#september 1963

[vintagegoddesses3]

[chicinsilk]

Chanel F/W 1962-63

(top) Model posing in a Chanel black and white herringbone coat with red lining, matching skirt and red bow blouse. (below) Model posing in a Chanel coat and matching skirt in misty brown tweed with brown piping, over an orange blouse. London September 1962.

(top) Modèle posant dans d'un manteau à chevrons noir et blanc Chanel avec doublure rouge, d'une jupe assortie et d'un chemisier à nœud rouge. (dessous) Modèle posant dans un manteau Chanel et d'une jupe assortie en tweed marron brumeux avec passepoil marron, sur un chemisier orange. Londres septembre 1962.

(Photo de Popperfoto via Getty Images)

[delightfullyatomicfest]

Ok but in 1963 why did John and Paul think they think they met at the fete in 1955?? This is consistent in their early 60s interviews, and in the intro to John’s book Paul writes that he was 12 when they met, for which June 1955 fits.

The accepted date they met is July 1957. That's two years wrong. It’s not like John and Paul didn’t both have the deaths of their mothers in 1956/1958 as a marker of time during this period.

I know Paul says he’s rubbish with remembering when things happened but this one is so ridiculous! I’d understand them not knowing, but it’s the specifically giving the wrong date that gets me.

Did they think it sounded better that they met when they were younger? Get mixed up with when Paul met George? Get mixed up about whether it was Paul or John who was 14(ish) when they met? Or was their maths so bad they were trying to subtract 6 from 1963 and that’s what they got???

But I suppose the real point of this is that these two cannot be trusted about when things happened. They were wrong about literally day one.

[vintagegoddesses3]

[vintagegoddesses3]

[vintagegoddesses3]

[vintagegoddesses3]

[vintagegoddesses3]