Yoko Ono, 76, has made the painful and somewhat controversial decision to include the bloodied clothing her late husband John Lennon wore on the day he was assassinated in an exhibit on his life. A paper bag with Lennon’s clothes, saved from that fateful night nearly 30 years ago, will be shown at the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame Annex in NY as part of the show “John Lennon: The New York Years.”:
A new John Lennon exhibit is particularly emotional for his widow, Yoko Ono. Besides Lennon’s guitars, letters and other personal effects, it also includes a paper bag containing the bloody clothes from the night he was shot to death.
Ono received the items from the medical examiner in December 1980, when the former Beatle was gunned down in New York City at age 40.
“It was hard to include,” Ono said. “And I thought it might be criticized as well.”
But ultimately, Ono thought it was important to let people see the effects of gun violence.
The Lennon items are part of a new exhibit that will launch Tuesday at the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame Annex. “John Lennon: The New York Years” includes Lennon’s famous New York City T-shirt, his upright piano from his Dakota apartment, and a posthumous 1981 Grammy Award for the couple’s album “Double Fantasy.”
“I know it’s a kind of a sad and very poignant kind of paradox I think that he loved this place so much and this is where he was killed,” she said in an interview after a news conference for the exhibit.
There are also letters documenting Lennon’s long-fought battle against deportation in the early 1970s, both from the government and supporters. Glass cases also contain a dozen or so handwritten lyrics.
Ono says Lennon’s death still haunts her nearly 30 years later: “I still get affected by it.”
“If it (his death) was a slow a process we could have talked about it or something,” she added, holding back tears.
The exhibit will be on display throughout 2009.
[From AP via the Huffington Post]
Yoko Ono founded the John Lennon museum nine years ago in Saitama, Japan. It includes personal memorabilia, photos, videos and music from Lennon’s influential life cut short. Yoko saved so many things from her husband and it’s not shocking that she also has the clothes he was shot in. It’s brave of her to put those on display and it helps bring a sense of the reality of that terrible day. Yoko gets a lot of flack for her supposed role in breaking up the Beatles but that was a long time ago and she’s since worked hard to preserve her husband’s memory and to spread their joint message of peace. She’s a strong woman who witnessed the love of her life die unexpectedly right in front of her. She’s willing to let us see some of the most painful artifacts from that day, even though they bring up more bad feelings for her. “John Lennon: The New York Years” is open now at 76 Mercer St. in New York.
You can see some artifacts from the museum, including the bag of clothes, on The Daily Mail’s website.
Yoko Ono is shown at the opening of ‘Imagine Peace’ at Montreal Museum of Fine Arts on 3/31/09.
that just seems wrong. clothes inside a paper bag won’t help to show gun violence. I doubt any collection or exhibit to Lennon is shown without folks having the knowledge or at least a photo of the Dakota with a caption of events. I don’t know. It just doesn’t seem right. She knows John better than we do (duh) but it doesn’t seem like something he would want either.
WTF IS SHE THINKING? This one should have been in a nuthouse a long time ago.
I disagree. There is nothing brave about her putting them on display. The fact that she kept them at all just shows that there is something wrong with her mentally. Keeping the bloody clothes your husband was wearing when he was violently murdered? That’s just sick. Putting them on display for the entertainment of others is perverse.
A particularly tasteless bid for attention. I mean, who cares about Yoko Ono? What has she even done for the last 40 years except cash in on her husbands fame? Talk about an irrelevant person…
I disagree with Y’all. Been to the Lorraine Motel in Memphis? Or the Civil Rights Museum? King Center? I think displays for the icons of the 20th century, who died tragically, are more impactful when we remember their lives in their entirty. She knows his fans will appreciate it, and I think it sounds emotionally incredible.
Just my opinion.
Peace
Barnesir, I can understand her keeping the clothes…maybe just too painful and final to throw them away like trash.
But publicly displaying them just reeks of celebrity mental illness, a cross between whoredom and addiction.
don’t judge.
people grieve in different ways, and holding onto the clothes in which he was murdered may help her deal with her despair.
putting them on display, though? kind of morbid. but you know there are people who will want to see them.
and it may interest you folks to know that this woman is a WHOLE lot more compassionate and personable than you might think. and yes, I have first hand knowledge.
