Note to readers: You will find this post quite long, but I hope not tedious. I hope there are enough photographs so that reading goes fast. Enjoy. The last paragraph is repeated here as most people won’t read that far: “One more thing to mention at the end of a long post where very few readers will find it: At the Mathis site there is a 47 page article by “Lestrade” called Pacific Theater. Because it is a PDF and I am technically inept, I cannot link without having a dead link. So you’re on your own to find it. Lestrade has done some excellent work in deconstructing the Aleutian campaign in World War II. The reason I bring it up here is that his photo analysis is superb. It’s well worth a journey and perhaps an hour of your time.”
In a prior post, I mentioned that Jim Morrison, Janis Joplin, John Denver and Taylor Swift had all been pasted into family photos, that is, we do not know their names, only that their last names: Morrison, Joplin, Deutschendorf and Swift are not their real names. It appears from the outside looking in that these musicians were (are) lifetime actors. I would guess that they were recruited because someone spotted some talent that could be developed.
However, it had to be made clear them that they were not to be let loose on the world, that they would put in their time, learn their trade and then exit the music business. They would be given intense training and then songs to sing that they pretend(ed) were (are) their own creation. In fact, Morrison, Denver and Joplin faked their deaths. Swift is still with us, but I have to suspect a fake death is on her horizon. (Prince probably fits into this category, but I never listened to his music and so have not taken the time to look into his very suspicious death. So too a few others, like David Bowie, for example. Rappers and hip hop, I never tuned in. Die away.)
Just for the fun of it I decided to use this post to review the photographic work behind these fake-named stars. The art of spotting fake photos is learned over time. We have to pay attention to perspective, lighting, lines and odd limbs appearing from outer space. For instance, below is a fake photo of President Obama and his Grandparents.
Notice anything amiss? Resting on Obama’s left shoulder is a floating hand. What does that tell us? Something (someone) was removed from the photo. It could be argued that the hand belongs to the man on his right, but look at his suit. His right arm is at his side. For the hand to belong to him, his forearm would have to be four feet long. Also notice the lighting. See the dark line on Obama’s chin? That merely tells us that the light source is in front and above him. But notice how the other faces are fully lit up, and how each is wearing sunglasses. They are sitting on a park bench on a sunny day, and while I cannot judge the entirety of the fake, Obama’s head might have been added onto an existing body. That, of course, does not explain the floating hand.
Fun! Here’s another floating hand:
That is supposedly “Paul” (actually Mike) McCartney at his fake brother’s birthday. Center and at the very back is the fake brother, who goes by the fake name “Mike McCartney”. His stage name is “Mike McGear.”His existence is explained in the post Sir Faul Revisited. This photo must have been part of the setting up process, as we have all suffered through at weddings, as the bride and groom are not in the foreground, and there is the back of a head on the right. Nonetheless, if you look at Faul’s left shoulder, again, a floating hand. What does this tell us? I suspect that Jane Asher, Faul, and the man to Faul’s left were added to this photograph in a darkroom (no Photoshop in those days). Since Faul did not attend McGear’s wedding, they had to fake it up. [By the way, find me a photo of either “Paul” in the company of Jane Asher where any of the three look happy. They appear to be phoning it in.]
The Jim Morrison Family Album
Let’s move on to the Morrison family. There is a series of photos left behind there.
That is Jim Morrison with his fake brother and sister, Andrew and Anne. It is highly unprofessional, as the shadows are all over one another. Anne’s shadow seems to hover over both Jim and the wall behind. Andrew’s shadow is on Jim, but Jim himself does not appear to have a shadow at all. You might say that Jim’s right ear was blacked out by Anne’s shadow, but this is a professional photo with lighting. How can that be? What I am guessing here is that Anne and Andrew are part of a group photo, and have been cropped for the purpose of adding Jim in a darkroom. If that is the case, then the two, Anne and Andrew, look perfectly normal. Everything behind them is just sloppy work.
This photo is Jim and his Dad, Admiral George Morrison. Jim appears to be fourteen or fifteen years of age. At first glance, it looks OK. In fact, this is some very good darkroom work, and was the only photograph in Dave McGowan’s book, Weird Scenes Inside the Canyon. But it does come apart on closer examination. First notice the hand under Jim’s chin. The first impression might be that it is the Admiral’s hand, but the perspective is all wrong. The arm would have to be longer than normal. And it’s an older person’s hand. It looks like a man hand. But that can fly, few would notice it. The key to this photo is the yellow line I inserted right above the left ear. Notice a change in skin tone. What has happened here is that Jim’s face has been very carefully superimposed on someone else’s body. Honestly, it is very good work. The closest I have seen was the morgue photos of John F. Kennedy, wherein his face was superimposed on another body, but done with such high quality that it took hours of gazing to see it. Anyway, only one photo in McGowan’s book, and it is a fake.
