Where Are john lennons Rickenbackers??

[tennis_nick]

I'll disagree with Paul here.

I think the guitar should represent Lennon when he looked down and said "This is the guitar I conquered the world with" Rather then when he looked at is and said "I WILL conquer the world with this guitar".

[1OUfan]

To be fair, the Hamburg 325 was "restored" at a time when "original condition" meant something in the antique car biz, but hadn't quite gelled as desirable when John's guitar was completed. There is a honey-colored stain on the maple, and that white guard (which was added sometime after John got the guitar back) takes it beyond any concept of original appearance. It just doesn't look right, and it fairly cries for a sensitive re-doing...it has been thirty years since it was done last.

It really should have been left coach-painted in black, chipped and nasty--no patina beats real historic knocking-about--but once done, it should be done well, for all time, and to a realistic "museum display" standard, with colors, textures and glosses as it was the day it first rested in John's eager hands.

From my perspective as the Conservator of a National Museum, I couldn't agree with you more. The original patina or evidence of owner usage should never be removed from historic objects---and if John Lennon's original 325 that we all saw on the first Ed Sullivan appearance doesn't qualify as an "historic object" nothing does.
Bob

[deaconblues]

From my perspective as the Conservator of a National Museum, I couldn't agree with you more. The original patina or evidence of owner usage should never be removed from historic objects---and if John Lennon's original 325 that we all saw on the first Ed Sullivan appearance doesn't qualify as an "historic object" nothing does.
Bob

Yoko Ono has admirably preserved the guitars exactly as they were when John last used them, down to the fingerprints. The real issue here is whether it's proper to engage in revisionism. I'm not sure what most people would favor, but I think that any alteration to the way it was left is doing us a disservice. ****** job or not, Lennon *liked* the guitar that way, and it was his decision to refinish it.

If I'm not mistaken, DeMarino kept the gold PG after replacing it with white, and sold copies of it for a number of years. He also has the original tuners.

[jingle_jangle]

I can understand that, but most Americans who saw the Ed Sullivan Show on February 9, 1964, have the image of that roadworn, coach-enamelled 325 imprinted in their psyches. It was not only a symbol, it did have a stunning visual presence and represented John at his most vital and productive, when he was still the King of Young Turks.

The honey-colored, white-pickguarded item in the museum bears none of that presence. It's like taking Elvis' mom's pink Caddy and painting it with invisible enamel. It is an emotional letdown. The reaction one has is that both history and testosterone have been sanitized out of it.

[tennis_nick]

To restore it to it's 1964 condition would be whitewashing the guitars later history, and John's history with it, that would be unacceptable IMO.

We don't restore the Liberty Bell because it's flaw is part of it's history.

[jingle_jangle]

Lemme guess...you were born after 1964?

You have made my point for me, Nick. The guitar in question had virtually no history after 1964. Its iconic presence rests, not with John's later work, but with that very special and tiny slice of the Beatles continuum.

[kiramdear]

He put it away after being presented with his '64, in February in Miami. I heard a rumor that he used it on his last ever session, for "Milk And Honey". If that's true then it adds a layer of significance to the re-refinished condition.

IMHO By and large, though, seeing it in "honeyglo" (it's kinda sticky looking or something not pretty with the gloss) is a disappointment. While he wasn't thinking of it as a museum object then, he could have been a little fussier about how the refin was done (or let someone else with a more critical eye see to it, or talk him out of it).

I wish he'd not refinished it the second time.

[beatlefreak]

It would be nice to at least see the original pickguard back with it.

[tennis_nick]

Lemme guess...you were born after 1964?

You have made my point for me, Nick. The guitar in question had virtually no history after 1964. Its iconic presence rests, not with John's later work, but with that very special and tiny slice of the Beatles continuum.

No history IS it's history. It played the role of the forgotten child.

[1965]

You have made my point for me, Nick. The guitar in question had virtually no history after 1964. Its iconic presence rests, not with John's later work, but with that very special and tiny slice of the Beatles continuum.

Couldn't have said it better myself. The thing is hideous as it stands today. Saddens me to think about it. One of the most famous Ricks ever made became one of the ugliest Rickenbakers out there with that refin and pickguard.

No history IS it's history. It played the role of the forgotten child.

It had a few glorious years, and those are the ones that virtually everyone remembers it by. When you think of that guitar, there's no way that the first image that pops into your head is how it looks today.

[kiramdear]

So typical of John to have 3 different finishes, a slew of various knobs, pickguards, tailpieces and a couple of wiring mods on it within 15 years. How many times did he re-invent himself in the same period?

[deaconblues]

My last word on the subject...IMO, the period it was "most famous" in is irrelevant. It's not just that 325 from Ed Sullivan. The guitar was John's sentimental favorite, and now it belongs to Yoko and to history, not to the fans.

John was feeling sentimental and wanted his old guitar back to a natural finish, the way he played it when first starting out as a musician. When he got it back he reportedly loved the new color. Who are we Rickensnobs to come along and say he was misguided, second-guess his decisions and refinish his guitar? Just seems wrong to do that to the man, even if he's not around to see it.

[kiramdear]

All praise to John. I wish he were here to tell us all off.

But we're Rickensnobs, after all. It's what we do

sorry, john give us a kiss!

[tennis_nick]

Thank you Dan for saying all the things I can only think of!

[jingle_jangle]

My last word on the subject...IMO, the period it was "most famous" in is irrelevant. It's not just that 325 from Ed Sullivan. The guitar was John's sentimental favorite, and now it belongs to Yoko and to history, not to the fans.

John was feeling sentimental and wanted his old guitar back to a natural finish, the way he played it when first starting out as a musician. When he got it back he reportedly loved the new color. Who are we Rickensnobs to come along and say he was misguided, second-guess his decisions and refinish his guitar? Just seems wrong to do that to the man, even if he's not around to see it.

Who you callin' a snob? Them's fighting words...

Yeah, it belongs to Yoko and history...that's why it's in a museum, innit?

Anyone not around in '64 to have seen them on Sullivan for the first time, at a time when we were sick of Bobbies Vee and Vinton and A Net Full of Jello and all the other Disneyskateers, and reeling from the JFK assassination, cannot possibly know the impact the Boys had on us Oldsters. I don't want to play the age card, and am aware of the danger of doing so, but you simply have no idea.

The viewpoints of the younger guys posting in this topic, fail to take this into account. To say this is "irrelevant", Dan, is to me a written dismissal of virtually the guitar's entire meaningful history. The guitar belongs to fans just as John's memory does. It was a vital part of his early persona.

I do understand that John could have wanted it back the way it was when he bought it. That might explain the strip from JG to "natural". It does not explain the honey maple stain applied, or the white guard. Sans stain and with a gold guard, it would represent the guitar as it existed for a brief time pre-America. With stain and guard, it's in never-never land. You are correct--it does represent John's thinking at the time, but I do get a strong impression everytime I read DiMarino's account of the relationship, that John allowed him to make a lot of the decisions, and just went along, which would explain the hodgepodge of inappropriate mods.

One more point to ponder: Why haven't ANY of the myriad overwrought "replicas" built of this instrument (some complete down to artificially-aged and carefully-aligned slot headed screws) sought to replicate the guitar as it exists today?

Answer: Because it looks awful and its ties to John's career and identity have been broken.