John was a fan of authors Lewis Carrol (Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland and The Walrus and the Carpenter) and Edward Lear (The Owl and the Pussycat and A Book of Nonsense). Their nonsense verse and wordplay inspired his book, In His Own Write and many of his songs. As The Beatles popularity peaked in the mid-sixties, John grew frustrated with the over-analysis of their lyrics, which attributed unintended meanings to their songs. This inspired him to merge nonsense verse, snippets of nursery rhymes, and surreal sounds into his 1967 masterpiece "I Am the Walrus".
One morning, John awoke in London to the sound of a two-tone police siren. This repetitive “nee-naw, nee-naw” sound became the musical foundation of “I Am the Walrus”. Once you know it’s there, it’s hard to “unhear” it. With that simple foundation, John wove a cornucopia of dreamlike sounds into the song.
Obscure references created layers of potential meaning that John has left us to unravel. Hidden amongst all the nonsense lines are fragments of anti-establishment sentiment designed to engage and mock both the critics and those in power. He includes a sly reference to "Pilcher", the detective infamous for targeting rock stars with drug charges. John and George were both arrested by this same officer on drug charges, and both pled guilty to lesser charges. Pilcher was later convicted of planting evidence in other cases.
Blending his genius for wordplay and musical innovation, John finds the perfect sounds for his mysterious lyrics. His willingness to create deliberate nonsense unlocked doorways into a fantasy world where each listener could discover different meanings of the song depending on their perspective. This has given “I Am the Walrus” a timelessness that keeps it interesting and fun.
Today, I will pay attention to one seemingly nonsensical idea or random connection, exploring what unexpected wisdom it might contain.
What "irrational" intuition or creative impulse have you been dismissing that might actually point toward breakthrough insights? How could embracing confusion lead to discoveries that logic alone cannot reach?
