Oh yeah, and fuck off JosephWolf.

WHY DO PEOPLE THINK THAT PAUL IS TEACHING JULIAN HOW TO USE FUCKING HEROIN?! Seriously, what is wrong with you people? Paul made this song to cheer up Julian because of John's and Cynthia's divorce. Though the lyrics may sound like how to take heroin, USE YOUR FUCKING COMMON SENSE PEOPLE. Do you people actually think John and Paul want him to do heroin?

My god. Some people just really deserve to be killed.

i think this is one of the best beatles songs ever. so creative. esp. the ending part so awesome!
its about paul cheering up julian

sorry if i was mistake on the release date of cold turkey but it doesn't make my point any less strong.

FWIW

"Cold Turkey" was released 24th October 1969, a year and two months after "Hey Jude."

You enjoy the music too

well said KevinWayne.

When did John first use Heroin? If it was before 1967 i'd be shocked. Happiness is a warm gun has made me wonder over the years and of course .....cept me and my monkey gives one pause to thought .......but as far as John having something negative to say about drugs Cold turkey (a Lennon solo tune) is the first negative thing John had to say about drugs on album and that was in the 70's.


Hey Jude was Released 26/8/68.

I'm telling you what i think it is about. I think i have made a very interesting arguement. Please try to convince me other wise.

Thanks PT


by the by......what Paul (or any artist) say a song is about in a book means little to me if the artist has something he would obviously like to hide.


enjoy the music

pt-

Certainly some of the Beatles' songs were inspired by drug usage. I still think "Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds" was describing an acid trip, regardless of John's protestations. Paul has acknowledged taking pills, pot, cocaine, and acid. He ticked off the other Beatles for talking to reporters about their LSD usage before any of the rest of them did. And yet, he describes himself (and is acknowledged by the others) as having been more reluctant than they were to get into the heavier drugs. He said somewhere that he drew the line at heroin (he was told, "It's only a problem if you run out of money, and that's no problem for you," and thought, no, I don't want any part of that).

The problem I have with "Hey Jude" being about heroin is that it makes the singer out not only to be a user but to be a pusher--and a pretty heavy-handed pusher at that. That's not Paul's MO. He had already seen the devastating effect that heroin usage had had on John back in '66 or '67. I just don't think that that was his drug of choice, or that he would write a song pushing it that hard. And there are other ways to interpret the song that make more sense.

Beatles song meaning book. Paul and Julian were always very close, even closer than John was to Julian. Paul was riding home one day, and started singing "Hey Julian, don't be afriad", then changed it to "Hey Jules" and finally, "Hey Jude"

The guess here is that the non drug takers would say it's clearly not about Heroin and the current (and thank goodness) one time drug takers are saying it is about dope.

Well Paul clearly was a heavy drug user. He has admitted as much, without shouting it from the tree tops.

The fact i fear some of you are missing is that Herion wasn't know as the demon we now understand it is now.......Hendrix, Morrison and Joplin we're all alive and well.


Name a great musicain and you can rest assured they used drugs.....the drug of choice for the elite in 1969 was heroin.

It's still a beautiful song, don't let the facts lessen your enjoyment of it. and don't let your desire for Paul to be saint Paul allow you to cloud your judgement.......Get Back wasn't exactally a sweet little # either.

youre a great sartwell shit talker

Taken from http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2005/10/25/EDGU1FCFMG1.DTL
Thanks

The Rolling Stones -- now rolling around the country as sexagenarians -- are the best band in the history of rock music. I submit that this can be proved with mathematical rigor and now propose to do so. Follow this closely.

Sartwell's First Law: The quality of a rock band is inversely proportional to its pretentiousness.

Corollary to Sartwell's First Law: The pretentiousness of a rock band can be expressed as a ratio of its artistic ambition to its artistic accomplishment. For example, on a scale of 1 to 10, the artistic ambition of the band Yes equals 9, its artistic accomplishment 1. This yields a pretentiousness ratio of 9:1, one of the very worst in rock history.

The evaluation of rock music is no longer an impressionistic expression of opinion, but rather a precise, quantitative science. Anyone who disagrees with me from now on is simply irrational.

