A new display that will include a bag of John Lennon's Blood Stained Clothes/Glasses

[Lovely2CU]

I can't imagine wanting to hold on to these items, let alone display them. I know people will want to see them, but I think its the height of tackiness.

A new John Lennon exhibition will include the clothes he was wearing on the night he was shot dead - still soaked in his dried blood.

The Lennon items are part of a new exhibit that launched today at the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame Annex.

His widow Yoko Ono received a paper bag containing the bloody clothes from the medical examiner in December 1980, when the former Beatle was gunned down in New York City aged 40.

The 76-year-old has left the clothes in the bag, and this is on display alongside Lennon's guitars, letters and other personal effects.

'It was hard to include,' Ono said. 'And I thought it might be criticised as well.'
Ultimately, Ono said, she thought it was important to let people see the effects of gun violence.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbi...-features-bloody-clothes-worn-night-shot.html

 

[Camicar]

Well, I was truly shocked when Yoko Ono used his blood-stained glasses on the cover of her first post-assassination album. I understand that everyone processes death and grief differently and I can also understand the rage that might lead one to want to SHOW everyone that his death was bloody and messy, so I really don't want to be judgmental, but at a certain point...

For me, she went to far with that album cover and I can't imagine what emotional good it does to hang on to such items and then display them. It seems prurient to display them. I know, I know that Lennon was not a modest person, but it seems to me that when in doubt, err on the side of protecting someone's privacy and how they died seems to me to be the ultimate in privacy.

I don't think I'm explaining this too well, but... I just am uncomfortable with this and not in "Uncomfortable but challenged" way. Just....oookey.

 

[Stitchfans]

I agree it is tacky. IMO somewhat disrespectful to John Lennon to. I'm sure he wouldn't want to be remembered by his bloody glasses and clothes.

 

[Robinrs]

gross ...

 

[laurie31]

Oh wow...that just seems so...I don't know. It seems like it violates his privacy. I wouldn't want to see those items.

I don't want to see JFK's bloody clothes either...

 

[jimmalru80]

It just seems uncalled for.

 

[LuvOrlando]

-

 

[Cool-Beans]

You might think it is tacky, but TONS of people will not and will go to see that.

The Rock Hall has a lot of trouble getting people to visit and that will surely help.

I don't have any desire to see them, but am not offended in any way.

 

[Evil Genius]

I don't have a problem with it. I can understand why she kept them. It was the last things her husband touched before he died. As for displaying them, well if she wants to remind everyone of what guns do to people everyday that's fine. I hope someone gets the message.

 

[moon]

Tacky? I think it's completely repugnant, exploitative and disrespectful.

But it doesn't surprise me from her (Yoko) I've never thought much of her, neither as person or an "artist".

 

[Carly_Roach]

After almost 30 years, John Lennon's clothing is no longer "soaked" in blood. Heck, after 30 days his clothing wasn't "soaked" in blood. I think that's a bit of overhyped drama that sells advertising to the masses but has very little actual bearing on reality.

If you were to see this exhibit, you'd actually be seeing blood stains - the same kind of blood stains that so many people find fascinating to see in old in Civil War museums. Nothing more, nothing less.

I have no opinion regarding Yoko Ono's decision to display this clothing other than if it helps a failing American museum keep it's doors open, then I'm all for it.

ETA: after reading the story, the exhibit is the bag filled with John Lennon's clothes. I don't believe blood is even visible. It could be a bag full of newspaper for all we know. Much ado about nothing, IMO.

 

[LuvOrlando]

-

 

[Handbag Lady]

I said no but only because tacky is too nice a word.

I can't stand Yoko Ono and I find her to be a talentless person as an artist.

 

[Micca]

They are historical artifacts, and if Yoko sees fit to display them, that's her decision. I wouldn't want to see them, not because it's gross, but it would make me very sad.

 

[browneyes106]

They are historical artifacts, and if Yoko sees fit to display them, that's her decision. I wouldn't want to see them, not because it's gross, but it would make me very sad.

I agree it is her decision but I wouldn't want to see that stuff either.

 

[TheZue]

I think this is disturbing.

But then again, hearing her rationalization for the display I can't help but realize it is disturbing in exactly the way she means it to be.

That's my thought on it as well. I voted before I read her reasoning. I think GENERALLY it's tacky to show death stuff...but here somebody went and did this to him on purpose for no real reason. Sometimes death is such a fuzzy concept, this brings it right into focus. It really was a tragic pointless death, but murders are. I do get her motivation here even if I don't totally agree.

I agree it is her decision but I wouldn't want to see that stuff either.

I wouldn't either. This is the problem I have, I think the people who would get her message about how nasty and messy gun violence is will have no desire to go see it. You are going to get the people who are morbid about this stuff.

Interesting thought about the memorials for the Holocaust...it's hard to think where the line between memorial for injustice and the macabre sits...but I think this and many celebrity death artifacts are sitting right on that line.

 

[BabyPiglet]

I find that disturbing and sad.