Wild at heart: Finch Hattons offers unforgettable luxury safari adventures in Kenya
At Finch Hattons Safari Camp in Kenya, a tower of preening giraffes might strike a pose next to your Land Cruiser.
Or a parched elephant could set a thirst trap by drinking in a private plunge pool.
14 The gorgeously decorated luxury Family Suites have elevated viewing decks overlooking the hippo pools.
Virgin Limited Edition
A stay at the property, part of Sir Richard Branson's Virgin Limited Edition portfolio, promises countless photo ops, from rhinos and crocodiles wallowing in natural springs to an Oxpecker catching a ride on a zebra's back. It's an out-of-this world experience.
Set in Tsavo West National Park about 150 miles west of Nairobi, the camp is named after British aristocrat, aviator and hunter-turned-anti-poacher Denys George Finch-Hatton, best known as the lover of Karen Blixen in her memoir, 'Out of Africa.' The handsome adventurer, who died tragically in a 1931 plane crash, was played by Robert Redford in the Oscar-winning movie of the same name.
The famed property, established more than 30 years ago, is every bit as swoon-worthy as its namesake hero. There are 14 luxury tented suites, each beautifully appointed with a private deck, antique rugs, an Old-World writing desk, bronze soaker bathtub, king-sized bed and complimentary maxi bar. And to be clear, apart from their mosquito-proof netted walls, these sumptuous villas bear no resemblance to camping tents.
Two spacious two-bedroom suites accommodate families while the deluxe Finch Hattons Suite comes with a heated plunge pool as well as a dedicated butler, game-drive vehicle and guide. It's the perfect romantic hideaway for honeymooners and VIPs.
14 The Finch Hattons Suite has a private heated plunge pool as well as a dedicated butler, game-drive vehicle and guide.
Virgin Limited Edition
14 All 17 tented suites have roofs made of sustainably harvested makuti palm leaves.
Virgin Limited Edition
Days start early, as animals are most active before first light and the temperature is cooler before first light. After coffee, tea and freshly squeezed fruit juice at the pavilion, vehicles depart promptly at 6 a.m. on morning game drives. A chef-cooked breakfast is served al fresco on the savannah or back at the camp.
Finch's team of incredibly knowledgeable Maasai guides are expert at spotting wildlife, from the mythic Big Five – lion, leopard, elephant, African buffalo and rhinoceros – to hundreds of bird species. Also roving are the Ugly Five: the spotted hyena, wildebeest, vulture, marabou stork and the hideous warthog.
While there is no guarantee of a big cat sighting on any safari, rangers do their utmost to locate apex predators. Guests are assured of seeing Tsavo's famous soil-stained 'red elephants,' buffalo, giraffes and zebra, which parade on the plains. One thing visitors will likely not encounter: another 4×4. There are fewer lodges and tourists in Tsavo than, say, the Maasai Mara, so you will likely have the bush to yourself.
14 Tsavo's famous 'red elephants,' named for the ruddy soil that stains their hide, entertain visitors on game drives.
Virgin Limited Edition
14 Giraffes are often seen ambling the bush and pruning the trees.
Virgin Limited Edition
14 Finch Hattons partners with the Kenya Wildlife Service, Amara Conservation and the Tsavo Trust, among other organizations, to conserve Kenya's wildlife and its habitats.
Virgin Limited Edition
Our ranger, Matthew, taught us about animal behaviors, identified tracks and bird calls (like the ring-necked dove's trill, which sounds like a cell phone) and also shared information about Maasai traditions and his village. He was very funny, quipping for instance that a strutting male baboon was 'acting like a branch manager,' so his passengers were always laughing.
It's worth getting up the middle of the night for the 4:30 a.m. drive and hike up the Chyulu Hills, with breakfast on the crest. As the day dawns, the sky is streaked fiery orange and pink, and Mt. Kilimanjaro stands majestic in the distance. A nature walk in the cloud forest with its sacred Mugumo tree swings, formed naturally by the aerial roots, concludes the unforgettable outing.
14 As the sun rises atop Chyulu Hills, the panoramic views are spectacular.
Virgin Limited Edition
14 After an afternoon expedition, 'sundowner' cocktails and canapés are served.
Virgin Limited Edition
Afternoon game drives might also include a trip to the Shetani lava flow, a dark and jagged landscape that stretches five miles, followed by sundowners and the Maasai Olympics on the savannah. The staff taught guests to spear-throw, play 'bush basketball' with a rungu club and shoot arrows at a target. It was a magical evening.