Yoko Ono was always a bit of a nutbar.lol
How disrespectful,and tacky of her to do such a thing.
Yoko is wonderful. As an artist, her message has always been about peace. She’s endured a lot of criticism, slurs and jokes made at her expense for the man that she (still) loves.
I don’t begrudge her for doing this.. and I think fans will make up their own mind at the exhibit of whether they want to look at the bloodied clothes or not.
Sometimes being extreme is the only way to get your message across. This isn’t some random collector that is exploiting the clothes, its his wife.
She’s an artist. It’s debatable whether she’s a good one or not, but regardless, as an artist her role is to push the boundaries and make people think.
I think it’s a good fit for a museum exhibit.
Wif: Displaying the 30 year old bloody clothes that your spouse was wearing when murdered is not art. It does not belong in a museum. It is just sick and tasteless.
DARTH RANDALL — I wouldn’t brag about that if I were you.
BARNESIR — right on!
One of the many points of art (and a transient one at best) is to make people think, provoke thought, feeling and reaction.
Not everyone has to (or should) agree on “what is art”, but the fact that we are even having a discussion about it, getting fired up, debating, etc shows that Yoko has gotten us to react to her philosophy and approach … which over the years has always been message-laden and didactic, even if we don’t find it aesthetically pleasing.
In this respect, I would say she succeeded: positively or negatively, we did respond.
i see where she’s going with it and i think its beautiful and somber.
car accidents provoke reactions, too.
art?
anna: What facet of artistic expression was Yoko tapping into when she sold one of John’s previously unreleased songs to JC Penny to use in an ad?
It’s about time this nutbag gets a job and makes some money of her own..all these years living with money made with stuff from her husband..even her son doesn’t have a real job…get real you people…
She is an artist???!!! Well the junk she draws when she is high on what ever it is she smokes is NOT called ART,,my 5 year old can draw struff and call it art..and someone like anna could explaine it for years and years in the university and call it science…do something useful to the society people…she must have kept the bloody clothes to see if she can sell them to some numnutt later on…
um…I’m not “bragging”.
just saying that I know what type of person she is, and how she treats “the common man”, since people have this impression of her that’s not really accurate.
just reality, man.
“She is an artist???!!! Well the junk she draws when she is high on what ever it is she smokes is NOT called ART,,my 5 year old can draw struff and call it art..and someone like anna could explaine it for years and years in the university and call it science…do something useful to the society people…she must have kept the bloody clothes to see if she can sell them to some numnutt later on…”
Nice. If you don’t know anything about it, shut up. I worked an exhibition of hers: she is a genius.
ps. Just b.c your five year old can draw “better” doesn’t make it art. I assume she has the same mental capacity you do, ergo without thought it’s nothing. If you are incapable of understanding something but feel the need to spout some opinion anyway, do everyone a favor and go crawl back underneath the rock instead.
Agree with Wif. It’s art, designed to make you stop and think. I’m sure for most people, his music legacy is sufficient as a reminder but Lennon himself was a showman so doubt he’d be too upset by all this. Incidentally, that image of the bloodied specs (at the DM link) is really interesting. The pieces are presented as very stark talking pieces. I don’t see this as exploitative at all although I understand why some people might.
“My 5 year old can draw stuff and call it art” – well, yes – that is an act of creative expression
I actually like this idea, I think it would be a wonderfully emotive exhibition to see – I’d go.
Art is the product of human creativity, whether you can appreciate it positively or not.
Well…let me try to give my thoughts on some statements:
TEss: Art, like values and taste, is subjective and varies from person to person.
A car accident in itself – like most random events – is probably not going be seen as “art” per se. But PURPOSEFUL thought, recording or presentation of an event – may change the angle though… it just asks the question of WHY someone thought it relevant to create, or WHAT was he or she trying to communicate to others.
DOn’t get me wrong, I personally feel that tragedy and tragic events are never something for a bunch of people to stand around and discuss over wine and debate the artistic merits of why it happened. But that’s MY argument.. we might discuss/debate that person’s thinking or decency and whether or not that is “art” if someone used car crashes in his or her work. Some people out there are just going to ask the dark questions.
Art will always be debatable — WHat may seriously affect someone and make her or him react strongly may nary raise an eyebrow with another individual– and within that gray area lies the question of “what is art?”
