All posts with more than 3000 Hits, prior to 2008

Thu Jun 23, 2005 4:33 pm

Steve_M wrote:Those fans did it without any further expectation so why should someone else later say that they deserved more ?


Steve, I would submit that the majority of the U.K. fans did have an expectation that, after he resumed live performances, Elvis would eventually bring the show to the U.K.

Steve M wrote:The demand for Elvis globally to perform was far above the ability to perform in as many countries as "deserved" Elvis to do so.


Not really. Recording artists have done and continue to do 'world tours.' These tours cover the major cities of Europe and Asia. For Elvis in the 70's this would basically entail places such as London; Paris; Madrid; Rome; Munich; Amsterdam; Oslo; Stockholm; Helsinki; Tokyo; and Sydney. Remember, at that time eastern Europe was closed-off due to the cold war and the asian market was much more limited.

Thu Jun 23, 2005 5:12 pm

Pete Dube wrote:
Steve_M wrote:Those fans did it without any further expectation so why should someone else later say that they deserved more ?


Steve, I would submit that the majority of the U.K. fans did have an expectation that, after he resumed live performances, Elvis would eventually bring the show to the U.K.


Exactly.

Elvis had said, more than once, "yeh I wanna play London England blah blah blah"
and the fans there got there hopes up...
year after year....
and got their hopes dashed to bits, year after year.

What a head game.

If you have no intention of ever going there,
don't f---in say that you are or that you want to.

Thu Jun 23, 2005 5:30 pm

What about the concert at the Pyramids in Egypt?
The story goes that there were talks in Vegas. The $3 million offer was made to Parker.
EP was thrilled and in the course of negotiations the salary went up. But the next day he found out that Parker had turned it down, EP was crushed and frustrated. Why didn't he contact the people and signed the damn deal himself? Did Parker brainwash him? Was EP to insecure to get involved in the business questions of his own career? I am sure he had the ability, heck he talked President Nixon into giving him the BNDD bagde.

Before boarding the ship to Germany he tells the press that there were plans to tour Europe. I don't think that was anything definite, but "plans" indicates, that it had been on his mind. After his stint he mentions, that he would love to tour Europe. In the early 70's he frequently mentions that he would be happy to do a world tour.
Did he lie to the reporters?

Then he goes ahead and declares that all business questions are to be directed at Parker. This is frustrating, knowing that according to reports Parker and his staff only acted busy, when an outsider came into the office.

Do you think EP ever knew of the invitations to perform for the President and the Queen? The man was so happy to receive the Jaycess award, don't you think he would have been honored to play those gigs for free and done it, even when Parker had turned it down?

Thu Jun 23, 2005 6:27 pm

So if I take on board that the arguments against what I've said are true, then there's two fundamental things that would arise.

Firstly, Elvis would have actively been sending a potential snub to the countries he didn't perform in.

Secondly, with the question being, did Elvis have a duty to perform overseas?, that in saying he did we are charging Elvis with failing to perform his duty.

For a man who's career from June 1954 to aug 77 spanned approx just 8000 days this is not comprehendable to me.
Out of that 8000 over 700 days were lost to Uncle Sam.

With the remainder he managed to record over 700 songs, make 30 odd movies, and in just the last 8 years he managed an average of a performance every 3 days.
This doesn't take into account all the performances he gave prior to 1962.

The scale of his efforts made his average from June 54 to aug 77 of 50,000 record sales - EVERY DAY!

And the consensus is that Elvis failed in his duty.

I am staggered by this.

If that is the case then Elvis built a rod for his own back without ever knowing it and I have no idea how he should have dumbed things down to avoid putting himself in that position.

Thu Jun 23, 2005 7:08 pm

Gosh Steve, are you on Priscilla's payroll?


Face it. Where world tour/overseas performance is concerned...Elvis screwed up and allowed the screw up to happen.

He says oh yeh I wanna see your country and play there.
Anytime. Maybe next year. Oh yeh, man. We're planning on it....

hogwash. He can talk the talk but he never walked the walk.