Another highlight was a visit to a nearby Maasai village where guests were invited to enter a traditional manyatta house made of wood, mud, cow dung and ash. A brief torrential rainstorm made the visit even more memorable, as everyone sheltered together under umbrellas and tarps. While it's not necessary to bring money, guests might wish to make a donation to the village or buy the traditional handmade beaded and metal crafts.
When not on game drives or lounging at the acacia-fringed pool, guests can book body and face treatments and massages at Chyulu Spa, the largest holistic wellness center in the East African bush. The soothing space features two treatment rooms, a hammam and a gym, while yoga classes are offered on an outdoor deck overlooking the facility's infinity pool.
14 Guests can relax at the infinity pool between game drives and hikes.
Virgin Limited Edition
14 Chyulu Spa has an infinity pool, two treatment rooms, a yoga deck, hammam, gym and relaxation area.
Virgin Limited Edition
14 An elegant outdoor pavilion with a thatched roof is where most meals are served.
Virgin Limited Edition
The superb farm-to-fork restaurant is better than many New York hotspots. Executive chef Sudi Baha helms the kitchen, which makes everything on site, from the bread to the ice cream. Lunch and dinner start with a delicious soup, often prepared with vegetables and herbs from the organic garden, followed by a choice of entrées and desserts. Guests looked forward to every meal.
In the evening, patrons might sip a gin and tonic (mixed with Nairobi's award-winning Procero Blue Dot gin and a pinch of its flavor-enhancing botanical salts) in the Karen Blixen Lounge. Or they could watch 'Out of Africa' on a movie screen under the stars.
14 Step back in time at the Karen Blixen Lounge, decorated with antiques and artifacts.
Virgin Limited Edition
14 Guests can sip cocktails or watch 'Out of Africa' on an outdoor movie screen in the boma area.
Virgin Limited Edition
When it's time to call it a night, a flashlight-toting guard or two will escort guests to their rooms, listening and watching carefully for wildlife.
After all, animals roam free, just as nature intended.
Rooms from $990 per person per night during low season and $1,450 per person per night during high season. Rates include all meals and a selection of drinks, return Finch Hattons airstrip transfers, park fees and scheduled activities including game drives and local excursions. To get to the property, guests fly to Nairobi, then take a charter or scheduled plane to the property's airstrip.
14 Daybreak at the Finch Hattons Suite viewing deck.
Virgin Limited Edition
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsweek
9 minutes ago
- Newsweek
John Cena Gives A Blunt Answer About Running For President
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. John Cena has made it clear that he has no plans to run for president of the United States. He gave a definitive answer when asked about a potential political career. The topic has come up as Cena plays the president in his new movie, Heads Of State. The idea of wrestlers running for office has been floated before with stars like The Rock. John Cena On A Presidential Run In a new interview with On Demand Entertainment, Cena was asked about possibly running for president. He quickly ruled out the idea. His response was brief and to the point. When presented with the idea, Cena simply said, "Not a chance." This firm answer separates Cena from other performers who have flirted with the idea of a political future. While a handful of professional wrestlers have successfully transitioned into the world of politics, the path is not a common one. The most prominent success story is Jesse "The Body" Ventura, who was elected Governor of Minnesota in 1998, serving one full term. HOLLYWOOD, CALIFORNIA - AUGUST 13: John Cena attends the Los Angeles Premiere of Amazon MGM Studios "Jackpot" at TCL Chinese Theatre on August 13, 2024 in Hollywood, California. HOLLYWOOD, CALIFORNIA - AUGUST 13: John Cena attends the Los Angeles Premiere of Amazon MGM Studios "Jackpot" at TCL Chinese Theatre on August 13, 2024 in Hollywood, California. Axelle/Bauer-Griffin/FilmMagic/Getty Images More news: WWE News: Steve Austin Reveals Real-Life Vince McMahon Confrontation More recently, Glenn "Kane" Jacobs has served as the Mayor of Knox County, Tennessee, since his election in 2018, proving that a major wrestling character can hold public office. Others have tried, with former WWE CEO Linda McMahon making two expensive but unsuccessful runs for a U.S. Senate seat before serving as the Administrator of the Small Business Administration. While Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson has been the subject of serious polling and discussion for a potential presidential run, he has never officially entered a race. Cena stars alongside Idris Elba and Priyanka Chopra Jonas in the action-comedy Heads of State, which premiered on Amazon Prime Video on July 2, 2025. The film, directed by Nobody's Ilya Naishuller, features a plot reminiscent of classic buddy-action movies. Cena plays Will Derringer, a former action movie star who has become the President of the United States. He and the British Prime Minister, Sam Clarke (Elba), have a public rivalry but are forced to go on the run together after a conspiracy leaves them stranded and hunted. They must rely on each other and a brilliant MI6 agent (Chopra Jonas) to survive and unravel a plot that threatens the entire world. The movie blends high-octane action with the comedic chemistry between the two leads. More WWE News: For more on WWE, head to Newsweek Sports.