I’ve stood on both sides defending and questioning what is art – from Bill Viola to Thomas Kinkade. There’s never REALLY a “one size fits all” answer, which was why I said the point was transient, at best. But your question is good because “art” is supposed to be questioned and disagreed upon and pushed and analyzed… like science, we learn more about ourselves, our psyche and our boundaries, in just TALKING about it.
Codzilla: As far as JCPenney–who knows? people still need to pay bills. An apartment in the Dakota building doesn’t come cheap. IT’s a constant struggle because people feel artists should be 100%– if you believe in your message so much, you shouldn’t sell out, you shouldn’t need anything else but your art. As far as Yoko’s personal finances and if she’s a “serious” or “real” artist, that will always be up for debate, with supporters and non-supporters and how they define art to themselves along the way.
Raz: I HOPE I am discussing this for years to come. No, her son Sean doesn’t have a 9 to 5 or hold a corporate title, but he had recently composed the soundtrack for a film that my husband worked on last summer. He’s probably involved with creative projects, especially with his background. His talent.. well… that’s debatable too, but he’s productive and sincere about what he does.
As far as your 5 year old creating a drawing stuff– I hope you encourage him or her for years to come. Drawing is a great form of expression, and it could be one of many unique talents your child has, and maybe one day I’ll be defending his or her art! =0)
If people are saying this is so wrong, what would you do with a bag of your famous, murdered husband’s clothes? Those clothes are history, you can’t just throw them in the trash.
Yoko is far from “irrelevant.” She had a heavy hand in the whole Dada movement and conceptual art BEFORE she even met John. How ignorant to think she was nothing but John’s wife.
I actually find it beautiful and fitting. Yoko and John were completely open with their lives when John was alive, so it doesn’t surprise me that Yoko would feel it appropriate to share her pain at his death. And -tell- me that seeing the bloody clothes of a man who stood for what he stood for wouldn’t have some sort of effect on you.
Yeah, it’s morbid, but so are the billion crucifixes in existence depicting Jesus nailed to a cross. Sometimes the most disturbing image makes the biggest statement.
“If people are saying this is so wrong, what would you do with a bag of your famous, murdered husband’s clothes? Those clothes are history, you can’t just throw them in the trash.”
No, those clothes aren’t history. Lennon’s musical and philosohpical legacy is history. If it were me, I would have burned the clothing decades ago. They shouldn’t be treated like some theme park souvenir.
It’s tacky and tasteless to say the least, and no, it is not art.
I can’t believe people had and still have so much animosity towards Yoko Ono.
First of all, she is part of the imperial family, which is the royal family of Japan, so she has always been very wealthy. Second of all, she is a famous and very talented artist in her own right. She is not a famewhore or even bad at drawing. She’s a genius, and the problem with geniuses is that often common people, people like Raz, just don’t get it, and it makes them angry. No, sorry your 5 year old can’t create any of the art she made. Have you ever seen her art? While some of it is visual, (she’s also a very talented writer) it’s mostly performance and installation based. Check out grapefruit some time. If you don’t know what your talking about, don’t bother commenting. It just makes you look like an ass. People need to see the bloody clothes, why is that so shocking? It’s her letting it go; it’s cathartic and part of the healing process.
Why would Yoko keep the bloody clothes that he was murdered in? That is a bit disturbing.
i think there is something sobering about the clothes in the bag, a finality to a life that was so tragically cut short, and i do think it is a great message for gun control. nothing wrong with hanging onto his clothes – i have a friend whose wife was killed in a car crash and he still has her bloody earrings in a baggie. grief is a tricky process and we all do it in different ways. as for yoko living off lennon’s money, john admitted that he was completely incompetent with finances and she is a great businesswoman and took the money, invested it (in things like real estate, cattle etc) and made alot more than he ever would have done. as for her art, yoko is not an artist in the classic sense,she is more of a performance artist and people either like performance art or they don’t get it. like music, dance etc it is subjective. but remember that when john met her she was already well-established in the art world, and it was her art that drew him to her initially, so i guess it spoke to him. and that’s really all that matters.
i cant say im surprised by some of the closed-minded comments on here about what is art and whats not.
also, i think its up to yoko herself to decide what to do with her husbands clothes. he was killed in those clothes, and they are probably very important to her.
i think the idea of displaying them is awesome. i would love to go to something like that. i would never think “ohh, thats disgusting!”. grow up.
