All posts with more than 3000 Hits, prior to 2008

Re: sheila Ryan book

Fri Nov 17, 2006 12:01 am

e76 wrote:Sorry, I dont know how to put what someone else said in a box. But anyway, why did you write this? Was Larry Geller on Elvis black list at the time of Elvis death? I always get a weird feeling about Larry Geller.[/url][/list]


Larry Geller has overinflated his sense of importance and worth in the EP Story.

I wish N8 was actually here for this one. He knows things. A lot of things. Things weren't exactly peaches and cream between Elvis and Larry at the end. Again, that's something N880EP came out and said in another thread, and I believe him. It fits. Geller didn't have much involvement in EP's life: he simply wasn't around for most of it. Yet he makes out he was Elvis' hairdresser and "spiritual advisor", even though many people cut EP's hair, and EP was also his *own* spiritual advisor (plus others he consulted). Beware Romulans bearing gifts!

Fri Nov 17, 2006 12:14 am

Larry Gellar was revered enough by Vernon, to ask him to style Elvis's hair after his death I think that speaks volumes for him as a man.

But having said that I would take everything he said with a pinch of salt :?

I dont think anyone will ever know what he and Elvis talked about.........but I dont believe Elvis asked him to write everything down for his autobiography.

Fri Nov 17, 2006 12:19 am

sid wrote:Larry Gellar was revered enough by Vernon, to ask him to style Elvis's hair after his death I think that speaks volumes for him as a man.


It's a pretty good indication that Vernon trusted Geller,......... but it's nothing more than that.

Vernon was in a state of extreme grief. He needed someone to do Elvis' hair and Geller was around. I'm sure he was quick to volunteer himself for the position. Vernon also allowed himself to trust fully in The Colonel, too. Just as he allowed himself to firmly believe that Elvis had been murdered. Vernon was not in the best of states at that time, it's fair to say. (Colonel comment: Vernon trusted Colonel Tom anyway, but he was probably more open to suggest while in extreme emotional distress).

sid wrote:I would take everything he said with a pinch of salt


Agreed.

Fri Nov 17, 2006 1:00 am

Cryogenic wrote:
You really ought to stop thinking I'm N8.

I'm not N8
I do not think that! But on multiple levels8, fallacious8, fallacy8... I know by reading you look up to him and so I guess he must be flattered cause imitation is a form of it.....but if I were to give advice to a very smart kid (not thinking of you :wink: ) I would tell him/her that it is best to be yourself or more original....but what do I know!!! :lol: :lol: :lol:

Fri Nov 17, 2006 1:44 am

JLGB wrote:but if I were to give advice to a very smart kid (not thinking of you :wink: ) I would tell him/her that it is best to be yourself or more original....but what do I know!!! :lol: :lol: :lol:


Condescension hidden within a superficial shell of humour?

Oh, c'mon, JLGB........

Don't be dense. I *am* my own person. "Fallacy" and its off-shoots are important words and often get an airing. N8 certainly put that word/word family more into my head by giving it great visibility, but I have adopted it for being the right word family. Yes, other aspects of my posts are in more conscious emulation of him...... but so what? Those aspects work.

Aside from a bit of ball breakin', I think this is more to do with the fact that a lot of people, for one reason or another, are weary of N8. People may have their reasons, but I think they're off the mark. (Note: I have sorted out the conflict between myself and Memphis Flash via private messages; no further elaboration on that point). It's the same reason people go after the Doc. Their directness is a bitter pill for some to swallow. But these are also two of the greatest members of the community IMO.

Everyone should be their own person, but in being their own person, they shouldn't let their ego dominate their intellect. N8 is a good guy and I feel like retaining some of his characteristics or at least dusting them off from time to time. End of story.

Fri Nov 17, 2006 3:13 am

The 1981 Goldman book is so filled with hatred for the subject it is very hard to read, let alone keep on a bookshelf. And the author's intent to fully discredit who Elvis was, where he came from, and how he changed the world -- not to mention the scores of factual errors or omissions -- makes learning what Elvis kept in his powder box almost worthless.

Good luck to Shelia and her book -- in spite of their short time together, she might actually have more to offer than Jerry Shilling's most disappointing recent biography. Let's not judge until it's available to be read.

That said, a few points:

Memphis Flash wrote:Other than Elvis' affair with Hope Lange, who was an older woman ...

Hope was barely three years older than Elvis -- born November 31, 1931.

Memphis Flash wrote:David Stanley, who remains good friends with Lamar Fike, once told me, in the most serious tone, "Albert Goldman's book is the most accurate book ever written about Elvis."

David has obviously never read too many books on Elvis.

Memphis Flash wrote:He is still 50% owner of the book, however.

Lamar is on record as saying he made one lump sum of $150,000 on "Elvis," which he blew away in a very short time. What is the source of your statement?