Who's fault is that?

Blame it on Parker (and his bad back) or blame it on Elvis
either, or both,
but the topic was, sadly, BS.

But it aint Elvis' fault he said that redundant BS about going to England and elsewhere. he thought he would! Yes! He had his bags packed all ready to go!

Them fans over there who never got to see Elvis live were just too damn poor or cheap to splurge on a trip to Las Vegas or Hawaii, or New York, or Memphis.
The burden was upon them to ever see him or not.


what was the point of Elvis buying that huge jet (with a bank loan and risking G'land for collatoral) if not to travel across Oceans?

Just need that huge jet for flying from Memphis to Denver for peanutbutter sandwiches. That's a waste of such huge expensive transportation.
Last edited by Graceland Gardener on Thu Jun 23, 2005 7:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Thu Jun 23, 2005 7:23 pm

I'm not arguning against any of that GG - read my post again.

To take that on board that what you say is true then it goes that the rest of my post has to be true.

We are charging Elvis Presley, despite all he did for the world as a whole, with failing in his duty.

That was the question originally posed by the thread and if we say yes then I think it is totally wrong because it is being taken out of context.

Do you really find yourself as a fan of Elvis, one who chose to become a fan, not forced to by Elvis, that you claim Elvis Presley failed in his duty ?

If you are right then everyone else practically living or has lived also failed in their duty.

I compare this with someone giving $900,000 to charity and then being forever claimed as the person who FAILED to give a million dollars to charity.

Thu Jun 23, 2005 7:35 pm

Suppose we list the reasons why Elvis did not tour overseas

credible reasons....silly reasons...imagined reasons, et al.

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
etc


and compare that to the x number of times he publicly said he wanted to, planned to, and even list reasons why he did want to/should (including my principal reason to express thanks in person to those fans)

which list would be a bunch of bogus BS?

As unthinkable as it is, he did let people down in this area.

He could talk the talk but did not walk the walk.

If he did not feel compelled or obligated to play Europe or Australia then RCA should not have distributed his records there.
None.
If you have no intention of going there, have no duty to do so, then why allow anyone there to listen to you or watch your films there.

Just treat every country like Antartica.
No Elvis tour there, and obviously no Elvis records ever sold there.

Thu Jun 23, 2005 7:44 pm

G G -

I read your post through a couple of times, but I still can't work out where your tongue is situated.
Last edited by ColinB on Thu Jun 23, 2005 7:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Thu Jun 23, 2005 7:44 pm

Why shouldn't RCA have distributed the records there ?

That doesn't do anything in itself. It's those choosing to buy them that makes the difference.

In doing so they pay their money and recieve what they expected for it.

So in a small island somewhere in the world where Elvis Presley records were distributed Elvis was under a duty to perform there ?

Thu Jun 23, 2005 7:50 pm

Steve_M wrote: So in a small island somewhere in the world where Elvis Presley records were distributed Elvis was under a duty to perform there ?



No. But do go to the countries that did INVITE HIM and clearly offered money for a show. Yes!
And countries with x amount of Elvis fans per capita, and where they have large venues, yes! Go play it!
If you gonna say you're gonna play it it then go play it!

What's the point of the polar opposite? Elvis only performs on his backporch. Anyone who wants to see him must come to his backporch.

I love Elvis, I love the concept of Elvis, but I really find it hard to feel sorry for a millionaire who doesn't invest in decent home recording equipment and who buys a big f---n ego-massaging jumbo jet aircraft but wastes it on trips to Denver for sandwiches but no globetrotting travel to see the world.
And who squanders invitations to perform in countries that did invite him.

These are among his chief flaws and avoidable deficiencies.