Yoko is a member of the famous widows club
they live on for DECADES long after their husbands die and their husband are still bringing in $$$$ and notice.
what shes doing right now. he is still making her money and giving her attention
It would have been easy for me to have jumped on the bandwagon to trash Yoko Ono, but I confess there was some very compiling posting that express a logic and compassion for this woman. These postings have certainly made me rethink my initial thoughts on the subject.
also, shes 76?! i hope i look like that when im her age! shes awesome. what a cool lady.
“If it were me, I would have burned the clothing decades ago.”
And………..
It’s NOT you. let her grieve in HER way.
YOU think it’s tacky and tasteless. and you’re entitled to your opinion, but don’t act like it should be everybody’s opinion.
@g funk – YES! What you said!
Stewie’s right, barneslr. You are entitled to your opinion but your husband didn’t get shot and die in front of you. She can do what she wants in her grieving process. If that includes a memento from the incident, then so be it.
I think its a great way to protest against gun violence as well. Actually seeing and knowing that there are the bloodied clothes of a person who died because of gun violence (ANY person, it doesn’t have to be John Lennon) is very powerful and not tacky in the slightest.
If they can shopw Jackie Kennedy’s suit she was wearing full of blood and brains they can show Lennons bloody clothing. No one likes Ono but she is doing nothing wrong. Maybe people should see what the hell a nut case with a gun can do to innocent people rather then just read about it. I dont like her but she is doing nothing wrong.
Jackie Kennedy’s blood stained pink Channel suit (that she wore in Dallas), was kept in her mother’s attic for years. It is now at the National Archives along with JFK’s clothing from that day.
At Jackie’s request, that suit will not see the light of day for 100 years.
But if it was in Caroline’s possession, I could never see her doing something like this, she has too much class.
For those who think it’s tasteless – the clothes are in a bag! You don’t have to look! And to put one such man’s demise in a bag is incredible to me! But given the icon the man was in his own lifetime as well as since, I find it incredibly touching & personal that his widow is prepared to share that with the world. If you doubt the significance go to Longleat House where you can stll see the shirt Charles I was executed in (and no – for those used to Hollywood gore it’s not horrific) and see how you feel then? You feel a sense of history. One who has walked amongst us….
If that man had just aimed two more feet to the left, we’d still have John.
I don’t think it’s tacky or weird. I can’t imagine someone murdering my husband. In fact thinking about it brings me to tears. My first reaction would be to save everything he had ever touched including the clothes he died in. I don’t think this is perverse. Of course no one would ever have any interest in my husband’s things so no one would ever know of my “craziness”.
I’m kinda luke-warm about Yoko Ono, but I do think that she sincerely loved John, and vice versa.
I don’t know if I personally would want to see John’s bloody clothes, but I understand the message she’s trying to get across (re: gun violence) and I respect her decision.
If I were her I’d do the exact same thing. I would have kept the bloody clothes and I would have immortalised his life and death just as she is doing. Screw you people who say she inst an artist. Just because you dont enjoy her art doesn’t mean it isnt art. Art is meant to provoke the human response. Not necessarily awe and warm fuzzies.
That being said did she ever say she is trying to pass this exhibit off as art? No, she is just trying to pay tribute to her husband and remind people of his greatness and how swiftly and violently that was taken away from the world.
Anna, I think you’re my hero. What an eloquent way you have of phrasing your argument.
Giz, I’m so glad you’ve been swayed. I often get into these online debates and get disheartened because people don’t seem to listen or budge. But your comment just restored my faith in internet dialogues. Kudos to you and your open-minded soul.
I, too, can’t see how she could have thrown his bloody clothes away. I can totally see how Jackie Kennedy would keep the Chanel suit in an attic–out of sight, but not discarded.
I truly believe everyone is entitled to their opinions, and that all feelings expressed are valid. However, what else could she have done with the clothes? They are obviously a memento of John, sentimental and perhaps a bit morbid. Could she bring herself to throw her beloved’s clothing in the trash? I don’t think so. Sell them on ebay, or sell them to someone else so they could sell them on ebay? Never. Be realistic, she is an artist. She is trying to make a point against gun violence in her own creative way.