Elle
an hour ago
- Elle
The Princess Of Wales Just Rewore The Perfect Blazer For The Changeable British Summer - And It's On Sale
Catherine The Princess of Wales today made a special visit to a wellbeing garden at Colchester Hospital - and while meeting patrons and patients also managed to look perfectly chic in wearing a favourite blazer that's perfect for the changing British summer. While yesterday a visit to the Essex hospital may have meant battling sweltering heat in a summer dress, the cooling weather saw Catherine choose a Blazé Milano blazer she's worn at least twice publicly, pairing it with a pin-striped shirt and brown trousers, and her favourite white Veja trainers. While the princess has worn the blazer - perfect for smartening up any outfit, but also keeping off any unexpected chill UK weather might throw at us - twice publicly, it is still available, an on sale. She has worn is in 2023 at a Royal Air Force Tattoo visit and in a portrait at home in an image released in June 2024 giving an update on her health. Catherine today visited the RHS Wellbeing Garden as 50 Catherine's Rose plants were donated to the site. The roses were named after the princess by the RHS and finds from the sales go to the Royal Marsden Cancer Charity. She even planted one. The Daily Mail reports that Princess Catherine - still known to many as Kate Middleton - also visited the hospitals cancer wellbeing centre, meeting patients, volunteers and staff. Speaking about her recovery from cancer, the Princess reportedly said finding a new normal was 'a rollercoaster' adding: 'You're not able to function normally at home as you once used to.' She added, say The Daily Mail: 'You put on a sort of brave face, stoicism through treatment, treatment's done, then it's like "I can crack on, get back to normal' but actually the phase afterwards is really, really difficult.' 'You're not necessarily under the clinical team any longer but you're not able to function normally at home as you perhaps once used to. And actually someone to help talk you through that, show you and guide you through that sort of phase that comes after treatment I think is really valuable. 'But it's life-changing for anyone, through first diagnosis or post treatment, both for the patient but also for the families as well. And actually it sometimes goes unrecognised, you don't necessarily, particularly when it's the first time, appreciate how much impact it is going to have. 'You have to find your new normal and that takes time... and it's a rollercoaster, it's not smooth, like you expect it to be. But the reality is you go through hard times. And to have a place like this, to have the support network, through creativity and singing or gardening whatever it might be is so valuable and it's great this community has it.' ELLE Collective is a new community of fashion, beauty and culture lovers. For access to exclusive content, events, inspiring advice from our Editors and industry experts, as well the opportunity to meet designers, thought-leaders and stylists, become a member today HERE.
Forbes
an hour ago
- Forbes
Book Review: Ian Leslie's Essential Beatles Analysis: 'John & Paul'
Members of the British rock band The Beatles, Paul McCartney (left) and John Lennon (1940 - 1980), ... More sing into a microphone as they play their instruments at the taping of a segment for 'Toast of the Town,' the CBS variety program hosted by Ed Sullivan, New York, August 14, 1965. The segment aired as part of Sullivan's 19th season opener on September 12, 1965. (Photo by CBS) "You know, people think that because I'm Mike Nichols, I don't need praise. I need a lot. Nobody gets that." The previous quote comes from Mark Harris's excellent 2020 biography (review here) of - you guessed it - Mike Nichols. To read about the polymath was to marvel at how much he was venerated by the best and seemingly brightest. As no less than Oprah Winfrey once said, Nichols was the individual that everyone wanted to be seated next to at dinner parties dense with people whom every would want to be seated next to. Apparently, Nichols had that certain something. Which perhaps requires a re-read of the quote that begins what is a review of Ian Leslie's excellent new book about John Lennon and Paul McCartney, John & Paul: A Love Story In Songs. Nichols, despite broad worship for him by the brightest of bright people from entertainment, business, politics, and the arts, still needed praise. Which means a lack of praise was arguably worse than a bad review for him. Think about it. Nichols's insecurities came to mind while reading Leslie's analysis of Lennon and McCartney. Really, who could praise or pan two of the greatest songwriters of all time? With everyone essentially looking up to the duoe in a musical sense (perhaps Bob Dylan didn't, maybe Brian Wilson?), it's easy to wonder where they went in search of sustenance. This is surely a way of trying to understand Lennon and McCartney's friendship. Though the best of friends, they were also very competitive with each other. How could they not have been? You don't achieve at the level they did with the Beatles (and beyond) if not. But if you're at the top together, realistically you only have each other in the meaningful compliments