Thu Jun 23, 2005 10:03 pm

Steve -
It seems your main objection is towards the word 'duty' and what it implies: an obligation. Ok then let's argue the opposite, Elvis didn't owe anybody a doggone thing and that you get what you get - like it or lump it! That's the Parker mindset, and that mindset is what ultimately hurt Elvis' career. The mid-60's formula films and the directionless, assembly line 70's studio albums, the less-than-top-shelf songs to get the publishing/royalty cut-in.

Elvis was a performance artist, and performers perform for their fans. It's a supply and demand situation. If there's great demand for the artist to perform in a given geographic location the performer does so. Elvis could have filled Wembley for multiple nights and played the Budokan in Japan for 2 weeks straight - the demand was there!

On a personal note I feel sad for those fans (particularly the international fans) who lived during his lifetime, but for whatever reason never got to see Elvis at least once live.

Fri Jun 24, 2005 12:06 am

He was a grown man with a great, (though unexplored), talent, unlimited resources known only to few, and HE and he alone was responsible for himself and his career.

Fri Jun 24, 2005 2:03 am

In part Pete - Yes, that is what I'm saying. But the word duty wasn't mine - it was the word used in the thread title that's why I keep using it to stay focused on the original question.

More in direct response was GG's bit about the record company distributing records where the artist concerned wasn't going to back that up.

Well that's easy to say now, but why didn't you tell RCA that way back then - please don't distribute Elvis records here if he's not coming - if you do and i buy them I want my money back if he doesn't come.

Why not decide not to buy them until he does come over ?

If Elvis had lived till 90 and never come over then I'd have to side with the other part of Elvis suggesting he would and never doing anythnig about it, but the jumbos were bought for a reason and Elvis wasn't thinking he'd pop his clogs at 42.

Fri Jun 24, 2005 4:38 am

Elvis saying that he will come to another country and perform, which of course, gets those fans all excited and anticipating his arrival, get a big pathetic letdown at his no-show.
And the reasons why he didn't come are sometimes just as pathetic.


Find the transcript (which used to be online somewhere) to the 1975 Las Vegas Sun newspaper article about PARIS OFFERS ELVIS $1M FOR CONCERT.

it was either March or April or August of '75 as I recall.

The newspaper reported that Elvis (who was currently in Vegas for his obligatory showroom exhibit) had recently received an invitation to Paris, France for a show that would pay $1M.

But a spokesman for Presley (Esposito?) says in so many words:
"They speak French. He sings in English. They won't understand him.
So why bother. He's not going."

End of offer. End of subject.

That's the stupidest excuse ever publicly made.

It's pure Parkerese of course

But the writers/editors at the LV Sun must've been laughing their asses off at that article.

How could that possibly help Elvis' image and credibility especially in a day and age where world tours were already taking place by every other band out there.

1975? Oh no Elvis won't go because we think the world is flat and he'd fall off the edge.

One million dollars for one show? Get off your ass and go do it!

Steve, did Elvis have a duty to accept Sam Phillips' invitation to come all the way down there to 706 Union for that 1954 audition?

Nah, he had no duty.

Plus it's like 15 blocks away.
For a poor kid without two good legs to carry him, that's just too far to go.

.

Fri Jun 24, 2005 6:37 am

Look at the bright side. I here Michael Jackson is going on a World Tour very soon!

.

Fri Jun 24, 2005 6:37 am

Look at the bright side. I here Michael Jackson is going on a World Tour very soon!

Fri Jun 24, 2005 9:18 am

GG, I give up. You don't answer the questions I ask you.

The questions you ask me you answer for me in the same post !

Fri Jun 24, 2005 4:41 pm

Steve -
The idea I'm trying to get at is that I think that there's a reciprocal relationship between a performing/recording artist and his/her fans. A kind of quid pro quo. The artist records/releases records and gives live performances for the fans. The fans support the artist by buying the records and attending the concerts. It's just the nature of the relationship in my view.

Fri Jun 24, 2005 5:07 pm

A sense of "duty" and "obligation" DID work to get Elvis to do things.

It was a contract already signed.
Parker waves it in front of Elvis' face and says, "You don't want to make Clambake and Easy Come Easy Go? Too bad. YOU HAVE TO. There's a contractual obligation."

