54 pages • 1-hour read
Ian LeslieA modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.
Content Warning: This section of the guide includes references to sexual relationships, gun violences, and themes of death, loss, and grief.
In 1970, Paul sought formal, legal dissolution of the Beatles. He cited his frustrations with management and inability to work independently as the reason for the breakup. Meanwhile, he began auditioning new musicians and recording his album Ram. Around this time, John gave a cutting interview for Rolling Stone where he aired his frustrations with Paul. Linda wrote John a letter in Paul’s defense, which riled John. He and Yoko wrote back, expressing more frustrations. Soon after, Ram was released. It did well, but John publicly scoffed at the project. He then wrote and released “How Do You Sleep?,” which Leslie holds overtly insulted Paul’s character and musical abilities.
John and Paul’s conflicts continued throughout 1970 and 1971. They were in constant musical competition and scorned one another’s lifestyles. However, in “Dear Friend,” Paul responded to “How Do You Sleep?” in a subdued manner. Leslie claims that it’s evidence of Paul’s attempts to smooth out their relationship and exemplifies Paul’s complicated emotions over the Beatles’ breakup.
After Ram, Paul began working on Wild Life and started doing public gigs for the first time in years. He also publicly responded to “How Do You Sleep?” in interviews, dismissing it as silly. John and Paul continued communicating via vitriolic letters. Paul wanted John, George, and Ringo to meet up without anyone else and formally sign the paperwork to dissolve the Beatles; this upset John. However, his tone soon shifted after a phone call with Paul. The two became friends again, if hesitantly. In 1971, John released “Jealous Guy,” which more overtly admitted his jealousy over Paul’s success and expressed remorse. Leslie argues that John’s whistling in the song is a gesture to his and Paul’s friendship.
In 1973, John and Yoko moved into the Dakota apartment building on New York’s Upper West Side. While John was out one day, Yoko had a private conversation with their assistant May Pang. She opened up about her and John’s relationship conflicts and asked May to have an affair with John, an arrangement Yoko and John had discussed beforehand. May was upset and initially refused John’s advances, but soon agreed to let him live with her. They began a full-fledged affair. Yoko then spent a protracted stint in California but kept in constant contact with John.
Meanwhile, Paul was starting his new group, Wings, with Linda, a project that Leslie holds was fueled by his and John’s ongoing competition. Leslie analyzes Paul’s songs from the time, citing them as evidence of Paul’s attempt to process his and John’s relationship.
During a trip to Los Angeles in 1974, Paul and Linda reconnected with Yoko. Yoko opened up to Paul about her and John’s relationship challenges. She now wanted to get back together with John but needed Paul’s help. Leslie speculates that Paul agreed to confront John about the matter because he believed Yoko was good for John and wanted Yoko’s support in working with John again. In addition, Leslie deems John and Paul’s conversation about Yoko as “a real-life ‘She Loves You,’” as the song’s contents mirror this triangular dynamic (358). Soon after, John and Yoko started to make their way back to each other.
The Beatles finally agreed to meet and formally dissolve the Beatles. However, John didn’t show up because Yoko said the stars weren’t aligned. However, he did soon sign the paperwork. Around this time, John appeared at Madison Square Garden, where he performed one of Paul’s songs as a tribute to his friend.
John gradually broke up with May and renewed his relationship with Yoko. However, he did take May’s advice and tried to reestablish his relationship with Julian. Meanwhile, he devoted time to Sean. He wanted to continue making music but never fully returned to it. He and Yoko maintained their public image. The two had been involved in activist work and were often photographed in bed together. Meanwhile, Paul and John continued talking on the phone. However, these dialogues grew increasingly frustrating for Paul, as John often became volatile. In the meantime, Paul tried to transition his work with Wings to keep up with industry and cultural changes. When he wrote “Coming Up,” it thrilled John, who saw it as a testament to their relationship.
John took a sailing expedition to Bermuda but cut the trip short and sailed home in a violent storm. Rather than destabilizing him, the trip seemed to renew his verve for life. In the subsequent months, he became more generous in interviews regarding his relationships with Paul and the Beatles. In addition, he was working on a new album with Yoko called Double Fantasy (which Leslie believes was inspired by his sailing trip). Leslie analyzes the song “(Just Like) Starting Over” and guesses at its relevance to John and Paul’s relationship and John’s hopeful state of mind. Just after recording it one night, he and Yoko headed back to the Dakota. Yoko was walking ahead of John when he was shot four times in the back and killed.