Some quick applications: The Ramones (1:8) are better than the Talking Heads (7:7). Nirvana (3:9) is exactly as good as Pearl Jam (9:3) is bad. The worst music ever made (literally) is art rock: King Crimson (10:1), for example. Early U2 and early Bruce Springsteen, who took what were fundamentally fairly simple ditties and mounted them with an elaborateness usually reserved for Wagnerian opera, are almost unbelievably overrated.

And finally, the Rolling Stones are much better than the Beatles.

Now admittedly, this Stones versus Beatles thing is decades old. But it rages still through the halls of nursing homes the world over.

Both the Stones and the Beatles started out as interpreters of rhythm and blues. They cleaned up African-American music and sold it to the world, a tried and true commercial strategy for white folks throughout the century, from Benny Goodman to Elvis Presley to Vanilla Ice.

Which brings me to: Sartwell's Second Law: The quality of a rock song varies inversely as the square of its distance from the blues. The bluesier the better.

The world's popular music is African-American music because African-American music is extremely intense and powerful. If you're playing music in a European tonal framework, you're not a rock band at all.

The history of rock is the continuation of the history of the blues, both in the way it is made and in the way it is received (by dancing in bars).

The two laws are connected: When was the last time you saw a pretentious blues band? Rock is a traditional, as opposed to an avant-garde, art form. The authenticity of a work of traditional art is measured by the way it venerates and explores the tradition. The authenticity of a work of avant-garde art is measured by the way it destroys or transcends the past. Avant-garde rockers have profoundly misunderstood their form.

Something awful happened to the Beatles about 30 years ago, something that happens to most young rock musicians who achieve extreme success: They mistook themselves for avant-garde artistes. They made, for example, Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band, a truly bad album. They lost the blues and, to paraphrase Chuck Berry, started sounding like a symphony, a vapid symphony. They went baroque.

Now that was exactly what the Stones never did (though there was one scary moment: Their Satanic Majesties Request). They have remained, for much longer than anybody else, a knockdown, straight-ahead basic blues and rock band. Mick Jagger never mistook himself for Luciano Pavarotti or T.S. Eliot. Keith Richards never tried to do anything but make great little riffs.

Think about how hard this must have been: You can do anything you want, and instead of making a statement for the ages demonstrating what a profound puppy you really are, you just write another great, simple rock song: "Beast of Burden," say, or "Rock and a Hard Place," or, from their excellent current disk, "Rough Justice.'' When Bach (10:10) made profound statements for the ages, they stuck. When Emerson, Lake and Palmer (10:1) made profound statements for the ages, they were dated before they were released. "Twist and Shout" and other early Beatles songs sound like they were recorded yesterday. But "For the Benefit of Mr. Kite!" sounds like the relic of an extinct, incomprehensible culture.

Everything the Stones have ever done, with the exception of some very early work recorded before they could sing and play competently, holds up beautifully: It's the rock of ages. Albums like "The Rolling Stones, Now!" (1964), "It's Only Rock 'n' Roll" (1974), "Undercover" (1983), and "A Bigger Bang" (2005) all sound perfectly fresh. There's a very simple reason for that: They are excellent examples of Sartwell's laws, completely unpretentious and always undergirded by the blues.

The accomplishment of the Stones never exceeds their grasp; they know exactly what they play well, and they just keep on playing it. Do that successfully for a year and, if you're lucky, you've got a good recording and a concert tour to show for it. Do it for 35 years, and you're the only rockers who ever have.

So there you have it: Perfectly irrefragable proof that if you go see the Stones, you'll be seeing the greatest freaking rock band in history. Anybody got an extra ticket?

by far the best Beatles song

I think after listening to all their albums and going through all their songs, this one seems to have the most longevity

just my $.02

YtseJam edited this song for me with my additions (all the stuff after the first naaaanananananana)... it was hard, and honestly I'm sure I missed a couple of na's on the parts of the song where he goes so damn fast. If anybody wants to slow the song down with software and discover exactly how many there are, feel free, but I'm content with what's up there. (I do think I got the mymymy's right, though :) ).

This song makes you so proud to be british! Does anybody remember the finale of the Queen's Golden Jubilee? Paul McCartney is a legend! And even much so is John Lennon. I loved the tribute to George Harrison with Eric Clapton! This song is their best!