sense. There's a focus on praise because a third of the way through John & Paul, Leslie writes that 'McCartney has often complained that Lennon rarely complimented him on a song, but he doesn't mention any examples of him complimenting his partner, and there are no credible third-party accounts of his doing so.' Describing their friendship, Leslie makes a case that 'it was a romance [figuratively]: passionate, tender, and tempestuous, full of longing, riven by jealousy.' Which is interesting, or not. Though best of friends, the greatest of great songwriters generally couldn't bring themselves to say nice things about one another's work. Well, of course not. If capable of complimenting each other, logic suggests they wouldn't have been the best songwriters. McCartney famously referenced Brian Wilson's 'God Only Knows' as one of the greatest songs of all time, but not one of Lennon's? And why didn't Lennon praise McCartney to the skies? Again, and no matter how good of friends, greatest can't praise greatest when they're the greatest at the same thing. Throwing bones to lessers is easier, by many miles. The anecdote about McCartney's complaint stuck with me throughout the reading of the book. Would their friendship have been much better if they could have let their guard down a little about the other's immense talent, or is the anecdote a waste of time? As in, was all their great work together an implied compliment? Enough philosophizing, at least for now. Leslie has once again written an excellent book. It's about how 'two young men merged their souls and multiplied their talents to create one of the greatest bodies of music in history.' Really, does anyone compare to the Beatles? No doubt some will list other prominent names like Dylan to perhaps avoid sounding common, but the next time someone does that quickly ask them if they can name ten or even five Dylan songs. With the Beatles it's easy. Memory says McCartney listed Lennon's 'Beautiful Boy' as one of his 'desert island' songs on BBC's Desert Island Discs (unknown is if he listed it while Lennon was still alive), but if you can only take one band's music catalogue with you to a desert island, are you really choosing Dylan or the Beach Boys over the Beatles? Notable about the Beatles' music alone, Leslie reports that Lennon and McCartney accounted for 159 out of 184 songs. Prolific doesn't do them justice. They were always writing, and making music. In John & Paul, 'each chapter is anchored in a song that tells us something about the state of their relationship at the time.' About what each song is said to tell, here readers will probably read different books. That's because Leslie perhaps finds meaning where others might not. By this, there's lots of philosophizing in the book that may bother readers who are there for the music. Examples include Lennon's upbringing. He was largely raised by a relatively cultured and surface prosperous aunt and uncle since his father was off at sea and his mother (hit by a car and killed when Lennon was in his teens) was mostly too young to be a mother, and at one point Leslie speculates that Lennon wanted McCartney 'to come and be an orphan with him.' About the classic songs Lennon's mother taught him, Leslie suggests that Lennon 'seemed to associate them' with 'the vulnerability of childhood.' Later in the book, and trying to explain the struggles for John and Paul in being apart, Leslie writes that 'when John wasn't being looked at by Paul, he didn't know who he was supposed to be.' The trips to the proverbial psychiatrist didn't ring true to this reader, but they'll surely enliven an already interesting book for others. Whether or not Lennon or McCartney would buy Leslie's analysis is of course unknowable, and more important, likely won't matter to most readers. Of greater interest will likely be just how well they worked together. They were Adam Smith's pin factory, musical edition. When together, and they were together a lot in the early years, the song ideas came fast and furious. They plainly inspired each other, while at the same improving one another. Politicians imagine jobs and work as one taking from another, but Lennon and McCartney remind us that people are additive, and when they work together 1+1 frequently equals much more than 2. This was certainly true with Lennon and McCartney. Leslie indicates that John's song 'ideas were platforms for the creativity of the group,' while 'McCartney's ideas tended to be more fully formed.' The more fully formed nature of McCartney's songs revealed itself early on with Yesterday. While all other Beatles music up until then had collaborative qualities, the band came close to not releasing Yesterday as a Beatles song. It was a McCartney creation right down to the instruments, but he and Lennon had agreed early on that all their music would be by them both. Funny about Yesterday was that in McCartney's recollection, 'we all regarded it as filler on the Help! album.' The filler wound up reaching #1 in the U.S. As they say, no one knows anything. Not only did the Beatles have no clue about Yesterday's eventual popularity, record companies in England didn't initially grasp the Beatles. Leslie notes that Decca Records chose Brian Poole and the Tremeloes over