Psychologically, Elvis did concede to commit his time to certain things based upon a pretense of professional "duty"

Apparently, the only way Elvis would've ever went to London, Paris, Sydney, Madrid, wherever,
is if a piece of paper was already signed and he was given that "you got to" mgmt schtick in the very manner he was coerced to go make movies he didnt want to make.

So, the very same can't-back-out-must-honor process would apply to overseas trips he didn't want to make

(but overseas trips he often said he did want to make) :roll:

Fri Jun 24, 2005 5:32 pm

Pete - quite right and as far as reading the contents of your post goes it would seem Elvis lived up to that fully.

GG - Elvis died at 42. He didn't know he was going to die at 42.

If I told you at some point I would do something for you in the coming years and then I die - what ya gonna do ? would one possible answer be that you would slag me off and say i failed in my duty to keep my promise ?

If not what is your answer please.

Fri Jun 24, 2005 5:37 pm

Steve,

Elvis dying at 42 is no excuse for why
he turned down the offer to play Paris at age 40

or turned down the offer to play Tokyo at age 38

or turned down the offer to play London at age 36.



The only obligation "in the coming years" that he failed to live to fulfill was a January/February 1978 engagement at the.....surprise.....Las Vegas Hilton

another fantastic locale to inspire the man.

:roll:

Fri Jun 24, 2005 5:51 pm

Steve_M wrote:Pete - quite right and as far as reading the contents of your post goes it would seem Elvis lived up to that fully.


Yes he lived up to it, but the crux of the matter is did he live up to it fully? To me it was a mountain/Muhammed scenario. For whatever reason(s)Elvis (Muhammed) would not go to the mountain (tour abroad to meet the demand of the international fans), so the mountain (international fans) had to go to him.

Yes he played Vegas, and Vegas was a venue that allowed him to stay in one place for a lengthy period of time so international fans would get a chance to see him. And yes the Aloha satellite show was also a gesture for the international fans, but did these really meet the demand?
I think they only scratched the surface.

Fri Jun 24, 2005 6:06 pm

GG- what about the tour due to start on aug 16th 1977 ?

You never mentioned about letting Elvis know the conditions upon which you bought his records in the first place. You're only now saying after the event that he should have done more for his fans and that they were within their rights to expect more from him. I guess it is easier to say Elvis failed in some of his duties to his fans after he is dead and cannot give his reasons for why he hadn't done more and more for the fans by the time he died.

Ever thought of writing a sequel on behalf of Albert Goldman ?

Fri Jun 24, 2005 6:41 pm

Steve_M wrote:GG- what about the tour due to start on aug 16th 1977 ?


That's a given. We already know about that.

I was referring to "coming years" already mapped out for him.

And big surprise, another damn casino gig.

--------

So here's the crux of the debate.

It's corporations versus the little guy

Being incorporated, RCA can insist Elvis has a duty to record for them.
He certainly does do his duty, on schedule.

Being incorporated, a movie studio can inists Elvis has a duty to act for them.
He certainly does do his duty, on schedule.

But the fans ---- just a bunch of individual anonymous humans scattered across the face of the earth cannot insist Elvis has a duty to sing for them.

Hey, fans should've incorporated.

Elvis Fans Inc.

Thus could legally twist his arm to get that London gig....that Paris gig...that Tokyo gig...that Syndey gig.

He cowtows to what the coporations in his career demand of him.

Fans can't demand a show at their nearest stadium?

Hell, they even begged.

Every reason why he didn't go and do it is imo, lame.

Fri Jun 24, 2005 7:01 pm

I guess the true reason for declining the Paris '75 offer is that they were going to pay him in francs.


"Franks? Like hot dogs, Colonel?"

"That's right my boy. We can't spend them french coins. So forgit it. I'll tell 'em you said no."

"Whatever you say, Colonel. You're the boss. I love you like a father."

gag.