I heard some dj on the radio talking about this, just after "remember to let her under your skin" John knocked some headphone on the floor during recording and he says "arrhh!! fucking hell!!!" as he thought he ruined a perfect take but they left it in. it does sound more like 'fuckin' 'ell"

bamaman1488--

You think your point is made because that's all you can see. Haven't you ever heard of the expression, something "getting under your skin"? Besides a needle, that is? It means that something is getting to you; you're allowing it to affect you. Paul is telling Julian (and himself) that they can't just have a thick shell. They have to take the risk of being vulnerable.

(And I suspect that "Jude" became slang for heroin after this song was released and users took it to mean heroin.)

People have the attitude that if it's *possible* to take song lyrics to be about drugs, then they *must* be about drugs, and anyone who thinks otherwise is a naive fool. That's an incredibly superficial outlook.

My guess is that Julian was hurt and angry over his parents' divorce, as well as his father's very open relationship with Yoko Ono. And Paul couldn't stand Yoko and empathized with Julian. So the song is partly for Julian (who was only about 5 at the time) and partly for Paul himself. The lyrics, "Let her into your heart...Let her under your skin" probably refer to Yoko: Julian may not like Yoko (as Paul doesn't) but she's the woman in John's life now and both of them have to learn to accept it. Only then can they "make it better."

The warning, "well you know that it's a fool / who plays it cool / by making his world a little colder" is probably a warning against the emotional coldness that hurt and anger often create. So he urges Julian (and himself) to "let it out and let it in," i.e., let the pain out and let the healing in. He can't put it on someone else to do that for him or with him ("someone to perform with"); he needs to do it himself ("the movement you need is on your shoulder").

Ultimately, it's by accepting the pain and the reality of the situation that it can ever get any better. The more I think about it, the more I think Paul was really writing about himself. He was furious at John for bringing Yoko into the Beatles recording sessions, but he had to get past that in order to keep the Beatles going at all. Too bad it didn't last much longer, anyway.

Just a personal note: this used to be my "work up the courage to ask a girl out" song. I used to play it in the background when I'd call her up. And if she said Yes, then I'd dance around the room during the "da da da da da da da" section. (Smirk all you want; I'm verrry happily married now!)

i realy dont think hey juse is about taking heroin! Paul Macca rote this song to comfort julian Lennon johns son after julian and Cynthia left John after he had been fooling around with yoko (john not julian!). Paul played it first to Cynthia and then to John. Or so Cynthia says in her new biography "john". it has nothing to do with heroin! Paul never took heroin, that was john and the reason it doesnt sound like paul is helping julian through his parents divorce is because he was using his artistic licence. loads of artists do that. People twist things around to make it less easy and less blatant about what they are siging about. like if someone had just smoked a joint they wouldent exactly say "oh yeah and by the way i am stoned while writing this!" that would just be dumb! and of course its not about the jews because it was written before that jew guy! sorry for being so aggressive but the beatles are too amazing to have people writing rubbish about their music.

i realy dont think hey juse is about taking heroin! Paul Macca rote this song to comfort julian Lennon johns son after julian and Cynthia left John after he had been fooling around with yoko (john not julian!). Paul played it first to Cynthia and then to John. Or so Cynthia says in her new biography "john". it has nothing to do with heroin! Paul never took heroin, that was john and the reason it doesnt sound like paul is helping julian through his parents divorce is because he was using his artistic licence. loads of artists do that. People twist things around to make it less easy and less blatant about what they are siging about. like if someone had just smoked a joint they wouldent exactly say "oh yeah and by the way i am stoned while writing this!" that would just be dumb! and of course its not about the jews because it was written before that jew guy! sorry for being so aggressive but the beatles are too amazong to have people writing rubbish about their music.

Could be about heroin, but on another level "Hey Jude" is about the Jews. "World on your shoulders" refers to the weight of Jewish destiny as the Chosen People, "waiting for someone to perform with" is the Jewish expectation of the Messiah.
Remember that "Hey Jude/Revolution" was released as blasphemous counterpoint to the Biblical "Jude, Revelation".
Interestingly, when the song first came out, the windows of the Apple boutique were smashed...by a Jewish Holocaust survivor, who reacted to the publicity posters, the "Jude" reminding him of the "Juden Raus" etc. campaigns of the Nazis.

