John Lennon Remasters

Slightly more than a year ago, the Beatles album remasters were released.  At the time, I felt like I did as a child during Christmas time, actively counting down the days until launch (when I remembered to do so, of course).  It was a happy time, but deep down I knew there was a more cynical, capitalist angle to the event. It reminded us that no other band can quite get away as easily with charging premium prices for their material, nor can any other band quite dictate how it will be presented.  It is a bit maddening to know that you can't buy the mono remasters as single albums, and even more maddening to know that the Mono box set costs more money for less music. There's no point in asking why any of this is the case.  Paul McCartney will Force choke you and answer "Fuck you, that's why" (I say this lovingly). The fact that I was missing about half their discography was reason enough to plunk down, but when I see cranky old timers bitch about having to (or at least being asked to) constantly rebuy old music, I understand where they're coming from.


I can say, however, that my cynicism shield only exists for my favorite band of all time.  I know this because I can't muster it for the band member's solo works.  This week will mark the 70th birthday of John Lennon, and to celebrate the event, his entire catalog of solo work has been given the same remastering treatment that was used for the Beatles, right down to using the same alternating black/white album spines, and a giant, expensive boxset.  I went out and immediately bought two of the records, but I have no strong interest beyond that.

But it's more than a lack of interest.  I really feel that heavy air of cynicism around these remasters.  This article on the Guardian spells it out perfectly.  In short, much of the merchandising and branding of the man runs contrary to what he believed in, or at least, what we tell ourselves he believed in.  Additionally, the man was not a saint, and his post Beatles output often fell flat. I've seen some of this material get ripped on with a ferocity that no other rock legend tends to receive, even for their worst work.  Solo Lennon can be shitty, just like shitty solo McCartney can be. 


What does it mean, then, that there's an entire box set of this thoroughly uneven work?  It might mean that some revisionist cobbled up liner note material that tries to put the album Rock 'N Roll in the same Pantheon as Plastic Ono Band (though maybe it isn't so kind?)


What does it mean that there is a new greatest hits CD made for this remastering project?  For one, it certainly means that Lennon's solo work isn't considered as sacred as the Beatles catalog, which will probably never see another compilation CD ever again.  More importantly, there's already a fantastic hits disc which they could have worked with.  The fact that it was left behind shows a greater concern for marketing than on making a definitive compilation. 


And hey, there's some other component of the release - a box set compilation, containing CD's that organize the material based on themes, or some vague logic like that.  Again, I see this as a lack of confidence.  Not many fans will want all the albums, but maybe they want a decent chunk.  But maybe that means that even a selection of the full albums isn't quite enough... 


What I'm taking away from all of this is reinforcement of a growing feeling of mine, that the public at large has an odd dual relationship with John Lennon.  We revere him at the same time we consider him human.  We praise his great work with more gusto than we point out his failures.  We try to make positives out of the fact that he was frequently an asshole.  Maybe people are simply trying to hold on thee ideal they have formed in their minds, since Lennon isn't here to personally reshape their opinions. I think most of us know that we continue to be intrigued by the man at the same time that he frustrates us.  Perhaps that alone ensures his infamy. 


Look forward to some album reviews, hopefully.