your chest hair in the exact same manner as the man you're supposed to be impersonating? look at the first picture. paul's chest hair grows in a v-pattern, his arms are hairy up to his elbows, and there is hair growing down from his navel in a line, while his legs are hairy all the way. and the pic above? the same.

gulp.

[Deleted]

Jun 17, 2013 23:25:14 GMT -5 pepper said:

and in the same vein, another repeating character in john's lyrics is lucy. ELUSIVE. and what's elusive? knowledge. future. the girl with kaleidoscope eyes:

 
a bee.



i'm sure bees love strawberry fields. so strawberry fields = elysian fields?


and glass onion might very well be a crystal ball. it's not only used for reading future, but for summoning the souls of the dead.




and we are left with a looking-glass in our hands.

and we are left with a looking-glass in our hands.



The kaleidoscope eye wishes you a Happy Birthday.


And she's GONE.

[beacon]

Jun 17, 2013 13:19:05 GMT -5 linus said:

I would point out that George laughs at the end of "Within You, Without You".
Plus, “And though the news was rather sad, Well I just had to laugh. I saw the photograph.”
And yeah, John says "Happiness is a warm gun", not sadness. "Come on it's such a joy."

Since we’re on interpretations of clues, (and this thought is for everyone, not directed at pepper);
I still don’t see how “A Day in the Life” is about Paul dying. Let’s break down the lyrics:
“I read the news today, oh boy”
If Paul died, was the story printed in the news? Recording for the song began on January 19th, 1967. I know that rumors were printed in a fan magazine in February, and that there was an article in an American paper later - I don’t know the date.
And what is with the glib delivery of “oh boy.”?

“About a lucky man who made the grade”
insert interpretation here.

“And though the news was rather sad, Well I just had to laugh”
In true Beatle form, they are being contradictory here, giving us ambiguous mixed signals. He also seems callous to this news.

“I saw the photograph”
Again, if the song is about Paul, were photos of dead Paul published in the newspaper?

“He blew his mind out in a car"
This either refers to shooting one’s self, or experiencing psychedelic drugs. If it were shooting, the word head or brain would make more sense.

“He didn’t notice that the lights had changed”
This refers to either getting rear-ended, or driving into cross-town traffic. Did he shoot himself or get in an accident? (Or was he in an accident because he was so tripped out on drugs?)
It's safe to assume Lennon means traffic lights, but it's not specified. He could be alluding to the lights in his mind.
Also, the “Blue Jay Way” video suggests being run over by a car. Which is it?


“A crowd of people stood and stared. They’d seen his face before”
This implies that he was recognizable, and well-known enough for them to know they'd seen him before. If the subject of this passage is McCartney, news would’ve spread around the world in hours.
And what are they staring at? An accident, or a guy sitting in a car at a traffic light tripping out?
Even the onlookers seem indifferent, they are just staring. If it was McCartney, I would assume people would be highly reacting and trying to help.

“Nobody was really sure if he was from the House of Lords”
House of Lords members are middle-aged politicians and lawmen. Or perhaps it’s a reference to a child of a House of Lord member. Neither of which describe McCartney.

“I’d love to turn you on”
To what? The only previously-mentioned thing this ties back into is the drug reference. The only semi-concrete illustration I can glean from this is that a lucky, well-known, middle-aged man was tripping on drugs in a car, and it made John laugh, even though it's supposed to be sad. Is there only supposed to be one interpretation for this song?

The rest of the song is about wars in books, someone going to work, and the Albert Hall. From the atrocious to the mundane.

I suppose the emotionality of the music and delivery is subjective.
And maybe it’s supposed to be a fictional rendition of the story, and that the point is that he was trying to tell us something. But I'd imagine if they were really trying to tell us something and do justice to their friend, they would’ve been more clear on at least one of the who (murderer), what, when, where, why, or hows of Paul's (still alleged) demise. But they didn’t. Which seems like… for lack of a better term… A cruel joke.
Because of their ‘clues’ we aren’t sure if he was in an accident, got ran over, got shot, shot himself, got beheaded, got hit in the head with a hammer, if it was in Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. or January etc. etc. Doing justice for a friend in this manner would entail stringing a consistent thread throughout one's means of encoding clues.
Even the supposed age on the white VW on Abbey Road is incorrect if it is referring to Paul. (Not to mention, if LMW stand for Linda McCartney Weeps, would her last name really have been McCartney? Wouldn't it have been Sheppard, or Campbell, Ackerill, Danelli, Aspinall, Lane, or Knotts etc. etc.?
And say what one will about jokes, and acid – but keep in mind, these ‘clues’ were being dropped by a guy that said himself that he was dropping acid almost every day since he started taking it in ’66.

