Joseph wrote to zorn: JZ> Why is it go terribly important to others that he go to his grave JZ> with this issue unresolved? Could it possibly be more important that JZ> remote people get a sense of comfort from the mantra JZ> "Lennon/McCartney"? I think it's important to people because it functioned as some kind of statement at the time: that nobody creates in a vacuum, that collaborators are always collaborating, even when they're doing something "under their own steam". That's a larger statement than just "who should get the royalties", it's a statement about community; and it's a statement that resonates with what a large number of people who were around in the sixties considered the sixties to be "about". (And yeah, it's a statement like a marriage, and remember that it was Paul who described the breakup as a divorce.) So I think it looks, from out here, like a final disavowal of principle. Especially since he's waited until twenty years after the person he made the agreement with died to renege on it, just to make sure he's dead enough not to argue. -- Jim Flannery newgrange@talmanassociates.com When you can't give anything, you can also receive nothing. Through giving, you also receive. You can never stop giving. When you have nothing more to give, you're dead. -- Mustafa Tettey Addy np: Fugazi, _The Argument_ nr: Harry Mathews, _The Journalist_