Paul learned about John’s death from George Martin, who was working with John again at the time. To cope, Paul immediately turned to work, spending hours in the studio. It was after this session that the media badgered Paul about John’s death, and he responded in a seemingly cold manner.
John’s death was immediately met with global displays of public grief. Soon, theories spread that John was the real talent and vision behind the Beatles. However, Paul has held that the media’s representations of John after his death weren’t really John. Leslie references the songs Paul wrote in the aftermath of John’s murder, analyzing their meeting and deeming them expressions of Paul’s grief. In addition, he references interviews Paul gave then that capture his deep sorrow.
Leslie reflects on John and Paul’s distinct relationship. He argues that no one has fully understood their connection because contemporary culture doesn’t have the language to express the beauty of male friendship. As examples of such intimacy, he references Plato’s Symposium and the kinship between 16th-century French philosophers Étienne de La Boétie and Michel de Montaigne (who wrote that he and Boétie had a soul connection). Leslie holds that this is true of John and Paul too.
The final chapters of John & Paul act as a lyrical elegy to Lennon and McCartney’s distinct personal and artistic relationship. As is true of the entire text, Leslie doesn’t withhold the messier facets of Lennon and McCartney’s history. Instead, he incorporates these conflicts into his biographical documentation to capture the nuance and scope of the figures’ unparalleled bond. Leslie’s attention to songs, feuds, and incidents—including the friends’ tense letters and phone calls, insulting interviews, and emotional musical odes to each other—reiterates The Complexity of Creative Partnerships. Furthermore, Leslie’s inclusion of these conflicts seeks to correct previous media representations of Lennon and McCartney’s relationship. Indeed, Leslie holds that while the media “would be reporting on this huge Lennon and McCartney feud,” the two would “be yukking it up, and laughing for over an hour at a time” like “they were best friends” (353). Leslie thus acknowledges that Lennon and McCartney had difficulties (due to their complex and protracted history) but that the heart of their relationship wasn’t anger or contempt—it was love.
Leslie’s authorial tone shifts in the final chapters, affecting a reflective mood. This tonal change is particularly noticeable in the last chapter as Leslie concludes the biography:
There are several reasons why we get Lennon and McCartney so wrong, but one is that we have trouble thinking about intimate male friendships. We’re used to the idea of men being good friends, or fierce competitors, or sometimes both. We’re used to the idea, these days, of homosexual love. We’re thrown by a relationship that isn’t sexual but is romantic: a friendship that may have an erotic or physical component to it, but doesn’t involve sex (387).
Leslie uses the first-person plural point of view in this passage to widen his overarching discussion. He is no longer simply cataloging events from Lennon and McCartney’s lives but musing on the significance of these events to contemporary culture’s understanding of the duo. Additionally, this passage suggests that global, historical, and cultural depictions of Lennon and McCartney’s story misrepresented their relationship to generations of individuals. Leslie hopes to revise these misrepresentations and to honor the duo’s more nuanced, multifaceted, and pure dynamic.
Lennon and McCartney were indeed remarkable creative partners whose connection was playful, soulful, loving, and profound enough to survive the intense pressures and complexities of their celebrity. They fought for it, and, according to Leslie, this story is in their body of work. Leslie closes John & Paul by remarking on their relationship as individuals. His use of language evokes the lyrical and emotional tenor of their music, thus acting as a tribute to their uncategorizable connection.
At the start of the text, Leslie poses a question that originates from the historically held notion that Lennon and McCartney had a falling-out and their relationship was never the same: “Whatever happened to John and Paul” (5)? However, by Chapter 43, Leslie has proven that they never stopped caring about each other and their friendship. His writing and research instead uncovered a more complex question and answer: What made Lennon and McCartney’s relationship so special? The answer he lands upon is, “Because it was John; because it was Paul” (388). Although ambiguous, this closing line captures the innate mystery and ineffability of Lennon and McCartney’s dynamic and suggests that no one can fully encapsulate their relationship because of its authenticity.



Unlock all 54 pages of this Study Guide
Get in-depth, chapter-by-chapter summaries and analysis from our literary experts.