Macca on the Columbus Incident

johnfoyle · Post by **johnfoyle** » Fri Jun 24, 2005 12:08 pm

PoP posts to listserv -

I was just doing a little Beatles research and I came
across this McCartney interview from 1982 where he
mentions the "Columbus incident" and offers an
alternate interpretion:

http://www.geocities.com/~beatleboy1/dbpm482.int.html

This is the relevant part:

-------------------

"Q: 'Do you think you make life hell for people who
are close to you, work for you?'

PAUL: 'I don't know. You'd have to ask them. I hope
not. If I do, I wouldn't know what to do about it. I
mean I would assume that they would have to tell me
that. It doesn't appear that I'm difficult. As far as
I'm concerned, I can say, 'No. I'm terrific.' I'm
saying that as a joke, you see. Just so everyone gets
the inflection. This is how I get misquoted a lot.
It's like Elvis Costello's thing in America where he
was shouting all that black stuff about Ray Charles. I
was working on with Michael Jackson and Elvis Costello
was in the same building. Michael said, 'that stuff
was big trouble. They still won't forgive him for
that.' They (Americans) totally misread it. From what
I understand, Elvis was doing this typically British
kind of humor-- if someone says, 'Do you love me?' you
answer, 'You? I wouldn't love you!' which means 'Yes,
of course I do!' They do this bluff-double bluff
thing. When someone in a bar said, 'Do you English
guys like Ray Charles,' he (Elvis) shouted, 'No, he's
just some silly nigger.' But what he really meant,
'Yes, I love Ray Charles. Why even ask me?' So he got
misinterpreted, and apparently, if Quincy Jones ever
catches up with Elvis, he's gonna bop him. But that's
what happens in the media, and I think that relates to
what we were saying before. That's Elvis Costello's
cross to bear. Now he's branded a racist, which isn't
true. My image is like a carboard cutout, which I'm
not really. I don't think I am anyway. My kids don't
think I am. I don't think I am. Am I being cardboard
now? I mean, I can't ever tell.' "

Mr. Average · Post by **Mr. Average** » Fri Jun 24, 2005 1:53 pm

The notion of Elvis Costello as a racist is absurd on so many levels. The notion that Elvis Costello drank excessively during this period is a matter of record, most of which has been recorded by EC himself. The notion that, somehow, Elvis actually believed that Ray was a silly anything is beyond niave...it's ignorant.

A 100 millisecond look at his recording history, covers, and allegiances proves it. Actions speak louder than words, by more than just a fraction.

so lacklustre · Post by **so lacklustre** » Fri Jun 24, 2005 2:57 pm

The thing is that Costello was being ironic, he was just 'misunderstood'.

Extreme Honey · Post by **Extreme Honey** » Fri Jun 24, 2005 3:25 pm

The Coloumbus incident is just one example of the american media's stupidity and power. If EC is still regarded as a racist amongst people in america, I don't know, but if so, Imagine what it could do to anybody else? The only hero of this story is Ray Charles, who actually forgave Elvis admist the waves of false information circling America at the time.

Mr. Average · Post by **Mr. Average** » Fri Jun 24, 2005 5:42 pm

Again: behavior and actions speak much louder than words. By the account that I have read, Elvis was speaking with someone (help?) when Ray Charles approached the someone and engaged in a conversation. Ray was fully aware that Elvis was there, and Elvis was fully aware (of course) who Ray Charles was and that, for the first time since the incedent, he was in a position to issue an apology. Elvis, by his account, turned feebly away, understanding that there were no combinations of words that could ever be offered up that could properly characterized the entirety of the situation. He had a chance, but a strange collision of embarrassment, the sense that maybe an apology was in order, against the competing sense that maybe an apology was an admission to quilt that he was not deserving, etc., rendered him speechless. Can't recall if he regrets not saying anything, but I do understand the 'freeze'...when there are no words that can be assembled to do justice to the situation, and putting closure to it.

I may have really butchered this accounting of history, so I stand ready to be corrected. However, the overall gist of the post is solid, I think.

anjabro · Post by **anjabro** » Sat Jun 25, 2005 1:13 am

I'd never thought of it as a 'Bluff/ double bluff' thing before....I always thought it sounded like he was trying to start a fight with some dickheads...

whar · Post by **whar** » Sat Jun 25, 2005 1:27 am

so lacklustre wrote:The thing is that Costello was being ironic, he was just 'misunderstood'.

Reminds me of somebody...

bobster · Post by **bobster** » Wed Jun 29, 2005 8:02 pm

I'm not sure about the "double-bluff" business -- EC certainly seems more contrite than that even today (when he admitted to being afraid to approach Mr. Charles, who had long ago accepted his apology...and he did apologize right away). Or maybe he just realizes the pointlessness of trying to make that explanation in the American context where it's likely to be interpreted as the lamest of excuses. We Yanks can be exceedingly literal minded in any case.