Nothing about the Beatles adds up. Not the ever-changing account of their series of events, their physical attributes, their messages ("Say the word love - you better run for your life little girl". "I won't do you no harm - Maxwell's silver hammer made sure that they were dead") or even their 'pid clues'.


The public was told how to react to the clues with "miss him". I would challenge people to break down the scripts and look at it from a fresh perspective every day, and keep digging before cementing on a decision. I suppose everyone has to have their own answer to what happened, just be aware of the people featured in the Sgt. Pepper crowd, and that "the joker laughs at us".
Nobody has figured out when there was a death, why, how, where, by who, and who replaced him, and who replaced the guy that replaced him. Or why there seems to be more than a few Pauls in the vintage magazines, etc.
Saying "Paul is bloody" backwards in a pop song sounds like a rather macabre way to eulogize a friend. (Not that interpreting lyrics backwards is an exact science). They could've used that opportunity to be a little more specific about his death. Perhaps the point wasn't to give us specifics, just let us know that he died. But why just cryptically tell us he died, and leave it at that? And use his death as the motif of their art?
Seems like the more classy thing to do would be to leave that dirty job for their press conferences, or something.


I would say nothing the Beatles did was a joke.
The clues and motifs that are coming out of the woodwork, the ones that aren't scripted in standard pid lore, are the ones I believe are at the heart of the matter.

Food for Thoth

The lyrics for ‘A Day In The Life’ work perfectly if we accept the standard, conventional, explanation for their meaning. It is a song about a death in a car crash; just not Pauls.

The song is about the death of Tara Browne – that Guinness child – and it is pivotal in this whole mystery. I am not a believer in PID as many of you know, but something is happening, and Sgt. Pepper is the key.

This is an extract from The Sgt. Pepper Code:

The Hon Tara Browne, heir to the Guinness fortune and archetypal golden child of the 1960s whose death at 21, in a car crash, inspired the Beatles song ‘A Day in the Life’. It was just a week before Christmas 1966, at the height of the Pepper sessions, when he was with killed when he drove his turquoise Lotus Elan through a red light at high speed and collided with a parked van in Redcliffe Gardens, Earl’s Court.

As the Beatles sang in ‘A Day in the Life’ on Sgt Pepper:

He blew his mind out in a car

He didn’t notice that the lights had changed

A crowd of people stood and stared

They’d seen his face before

Nobody was really sure

If he was from the House of Lords.

British newspaper, The Telegraph, stated on 22 June 2012 that ‘Paul McCartney told interviewers that he took LSD for the first time with Tara Browne, and Marianne Faithfull has asserted that Browne “was on acid” the night he died’. Could McCartney have been present on that fateful night?

What exactly was the nature of Paul and Tara’s relationship? Could Sgt Pepper be an elaborate homage to a fallen friend or indeed, lover?

As an aside, Paul to this day uses a piano on stage that is replete with a psychedelic mural design painted by Dudley Edwards - of Binder, Edwards and Vaughan - that is a replica of the design that Edwards painted onto Tara’s car. Tara is also believed to have been travelling, on that fateful night, to meet Edwards and see how the work was going on a design for Tara’s shop, Dandie Fashions.


My inspiration for this assertion – concerning the nature of Paul and Tara’s relationship – comes from this post from Apollo C Vermouth:

Pardon the intrusion...

"He blew his mind out in a car. He didn't notice that the LIGHTS had changed."

"Red lights, green light, strawberry wine..."

"A good friend of mine..."

An interesting read...

www.online-mythology.com/apollo_hyacinthus

Hyacinths adorn the Sgt. Pepper cover.

"Flowers in the dirt"

Apollo

So, if someone as informed as Neil Aspinall thought it relevant to point out this connection then, in my opinion, it cannot be ignored.

IWILL can tell us if she thinks this was disinformation, or, indeed, if she has any other insight, however, I am convinced it is highly relevant.

