“I can’t do this”: Why did John Deacon leave Queen?
Two decades is a long time for any relationship to remain stable, but by rock music standards, it’s practically a lifetime achievement. It a fact that made the tenure of Queen all the more impressive – that they mostly stayed together as four cogs in a well-oiled machine for the majority of the 20 years between the 1970s and the ‘90s, firing out hit after hit as if it were a natural part of any other working day. It was a system that worked… until ultimately it all fell apart.
The death of Freddie Mercury in 1991 understandably shifted the tectonic plates that the band had thus far happily existed on. After all, losing the leader of any band is bound to be cataclysmic, but in Queen’s case, more than most, as the frontman was the unmistakable glue that held them all together. But the power of grief was overwhelming on a tidal wave scale – and although, of course, it hugely affected every member of the band, it completely altered the path of John Deacon.
Bereavement mixed with the effects of fame ultimately became too much to bear for the bassist, who went on to quit the band in 1996 and has rarely ever been seen in public since. The fact of Deacon’s retirement and his steadfast refusal to engage with the heights of Queen any longer are well known, but less so the reasons behind it. However, Brian May put some of these rumours to bed in a 2023 interview with The Guardian, noting: “All I can say is that, historically, John was quite sensitive to stress. We all found it hard, losing Freddie, but I think John particularly struggled.”
The breaking point for Deacon came five years after Mercury’s death, when the band travelled to Paris to put on a special show. “It was to open the ballet season with an amazing new work by Maurice Béjart, about Mozart and Queen,” May recalled. “We played with John on bass, and Elton John sang with us. At that moment, John just looked at us and said, ‘I can’t do this any more.’”
What is John Deacon’s relationship with Queen like now?
The guitarist continued: “We knew that he at least needed a break, but as it turned out he never came back. I don’t think that I can go into much more detail – we have to respect the fact that John needs his privacy now – but he’s still part of the machinery of the band.” With that, Deacon receded into the much more mundane life of domesticity, a far cry from the rock and roll rapture that became the cornerstone of his previous life – but it didn’t mean his former bandmates were leaving him by the wayside.
“If we have any major decision, business wise, it’s always run past John. It doesn’t mean he talks to us – generally he doesn’t – but he will communicate in some way. He’s still very much part of Queen,” May confirmed. As such, even though the dynamic of the band has changed unrecognisably in the last three decades, it only strengthens what was always already the case for Queen – that their main priority is one another, and nothing is getting in the way of that.
In many ways, John Deacon should really be congratulated for achieving what many other veteran rockers can only dream of. He had his years of fame and fortune, but when all was said and done, being able to fade back into relative obscurity was his greatest choice. It may not be the Queen known and loved the world over any more, but as May said himself, there would be no band without the bass.