This one is just a bit easier to see. Jim’s head has been superimposed on someone else’s, but in such a way that his neck is elongated and the head is about to fall off. Everything else about the photo is normal. It is goose neck Jim.
I deliberately left this image small, as the feature that gives it away diminishes with larger size. Note everyone’s hair. This is obviously a flash shot. Look at the guy in the back. You can see the flash reflected in his glasses. The flash used was obviously a small bulb, as only the two in the foreground and the three behind are lit up. But that is not what is wrong with the photo. The film or camera is of low quality, so that the everyone is slightly blurred. Everyone, that is, except Jim, who has his hand on his left cheek. I can see individual hair strands with him, and his features and clothing are much sharper than everyone around. Again, he was inserted in a darkroom.
Here we can see that Jim is subject to different lighting than the rest of his family.In fact, his entire face missed out, and this appears to be natural lighting. The sun is not shining on Jim. Most likely, as the background looks normal and they would not take a photo of a family of four and put them all on the left, even cropping Anne’s body, we might be looking here at another group photo with the entirety of Jim superimposed over someone else. Jim’s right arm and his mother’s left blend and disappear together. Look at the arms of the others for comparison.
This appears to be the Morrison family and some extras. That is an unknown child in the foreground, and left to right, unknown woman, Mrs. Morrison, Anne, Andrew and the Admiral, whose pants appear to be sucked partially into the vehicle and whose upper body is very squat by human standards. He looks normal in other photos. That by itself is weird. The wildcard is Jim in the red shirt, mugging.
I took Jim and the two heads above him in the photo and enlarged them to 300%. Notice how the features of his mother and sister, while blurry, are recognizable. Jim is not – his mouth is distorted and his nose and eyes are almost invisible. What I am suspecting here is that this boy may be a relative of the boy on the bike, perhaps an older brother. They used the darkroom to smudge up his face so that he would not be recognizable, allowing the photo sleuths to pass him off as Jim.
There was no Jim Morrison. There was a man who was lead singer for The Doors, an enigma who projected charisma and charm, and who further wrote 12 songs that became the Doors’ first album, even has he did not read music and played no instrument. But he could stir a crowd.
The John Denver Experience
John Denver does not have many photos with his parents. In fact, I have managed to locate two.
This is a task, as there are possibilities here beyond mere photo fakery. I contend that John was surreptitiously added to the Deutschendorf family. Part of my evidence is this photo, which has the Lt. Col and his wife, and son Ron behind. John’s texture does not appear to match the studio quality of the others. His skin tone is lighter and more defined. His facial features are not familial. But that by itself does not make the photo a fake. There is one other aspect to this, pointed out long ago by a commenter on my John Denver’s Death: Another Hoax piece. The man in the background is Ron Deutschendorf, allegedly John’s brother. The man on the right is Lt. Col is Henry John Deutschendorf, and John Denver is Henry John Deutschendorf II. Ron had a son, and named the boy Henry John Deutschendorf II. This was before Denver’s fake death at age 53.
Is this photo real? Could well be. I leave it to the reader to decide. I am not certain.
This is a photo from John and Annie Martel’s wedding day. The hand grabbing onto his mother, her left shoulder, seems suspiciously long, another floater, but I cannot state that with certainty. Gaze at it, let it sink in on you. John’s head looks real and properly attached, and everyone is having a good time. The Lt. Col is subject, however, to different lighting. Even though this is a professional flash photo, his face is darkened, and his neck shadowed. I would guess, if there is fakery going on here, it is that – he is the only one not touching anyone else. His wife is the only one not looking at the camera in this, a professional photo. She is distracted and looking away. But it too could be real. It could be that the Lt. Col and John knew each other, and that each knew the gig. So John, destined for stardom before leaving on a jet plane, was an actor even at that age. I know, this is somewhat weak. It is Ron’s son that puzzles me most. It is my suspicion here that Mrs. and Lt. Col Deutschendorf were added to the photo in a darkroom. But it is not slam dunk.
