In My Life

First of all, I'd like to say that I don't truly think anyone's really given this particular song a justified response, as to what the song is actually supposed to mean. Sure, some people give very surface-level statements about what it means, but nothing deep -- and it's a deep song, as Lennon said. Most of the comments involve the poster's life, and how the song has affected them, rather than what the song actually means. Hence, I'd like to actually put some attention in the song, where it belongs.

In its entirety, the song is basically written to someone beloved to the songwriter. The speaker is expressing their love for someone special. This is indicated by the line "In my life I love you more." Although, rather than simply saying, "I love you," the writer decides to compare their newfound love to everything they've known to love and cherish their entire life. This is indicated by the lines, "And these memories lose their meaning/ /When I think of love as something new." Hence, the writer is saying, "Compared to even the most cherished of all of my life's memories, I love you more."

Hence, the song isn't necessarily about reminiscing or nostalgia. Instead, it's more about expressing one's love for someone, by comparing them to the past. "You're greater than my most cherished and fond memories." Although, in doing so, the writer must express how great and cherished these memories actually are. Hence, there is a sense of nostalgia and reminiscing, in order to express the depth of this love and appreciation for the past. And so, by showing how deeply in love he/she is with their past, the writer is truly saying miles, by comparing their love to these feelings. They are, in essence, saying that they respect and appreciate their past indefinitely, but that even those memories cannot surpass the love he/she now feels for this new special person. And so, they express the immensity and seriousness of their love for that person.

Although, the average person will only really relate to the nostalgia and reminiscing, so that the song isn't really cherished as a love song. Instead, oddly, it's cherished as a looking-back song. A song of memory. A song of reflecting on the past. And it's odd how the chord structure of the music, and every selected note, seems to get across a sad, somber feeling, rather than some excitement and seriousness of an expression of love. Instead of a love song, it comes across more as a melancholy perspective of the past; a deep, sad look at all of the memories of one's life.

And personally, I think the beat is too Beatlesque. In other words, it's too poppy. Too upbeat. Too rock and roll. John Lennon's later music was very serious and deep -- expressing worlds of emotion, as he had matured as an independent songwriter/musician. I think it's sad that John Lennon didn't re-record this particular song in his later years. It was truly one of his all-time best songs, along with Imagine. And also, I feel the same way about Help. I think Help should have been re-recorded, along with Strawberry Fields Forever. While Strawberry is simply odd-sounding, and could've been orchestrated better, Help suffers from the same problems as In My Life: the beat is too poppy, too upbeat, too Beatlesque. The odd thing is, these aren't Beatle songs; their Lennon songs. One can sense Lennon's particular style all over these songs. The very lyrics are philosophically deep and moving -- full of meaning and emotion, whereas most Beatle songs are simply catchy, without the extra sense of meaning, for which Lennon was no doubt talented.

I think McCartney's Yesterday was a good example of how these Lennon songs should've been recorded. Solo piano, or solo guitar, without the rest of the band, and without the drums. Lennon's songs were simply too bare and special to involve the rest of the Beatles. He should have recorded In My Life, Help, and Strawberry Fields Forever in a very personal, solo manner. I think the songs are now left in a form which isn't truly genuine to Lennon. I feel they are songs suck in the past, in a form Lennon could have done away with. I feel Lennon's true mature song writing style would've naturally brought out the true depth and scope of these earlier songs. And now they're simply stuck in a two-dimensional Beatlesque box of pop garbage. But I still think they are decent, even if they aren't exactly entirely Lennonesque. Lennon's spirit still lies within the music -- one just has to overlook all of that Beatly nonsense to hear it!

Cheers.