John’s use of the rather pointed term, 'that Guinness child', is very telling I believe. I feel he may have been slightly jealous of the nature of Paul’s relationship with Tara and the tone of the lyrics convey a sense that he may have been mocking Tara’s death.

Perhaps John was worried that the nature of his relationship with Paul was changing.

Perhaps Neil Aspinall shared these concerns as it was he that used the Billy Shepherd moniker when he wrote the The Beatles Monthly magazine and, therefore, the ‘False Rumour’ article that appeared in the February 1967 edition.

To the best of my knowledge there was no rumour that Paul had died in a car crash in January 1967 until Neil Aspinall created it. This coming just a month after Tara’s actual death in a car crash is too coincidental. Then, forty years later, Neil Aspinall points us back to a clue about Paul and Tara’s relationship.

Let us not forget that it was Iamaphoney who first pointed out the ‘False Rumour’ article. If Iamaphoney began as a Neil Aspinall orchestrated project, as I believe, then this would make perfect sense. That said, obviously Iamaphoney perpetrates the PID myth, but I still believe the ‘Revelation’, if it ever arrives, will not be that McCartney died.

I do not have a direct line to Iamaphoney, nor do I have a cache of emails from Neil Aspinall, to confirm any of this so I have to try and understand the clues the best way I can.

IWILL said, “The death was in the car yet outside the car, both with the car and without”, and whilst I would not attempt make a definitive explanation of somebody else’s post, my take is that Tara died in the car, and in so doing, a bit of Paul died too.

Sgt. Pepper is an attempt to commemorate the death of Tara and the rebirth of Paul.

Paul is reborn as an enlightened and initiated man of the Establishment.

Sgt. Pepper was the first record cover to display printed lyrics, however, it asks only one question and that is from Within You, Without You: “Who gain the world and lose their soul – they don’t know – they can’t see – are you one of them? “; and this mission statement for the illuminati is printed over the image of the one Beatle who can’t see, the one who has his back to you; Paul McCartney.

[Deleted]

Pardon the intrusion...

"He blew his mind out in a car. He didn't notice that the LIGHTS had changed."

"Red lights, green light, strawberry wine..."

"A good friend of mine..."

An interesting read...

"Flowers in the dirt"

Apollo

[pepper]

do we have any proof that apollo was neil? no.

has he ever layed down real facts we can check? no.

think about it, if you were involved in one of the biggest scams of the last century, and your friend was somehow damaged by it, wouldn't you find another way to out the truth instead of posting riddles on different forums? all this supposing you were already an old man at the end of his life, ridden by guilt?

fine, he could have been threatened into silence. but that's no excuse for playing cat and mouse. if you wanted people to know, why not just say it. apollo and hyacinth, biblical parables? it's open for interpretation, just like album covers and lyrics. every one of us has their own version of truth. and yet, it has to do very little, or nothing at all, with the actual truth.

i want to know the truth. but i'm not that gullible.

[Deleted]

Jun 18, 2013 8:15:57 GMT -5 beacon said:

So, if someone as informed as Neil Aspinall thought it relevant to point out this connection then, in my opinion, it cannot be ignored.

IWILL can tell us if she thinks this was disinformation, or, indeed, if she has any other insight, however, I am convinced it is highly relevant.


Let us not forget that it was Iamaphoney who first pointed out the ‘False Rumour’ article. If Iamaphoney began as a Neil Aspinall orchestrated project, as I believe, then this would make perfect sense. That said, obviously Iamaphoney perpetrates the PID myth, but I still believe the ‘Revelation’, if it ever arrives, will not be that McCartney died.

I do not have a direct line to Iamaphoney, nor do I have a cache of emails from Neil Aspinall, to confirm any of this so I have to try and understand the clues the best way I can.

IWILL said, “The death was in the car yet outside the car, both with the car and without”, and whilst I would not attempt make a definitive explanation of somebody else’s post, my take is that Tara died in the car, and in so doing, a bit of Paul died too.

No, Paul is not the one who died. It was me.