To jimfranklin:
I agree completely with you. I listened to the song recently and "take it Jude" is quite audible without turning the volume all the way up. So no need to disturb your neighbors folks.

To eeskride's response:

No one knows whether or not Paul took heroin. And you can't say he never did. No one knows.

Certain lyrics in this song do not make sense if this was indeed written for Julian, to comfort him during a divorce.

When paul says "Remember to let her into your heart" ... who is "her"?

Let her in to your heart
Let herin to your heart
Let heroin to your heart.

"her in" sounds a lot like "heroin" doesn't it?

And the line "Let it out and let it in" How does that relate to a kid struggling with a divorce?

And please, everyone listen to what paul says at 6:03 in the song. You don't have to turn it up all the way like someone said earlier in this forum. You can clearly hear it when he says "Take it Jude"

And if this song is about a divorce, does "Take it Jude" make any sense? No it doesn't.

I'm not saying Jude is not Julian. This song probably is for Julian, but Paul doesn't sound like he is helping him through a divorce, it sounds like he is telling Julian to take heroin.

I felt the need to correct the last comment made by jimfranklin, especially since it was the last entry.

Paul was not into heroin. His mother was a nurse so he stayed away from heroin for this reason, plus he hates needles. He only took soft drugs like pot.

This song was written for Julian, John Lennon's son, like the others said before jim franklin's entry. He wrote the song to comfort Julian during John's divorce from Cynthia, and changed it to Jude because it sounded better to say.
I felt the need to defend Paul and this song's meaning.

"For well you know that it’s a fool,
Who plays it cool,
By making his world a little colder."

does not mean "to let love out of your heart" This line also strongly indicates this song is indeed about heroin.

When you take heroin your body becomes very warm, and when you know that and listen to the line again it makes perfect sense:

For well you know that it's a fool, who plays it cool, by making his world a little colder

Its a fool who doesn't take heroin and makes his world colder.

And towards the end (at 6:03 on the 7:04 minute long version of the song) He clearly says "take it jude"

This song is clearly about trying to get someone to take heroin. Let's go over all of the indications one more time:

Remeber, to let her into your heart,
Then you can start to make it better. (let it into your bloodstream, and you can make it better and get a high)

The minute you let her under your skin,
Then you begin to make it better. (to let the heroin under your skin)

And anytime you feel the pain,
Hey Jude refrain, (when you have a bad trip, he is telling jude to refrain)

For well you know that it’s a fool,
Who plays it cool,
By making his world a little colder. (i explained this earlier)

Remember (Hey Jude) to let her into your heart,
Then you can start to make it better.

So let it out and let it in (when you take heroine you pull out the blood and then push it back in)

Hey Jude begin, (start taking heroin)

and the last line is...

Remember to let her under your skin,
Then you’ll begin to make it better.

and then he says "Take it Jude"

How can you deny that this song is not about heroin? Because Lenon said it wasn't? Do you think he would actually say that it is?

naaa naaa naaa na na na naaa take it juuude naaaa

"Hey Jude" is such an overwhelming song. To me this song really proofs that Lennon and McCartney are equal, song writing wise. "Hey Jude" is not only one of the best Beatles songs, it's one of the most beautiful songs EVER! I saw/Heard Paul in 2002 (the closest thing I'll ever get to experience The Beatles live) and when he performed this, I really felt that EVERYTHING in my life made sense. That’s a very powerful thing when that happens and the fact that a song can do that to you is one of my favourite things in the world.

My favourite lines are:

"For well you know that it’s a fool,
Who plays it cool,
By making his world a little colder."

(The lyrics posted on this page are actually incorrect.)

Those lines (and the entire song for that matter) are some of the wisest words I have ever heard! To me those lines means: If you let love out of your heart, if you let it go or you play it cool even if you like someone, you’re a fool. For anyone who does that makes his or her and the world a colder place to live in.
I know that that’s not exactly what it means in the song, but I guess you sometimes change the meaning of a lyric to identify with it. And a lot of times lyrics inspire you to think thoughts you haven’t thought before. And IMO The Beatles are masters at that!