the Beatles, while Columbia and HMV turned manager Brian Epstein down too. Finding the Beatles a record contract proved 'soul-sapping work' for Epstein. Yet, while Yesterday was an unexpected hit, when the Beatles recorded "Please Please Me," producer George Martin quite simply knew. On the studio's intercom, he said 'Gentlemen, you've just made your first number one record.' Leslie's description of McCartney is of 'sheer exuberance and joy in being alive.' Abundant genius too. He could play all the instruments, and as a left-hander he could pick up a right-hander's guitar, turn it upside down and play it flawlessly. Lennon was the founder of the Quarry Men that McCartney aimed to be a part of. He was also older than McCartney. Lennon was seen as the leader, though McCartney quickly established himself as 1B to Lennon's 1A. About this, Leslie references a comment from McCartney that eventually the newby 'got up to his level…we grew to be equals. It made him insecure. He always was, really.' Which is essential in high achievers. McCartney too. Leslie cites the Kinks Ray Davies' description of McCartney, that he 'was one of the most competitive people I've ever met. Lennon wasn't. He just thought everyone else was shit.' Two sides of the same coin? George Harrison saw them both as 'egomaniacs,' while the surely exuberant McCartney acknowledged about himself that he was 'a turd.' It's no insight to say that the rampant insecurity was the catalyst for great music. They couldn't compliment each other probably because a little bit died inside of one another when the other happened upon a great song. They needed each other for those songs, but it hurt just the same. Leslie fascinatingly reports that the Beatles made Rubber Soul in fifteen days, which is a fraction of the time it takes to make an album today. The speculation here is that this was the prolific nature of Lennon and McCartney at work, plus Parkinson's Law must enter the picture. C. Northcote Parkinson observed that the amount of time required to finish a job expands with the time allotted to it, and back in the 1960s studio time was incredibly expensive, and by extension, precious. The album was made, and insecurity loomed large in its creation. Leslie indicates that with Lennon, 'a desire to beat Dylan, and a need to keep up with Paul was bringing out the best in John.' Classics by Lennon from the album included 'Norwegian Wood,' along with 'In My Life.' Leslie reports that more than any other Beatles song, 'In My Life' unearthed the most conflicting recollections from Lennon and McCartney about who did what. No doubt it was Lennon's song, but McCartney claims he contributed the song's melody, along with the guitar riff. Whatever the truth, 'In My Life' eventually led to 'Penny Lane' by McCartney. Competitors known to sing to each other, looking deeply in one another's eyes, made great music because the other made great music. It's all so interesting, and as was so often the case with the book, it raised questions. What if Dylan had an equal in the studio, and what if Wilson did? Did Quincy Jones make up for the relatively less talented Jackson brothers, or would Michael Jackson have soared to even greater heights with a family member or fellow artist routinely working to outdo him? What's interesting and fun at the same time is that jealousy and competition aside, the Beatles truly were a group. Contrast the latter with the Rolling Stones. From Keith Richards's memoirs (review here) it's evident that the members very much led and lead separate lives away from touring and making music. Maybe that's why they're still together today? With the Beatles, Leslie writes that even after the band had become a global phenomenon, 'John, George and Ringo were in and out of one another's houses on a daily basis.' McCartney wasn't as much a part of this since he was single and living in London, but even then they were still a band in the most literal sense. When Harrison developed a fascination with the Maharishi, the whole band went to India. Lennon actually wanted to purchase a Greek island for the band members to build a house each followed by just one guest house for visitors, only for first wife Cynthia to tell him 'they [the other band members] seem to need you less than you need them.' As most readers already know, the Beatles' final U.S. tour closed the door on touring altogether. True musicians, they couldn't hear themselves play. Where it was a little surprising was with the attendance figures. Leslie reports that their show at Candlestick Park was ¾ full, and Shea Stadium only 4/5th. It's so easy to forget that by the time of those final U.S. shows, the Beatles were controversial. There was Lennon's line about Jesus that Leslie helpfully clears up. Though Lennon was 'an atheist of a distinctly religious bent,' his Jesus line 'was slightly wistful.' About Pet Sounds, Leslie confirms that the Beach Boys 'had hit a creative peak high enough to scare McCartney into proving the Beatles could do better.' Since the Beach Boys never matched Pet Sounds again, it's fun to at least wonder what might have happened if the Beatles' response in Sgt. Pepper's had quickly been met by Wilson with what was expected to be his next masterpiece in