She’s leaving home
We know there has to be photo fakery in the Janis Joplin family, as Janis was a set of twins, pictured to the right and left. You can always tell one from the other, as the twin on the right appeared more gregarious, and was probably the stage performer. The one on the left – I have never found a photo of her smiling and showing her teeth.
We are-told that “Janis” left home at age 20, so that would be around 1963. At that time, habits of dress had not yet changed, hippies had not taken hold. Dave McGowan did a good job covering a group of kids who dressed in hippie costumes and frequented the nightclubs of Los Angeles in the mid-60s, led by Vito Paulekas. They were plants, much like the screamers in the early Beatles days, paid to perform so that by power of suggestion they would eventually ‘catch on.’ So Janis is apparently avant-garde. More likely this is a period flash photo above, taken with poor lighting where everyone casts a shadow. “Janis” was inserted in a darkroom, and in case you cannot see, it is the Janis to the right, the one who smiles. The one on the left would eventually become “Amy Goodman” of Democracy Now!, who I think of as the Queen of Dour.
The Taylor Swift Mannequin
I am no Swifty, neither a fan nor a believer in the real talent of Taylor Swift. Also, I am far less certain of my analysis of the Swift photo gallery than the others above, as the art of faking photos has gotten so sophisticated. Nonetheless, I will lay it out here and wait to be set straight by better sets of eyes.
Having so little interest in her, when I came across the mannequin photo, seen below, I had no idea what to make of it. It’s so damned obviously a fake.
It was not until-writing this post, and discussing Morrison, Denver and Joplin, that I realized Swift fits right in with the others. The name “Swift” itself is a tell, possibly going back to Jonathon, but that would not be Taylor, but rather her father. However, who is to know, as this very interesting post from Geni is all I know about Scott Kingsley Swift.
It’s a little blurry on my end, but this particular Scott Swift is completely washed, and has a daughter named “Taylor” … but the one photo I found of Taylor Spender does not line up with Taylor Swift. Very curious. Mr. and Mrs. Swift are now separated, maybe divorced.
To be clear, I do not claim that the people in this post, the McCartney’s, Morrison, Denver, Joplin and Swift, lack talent. The ability to perform before a crowd, especially in the pre-Autotune and pitch-correction days, requires some talent and a good deal of training. But there is something deeper going on with these people. Their photographs are fake. Why?
I think it has to do with the music business in general.It is far too important to be left to chance. It influences ideas, attitudes, behavior, and dress. Musicians have far too much influence to be left on their own. Consequently, there is a great deal of manipulation. One record producer, whose name I have long lost, said that he could take any kid off the street and make him a star. Joplin above, for example, in my view, could not sing! So why is she lauded as one of the greats of all time? Why did people pack her concerts? Power of suggestion. Have you ever noticed that the American people are very suggestible? Has Covid taught you nothing?
The same with Taylor Swift. Mathis has analyzed her lyrics, something I would never attempt, and found them too grown up, too experienced for a person of her age. That’s no surprise to me, as I do not imagine that Lennon/McCartney, Jim Morrison or John Denver wrote their own stuff. Part of their agreement in enduring the intense training they went through prior to stardom could be something like this: “We will make you famous. We will give you fame, and we can take it away at any time we choose. You are not on your own, and you will not divulge any secrets. If you attempt to do so, you are done.” I am not saying that Joplin and Morrison were about to breach secrecy. I more suspect their had to leave the business young as they did not have enough talent to sustain a career.
Anyway, back to Taylor Swift, there are enough photographs of her and her parents that seem genuine to assume they are all in on the game. If that were not the case, why the fake photos? I am going to let readers do the analysis of the following photos, which I judged to be fake, but you’re on your own here. Pay attention to lighting, texture and perspective, as photo fakery in this day and age has gotten very sophisticated.
She sure looks like a mannequin in that last one too. At this point, I am all Swifted out, and entirely unsure that all those photos are fake. Enlighten me in the comments.
One more thing to mention at the end of a long post where very few readers will find it: At the Mathis site there is a 47 page article by “Lestrade” called Pacific Theater. Because it is a PDF and I am technically inept, I cannot link without having a dead link. So you’re on your own to find it. Lestrade has done some excellent work in deconstructing the Aleutian campaign in World War II. The reason I bring it up here is that his photo analysis is superb. It’s well worth a journey and perhaps an hour of your time.
This is a long post. You might guess we are having a “Code Red” snow storm that will last from last night into tomorrow. I’ve got time on my hands.