I’ll bet some of the people who posted against displaying the clothes have guns, or let their kids play violent video games. It’s a double standard, only this is real. Someone killed John Lennon, and it was and is a pretty big deal. I think her thoughts are along the lines of: hopefully this will prevent at least one murder or violent act. Don’t judge, no one is going to make you look at it.
“If they can shopw Jackie Kennedy’s suit she was wearing full of blood and brains they can show Lennons bloody clothing”
Just because someone did the wrong thing once doesn’t make it right for another person to do the same wrong thing. That’s like saying “if X commits murder, then so can Y.” Your argument has no logic to it.
“However, what else could she have done with the clothes?”
She should have burned them.
why, barneslr? because that’s what YOU would have done?
it’s really quite pushy of you to dictate what a widow should do with the clothes her husband was murdered in.
if you would have burned them, more power to you, because whatever helps a person through those horrible times is what they should do.
but to act like YOUR grieving process is the CORRECT one is just silly.
haha ha..my kid wants to become a REAL scientist, someone who actually does something positive for the society, something that makes a different and something that makes things happen an honest way of life and making a living…if she tries her hand on ART it is going to be for fun and her own experience as we don’t believe in being an artist is a way to help people in our family…NOW 1..2…3.. you all can start to attack me ,,,as someone mentioned everyone is entitled to their own opinion..
btw her son if it was not because of his father no one would care about his songs or his talent if he actually has any…have a good one.!
She is 76? The bloody clothes gotta go before she kicks the bucket, they are definitely worth much more now, with her alive then when she is gone….good timing fellow..money made can pay for your upcoming plastic surgery!!!
your family may not believe that being an artist is a way to help people, or that an artist isn’t a person who “actually does something positive for the society, something that makes a different and something that makes things happen an honest way of life and making a living”
but plenty of people (including the medical community) believe that art (and producing it) can have therapeutic benefits. seriously, google “art therapy” and see what you find out.
hmmm, just wondering if Ms. Ono’s “art project” will spawn the need for shadow box kits at the local WalMart. There must be lots of murder victim families that would desire a more sophisticated type of framing than the paper bag look for a deceased loved-ones’ bloodied clothing.
i think that she’s done a wonderful job of preserving John’s memory – – and yes, what she does with the objects of what was the most tragic event of her life – it’s completely up to her. I won’t judge – they must have been soulmates……i haven’t heard tell of any Yoko beaus/husbands around.
“This is not art”
@ Giz: I completely agree with you. Initially I felt one way, but reading all of the comments on here has made me stop to think about it from a different point of view. I didn’t have all of the facts before I formed my opinion and I am glad I stopped by here to read these comments and change my mind.
@ Raz: I feel kind of bad for your 5 year old child that you have already decided for them that they can’t be an artist. That means if they have a passion for dance, music or writing novels the world could lose a very valuable artist. Thank goodness John Lennon’s parents didn’t decide to keep him from the arts. Vincent Van Gogh, Picasso and dozens of other artist could have been scientist instead of artist. How sad that would have been.
While I don’t know that I could keep my dead husbands bloody clothes around for any amount of time, I respect that the wife of that wonderful man has her own way of doing things. After reading all of these comments I think she is probably a pretty amazing person.
think about this. people say she is a scammer. so… no one would keep there dead husbands clothes that he died in, unless she wanted money. and its probably not even his clothes. just a paper bag. she used him and ruined his life. poor john. i’ll miss you.
ummmm without art… we wouldn’t have anything. We wouldn’t have the houses we live in because someone had to design them. Nore would they be painted in a pleasing way. We wouldn’t have the cloths we ware because someone had to create them. We wouldn’t have the history we have because a huge amount of the history we know of a culture is by looking at the art they left behind. You wouldn’t have tv or movies because theres no one to sketch the scenes out on the plot boards. no set design. no costume design. no writers to write the scripts. No music. No books. No pretty discriptive lables on the things we buy because someone has to design/draw/create those too. Oh and you wouldn’t have your car,plane,tractor,cell phone, computers so on so forth because those too have creative teams/designers who work with those all so important Science guys. I could go on but I think the point has been made.
Without art, the world would be nothing.
Nothing at all.
I’ve learned a lot from your blog here,Keep on going,I will keep an eye on it,One more thing,plz visit my websites:Wii video game consoles and accessories wholesale retail