Smile. We'll never know. Notable about Sgt. Pepper's is that 'A Day In the Life' (it frequently comes in at #1 in the holiday weekend playback of the Beatles' best songs) was actually the first song recorded for the album while the last song on it. In Leslie's words, 'nothing could possibly follow it.' Lennon credits McCartney with 'I'd love to turn you on.' Which raises another counterfactual. What if Lennon and McCartney hadn't been master songwriters? Work divided unearths so much in people, so why not the Beatles? Would their good taste in songs have lifted the band to even greater heights? Elvis, whom they revered, didn't write his own music. The not-so-insightful, musically illiterate view here is that the writing is what made the Beatles. Writing is learning, and it made Lennon and McCartney much better than they would have been without it. Furthermore, their prolific nature indicates that they couldn't have not written even if the best of the best had plied them with endless songs. All that, plus consider the evolution of the band. While Leslie's book is largely about Lennon, McCartney and their fruitful collaborations, contemplate what George Harrison became. Leslie confirms what other biographers have about how Lennon and McCartney were a separate income stream within the band to Harrison's great resentment, but the facts are that at least in the early days, he wasn't writing good music. What choice did they have in reducing him to a lesser place in the hierarchy? Lest readers forget, it wasn't exactly easy for the Beatles to initially get a record contract. But record companies were wrong, and obviously music in abundance was made. Harrison, though already the best guitarist in the group, also learned how to make music. Leslie quotes McCartney as saying about Harrison, 'Well, the thing is, I think that until now, until this year, our songs have been better than George's. Now this year his songs are at least as good as ours.' What an admission, what praise in a sense, and it's worth thinking about relative to McCartney and Lennon's difficulty summoning praise for one another. No matter how good Harrison became, McCartney or Lennon he would never be. McCartney knew this, hence his ability to say what he couldn't about Lennon. Interesting about Leslie is that he's more than a biographer, or an analyzer of a friendship. It's evident from the chapters that he knows music. Which means musicians will read a different book simply because there's much in John & Paul about the making of the songs. About 'Here, There and Everywhere,' he writes of how McCartney 'allows the merest hint of something darker in the middle eight, with its chromatic, sharking guitar line over a minor chord.' Was Lennon and McCartney's friendship deeper than friendship? Leslie makes allusions to this, as mentioned writes about them singing to each other while looking deeply in one another's eyes, plus there's a quote from Yoko Ono in which she says 'I'm sure that if [Paul] had been a woman or something, he would have been a great threat, because there's something very strong between John and Paul.' Without any inside knowledge, the guess here is that as opposed to unresolved feelings, McCartney and Lennon's friendship foundered on the sad truth that familiarity breeds contempt. No doubt they competed with each other, and no doubt as the fame everyone secretly craves rose to an unimaginable level, the intensity of the rivalry underlying their friendship grew. Contemplate all this while knowing the person you're competing with is a major instigator of your own talent and vice versa such that you in some ways have to routinely be around the person you're growing contemptuous of exactly due to extreme familiarity? Wow, that's some philosophizing too. Is it right where Leslie is perhaps wrong? Probably not mainly because it's not unreasonable to believe that Leslie likely wouldn't disagree with it. Marriages struggle at times because you see the person you're married to each day. In Lennon and McCartney's case, for a thirteen year stretch they were around each other much more than married couples. With each other frequently when they weren't working, they were nearly always with each other when they were working. And we wonder why there was jealousy about wives, bitterness about how the band was run, and deep-seated anger about each other? It's really not surprising. While the Beatles' stretch of fame included endless togetherness, the Rolling Stones were apart. And while they couldn't compliment each other, the feelings were evident. Leslie quotes an associate of McCartney's witnessing the Beatle 'crying his eyes out' after a meeting of the band during which Lennon said he was leaving. Just the same for the most part, Rolling Stone's Jann Wenner attended a screening with Lennon and Ono of the documentary Let It Be, and upon seeing 'an image of Paul singing on the rooftop at Apple [the Beatles' record company], he broke down crying.' Well, there you go. Or something like that. The guess here is that as with so many friendships, they simply needed a break. Which leads to arguably the ultimate counterfactual: what if Lennon had lived? If so, it's not hard to imagine the duo recording together again, and lifting one another.
