Re: your recent article about the
John Lennon Art shows put together by Yoko Ono and Legacy Fine Arts, it seems
that as a by-product of the cyberspace age, anyone with an axe to grind or
who's looking to make a name for himself by drawing undue attention to his
rantings can put together a blog and have it accepted as gospel (the new
millennium equivalent of the old "everybody's a critic" lament). Frankly,
the named protagonist (Mr. Arseneau), who's been seeking an audience for years,
and those he has baited into chiming into his blog, have all got to be kidding.

I've been going to the Lennon art
shows for YEARS and aside from the (out of my price reach) original signed
lithographs (yes, he created only ONE original drawing of each, but signed MANY
lithographs of them), everything - and I do mean EVERYTHING about the items for
sale and on display was disclosed, and not sold as anything more than what they
were ... prints (or in some cases, "lithographs" or
"proofs"). In my decade-plus dealings with them, I've found the
people at Legacy Fine Arts to be knowledgeable, friendly and have integrity
beyond reproach.

So, by way of example -  I
got a silkscreened reproduction of the lyrics to "Real Love". Was it
hawked as an "original"? NEVER. Did I think in my wildest dreams that
John's pen went to that sheet of paper? NOT FOR ONE MINUTE. Did he draw the
same exact self-portrait doodle on every lyric sheet he ever wrote ? NOT A
CHANCE. Is it of high quality and beautifully framed and does it look great as
a centerpiece in my den - YOU BET.  The same goes for my "Borrowed
Time" sketch (the one used for the posthumous "Wonsoponatime"
album) and other pieces I've bought.

John's art is really whimsical and
I enjoy it very much. The message here - consumers must educate and culture
themselves. Learn about the art, the artist, and YES, the piece you are buying.
I do not feel for one second I was ever mislead and am 1000% happy I acquired
the pieces I did, including one of the "colorized" children's
drawings. Of course, Mr. Arseneau cites those as "forgeries", as
another artist worked on them after John died, and would have readers believe
he has discovered the smoking gun - the NAME of the artist who perpetrated the
act ! I never even applied to detective school, and I knew that Al Naclerio was
the artist in question - he is, after all, credited as such in the book that
collects the drawings.

As for Mr. Arseneau, I replied to
this "scholarly" blog, and his mantra of "the dead don't create
art", by posing the challenge of whether the surviving Beatles themselves
shouldn't have "colorized" John's demos to make the "new"
songs "Real Love" and "Free As A Bird". After all, as a
form of "art", the dead don't make music, do they ? Whatever one may
think of those two records - both of which I happen to LOVE -  the
principle is the same as what Mr. Arseneau is crying foul over as a big "fraud".
My guess is this same guy, who's trying to incite the masses into a class
action suit over the (let's call it) "art" hasn't quite gotten to the
point of suing Apple, Capitol Records, Paul McCartney, Ringo Starr or the
George Harrison estate for selling us supposedly "new" Beatles
recordings. After all, the dead don't make music, do they ? Maybe Apple and
their lawyers don't take as kindly to a poke in the eye as the art dealers do.

Given Mr. Arseneu's penchant for
hammering home time lines ("John died in 1980; these were colorized years
later"; etc.) in defense of his "fraud" allegations, I assured
him that when I bought my CD's of "Real Love" and "Free As A
Bird" (a) I did not think they were the originals (I'm pretty sure they
sold a few million COPIES of each of them); (b) I was well aware John had been
deceased for over a decade, and (c) outside people (you know, like Jeff Lynne)
were brought in to lend their talents to help bring these projects to fruition.

On his website, Mr. Arseneau 
cites a 2008 article in which he besmirches Yoko and the Legacy team, stating
""The bottom line is ... they want the public to see and buy work
that John Lennon himself has never seen"; by that standard, one would have
to deduce that "Real Love" and "Free As A Bird" should be
discounted (certainly John never heard those finished products).

And while on the subject of Mr.
Arseneau's website, one look at his "bio", covering his five years of
study at community colleges (yet with no mention of any degrees earned), he
notes "when I research and write about contentious issues of authenticity
in the art world, I use independent documented definitions I didn`t
define", making a point to use a select dictionary definition of scholar
("a learned or eurdite [sic] person, esp. one who has profound knowledge
of a particular subject."). While obviously not figuring anyone would
challenge a scholars' spelling, I would have to say he's taken a very liberal
interpretation of the term; a look through my own desk dictionary defines
"scholar" as "a person who has done advanced study in a special
field". Not sure five years at community college, with no mention of a
degree, gets me there.

It seems Mr. Arseneau would have
been at least somewhat appeased if they called the exhibit the
"reproductions and lithographs of lyrics and drawings done by John Lennon
when he was alive" as opposed to "the art of ..." And while he
definitely doesn't come across as a fan of Yoko's (I get it, believe me), like
it or not, SHE (not Mr. Arseneau) gets to decide how John's legacy (no pun
intended) is handled and marketed.

One look at any Beatles Sotheby's
auction would show REAL handwritten Beatles lyrics routinely fetching well into
the six-figure range. Anyone who thinks I was defrauded into paying $500 for my
"Real Love" lyric print (which by the way, came in what would
probably be a couple hundred dollar framing job) is simply ill informed and
doesn't give folks credit for being even half-educated consumers.  People
are a lot smarter than Mr. Arseneau appears to give them credit for. Yeah, I've
seen the REAL handwritten lyrics and know they are - really - priceless. As
long as people are in a position to make an informed decision, as I was, and
are happy with their purchase, who's to say what Yoko "should" be
doing ? Hint: Not Mr. Arseneau, or you, or me.

In my last (by that, I don't mean
"most recent", I mean "final") post to Mr. Arseneau (he and
his crusade are simply not worth the time or

effort) , I acknowledged that
"caveat emptor" is ALWAYS good advice, and let him know that I'd be
going to the show the following week NYC, and PROMISED to let him know
IMMEDIATELY if any of the Legacy staff try to pawn the prints off as
"originals", or anything else but what they are. I hope he's not
holding his breath waiting for a follow up, because, as always, the folks at
Legacy Fine Arts treated me with respect for my consumerism and intelligence.
It's more than most "blog scholars" are willing to concede, it seems.

"at least let me color it because John probably would not have minded it if I did it."

John didn't mind when you covered yourself in a burlap sack and screeched into a microphone while he was trying to play music either. It doesn't make it right.

Yoko, just do your own mediocre thing and stop endlessly riding John's coattails.

It's a bit of a stretch to call her work mediocre.

Oh, Yoko! Always meddling with your husband's art!

Who cares about the shit he drew. It looks terrible anyway. What matters is that she broke up the Beatles and recorded terrible, terrible music with him.

Yoko didn't break up the Beatles, they did it all by themselves.

She helped though and a lot of mutual friends said she did her damndest to make sure they never reunited.  She put the clamp down quick when John and Paul even began discussing possibly touring again.

I like his cartooning.  It's like a drugged-up James Thurber.  And John would have broken up the Beatles with or without Yoko, though it might have taken a little longer.

You're right about their musical collaborations, though.  P.U.