Ancient Tara was the site of the "stone of destiny" on which Irish kings resided.
Read more at www.thinkbabynames.com/meaning/0/Tara#vJxOPHs0fUvXVSty.99








but somewhere here in between the city walls of dyin' dreams
I think her death it must be killing me





Drive it Home
With one headlight



The Wallflowers





lol

[beacon]

Jun 18, 2013 9:09:51 GMT -5 pepper said:

do we have any proof that apollo was neil? no.

has he ever layed down real facts we can check? no.

think about it, if you were involved in one of the biggest scams of the last century, and your friend was somehow damaged by it, wouldn't you find another way to out the truth instead of posting riddles on different forums? all this supposing you were already an old man at the end of his life, ridden by guilt?

fine, he could have been threatened into silence. but that's no excuse for playing cat and mouse. if you wanted people to know, why not just say it. apollo and hyacinth, biblical parables? it's open for interpretation, just like album covers and lyrics. every one of us has their own version of truth. and yet, it has to do very little, or nothing at all, with the actual truth.

i want to know the truth. but i'm not that gullible.

If it is proof your after you are in the wrong place, this is a 'conspiracy theory'!

Re: Luck o' the Smiling Irish
« Message sent on Aug 17, 2008, 12:25am »
Lucy ( in disguise )

Nell never posted to the group. I passed along whatever he wrote me. Verbatim. The answers and PMs sent to my attention were passed on to Nell for his reply. Later, as he became ill, I added some words of my own. His replies became short and less than poetic. I've been doing this long enough to know how he would have phrased his responses. The Sound and Fury post was all his. I think he was saying goodbye. Paulie added some words as well. The end part. I had enjoyed your company while all this was going on. I know Nell had a warm place in his heart for you as well. And yes, it was alot of work. But, by getting to know a tad about you made it worth every second.
POV



Re: Luck o' the Smiling Irish
« Message sent on Aug 17, 2008, 2:59pm »

Lucy (sheds her disuise)

I cried too. Still do from time to time. It was a great loss. But through it all, Nell kept an odd sense of privacy. He wore his own disguise. It wasn't till the last final months that he began to shed everything that kept him safe. He became naked, so to speak. None of us wish to be seen it that attire.
Lucy, I play no games. One thing I have learned through this experience
is that life is a rare gift. I hate 20/20 hind sight. I call 'em likes I see 'em. I have no regrets. How do you like your steaks? I imagine how that would be. But, Louise makes it clear that Johanna is not here...
POV




I have hundreds of letters from the Vermouths. Until recently, that is. I'm giving these few to you, Beacon, to provide some closure to your work.

My work, too.

lol

iamaphoney / Martin Heurlin / The NuTTers

I can't offer you proof of anything but I think the above is as close as we are going to get.

Paul didn't die but they created a riddle anyway, a mystery to be solved. All mysteries need clues and keys and, gullible as I may be, all I am doing is researching the clues.

For what it is worth, my take is that when Standby Films was begun in 1970 it was the same time that Aspinall began work on a project entitled 'The Long and Winding Road'. According to Wikipedia; "Long-time friend and Apple Corps manager Neil Aspinall had compiled footage from various sources around the world of concert, interview and television appearances. From this archival footage, Aspinall assembled a 90 minute feature film which was tentatively titled The Long and Winding Road and was completed in 1971". This project would eventually be revisited and would see the light of day as Anthology and an Apple release.

Maybe, in the same way that Mal Evans was pissed because Paul never gave him song-writing credits and his book got squashed, Neil resented the fact that his version of Beatle history was canned and he wanted to leave an enigmatic epitaph!

[Deleted]

Jun 18, 2013 8:15:57 GMT -5 beacon said:

nor do I have a cache of emails from Neil Aspinall

When all the broken hearted people living in the world agree you can have as much cache as you want. Really.



....... and today is that Day.

[pepper]

thank you, beacon, but that 'lucy' could have been you. or me. or anyone. just google the names of his wife and kids, cousins, friends, whatever, create an e-mail account, and that's it.

why would a dying man play games? or 'paulie'? what is the point? creating and perpetuating a myth? well done, then. 

but eventually running in circles pis*es you off and you just stop caring.

or that is the point? giving up?

[Deleted]

Jun 18, 2013 10:27:53 GMT -5 pepper said:

thank you, beacon, but that 'lucy' could have been you. or me. or anyone.

Darlin' -


I AM LUCY.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=4l1ILO2DZwA


this it

over the hill!

YOU ARE FREE!

lol