JLGB wrote:Elvis did great but 68 special was CREATED tv magic not real magic on the stage like in the 69 comeback or 50s explosion ... It is myth like Goldman wrote ...

Conventional thinking primarily and rightfully credits Elvis with the success of his 1968 TV special.

Editing has NOTHING to do with his singing or guitar playing on June 27, 1968 -- perhaps the greatest rock and roll EVER put to tape by anyone -- or the incredible work done on tracks like "Trouble/Guitar Man," "Saved" or "If I Can Dream."

How anyone can say otherwise is beyond belief!

Fri Nov 17, 2006 10:21 am

Cryogenic wrote:
JLGB wrote:
Condescension hidden within a superficial shell of humour?

Oh, c'mon, JLGB........
.
Condescension hidden?! Yes and no....you have the right to imitate and be in awe of anyone you want and even be a show off with your grey matter! BUT don't disrespect me. I am sure you can find another place to tear a hole into.

Fri Nov 17, 2006 10:36 am

drjohncarpenter wrote:

Editing has NOTHING to do with his singing or guitar playing on June 27, 1968 -- perhaps the greatest rock and roll EVER put to tape by anyone -- or the incredible work done on tracks like "Trouble/Guitar Man," "Saved" or "If I Can Dream."

How anyone can say otherwise is beyond belief!
Everything you say is very true except the editing. But of 4 performances for television taped...those minutes edited within the framework of the special were masterfully chosen even dialogue that faded before Elvis himself admitted to mumbling comes off better and even lets the viewer go off imagining theres more intellectual words spoken about the big change in the music field then. I will concede Doc I have exagerated....But the 4 or so hours filmed (although for the most part great) are not MAGICAL like those minutes seen originally in 1968. Makes sense?

Fri Nov 17, 2006 10:44 am

JLGB wrote:BUT don't disrespect me. I am sure you can find another place to tear a hole into.


You're taking this waaaaaaaay too seriously. Just like Steve took my crack in another thread too seriously. Is everyone on pills or something?

Fri Nov 17, 2006 1:09 pm

JLGB wrote:But the 4 or so hours filmed (although for the most part great) are not MAGICAL like those minutes seen originally in 1968. Makes sense?

If you're referring to the June 27, 1968 sit down shows, you have lost me. They're two of the greatest concerts in the history of rock and roll.

Here's an outstanding look (in PDF format) at why June 27 is important:

"The Little Theater" by Greil Marcus

Fri Nov 17, 2006 1:21 pm

Greil Marcus also wrote a fantastic, scathing review of that reprehensible Goldman biography in a 1981 "Village Voice" literary supplement.

Part of it was on-line, and I posted it a few months ago.

Evidently, it's worth another look:

"Lies About Elvis, Lies About Us"

.

Fri Nov 17, 2006 3:36 pm

Cryogenic wrote:
JLGB wrote:BUT don't disrespect me. I am sure you can find another place to tear a hole into.


You're taking this waaaaaaaay too seriously. Just like Steve took my crack in another thread too seriously. Is everyone on pills or something?


I am, but I have it under control. No really I do. :lol: :lol:
Im just teasin...(not really) no really, just joshin....(I'm for real) Nah...

ala Eddie Izzard, I love that guy(?). As a comedian of course, not that there is anything wrong with the other way.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thanks for the links Doc! You have turned a rather bland thread into somthing very informative.

Fri Nov 17, 2006 4:01 pm

drjohncarpenter wrote:
JLGB wrote:But the 4 or so hours filmed (although for the most part great) are not MAGICAL like those minutes seen originally in 1968. Makes sense?

If you're referring to the June 27, 1968 sit down shows, you have lost me. They're two of the greatest concerts in the history of rock and roll.

Here's an outstanding look (in PDF format) at why June 27 is important:

"The Little Theater" by Greil Marcus
Thanks Doc! Again you are correct Doc! But the MAGIC in 1968 could not have happened with any show broadcast in an unedited form as seen many years later. This would have been without Trouble openning and IICD ending plus the rest including segments (the whole TV special with live segments inserted to tease and let imagination wander) from every one (I think) of 4 performances 2...sitdown...2 standup.....the legend,myth...grew and the Bootleg,HBO and finally DVD NEVER IMO equaled (lived up to the impossible expectations) the legend or myth created in 1968...I cannot express myself any better and thanks again for link! :)

Re: .

Fri Nov 17, 2006 6:10 pm

Blue-Gypsy wrote:Thanks for the links Doc! You have turned a rather bland thread into somthing very informative.


The Doc is virtually always to be credited, but you evidently missed my own refutation of JLGB's claims and my allusions to both of Greil Marcus essays. Since the Doc posted those, here is another great refutation of Goldman's goop:

http://www.ulmus.net/ace/aceworks/presley.cfm

.

Fri Nov 17, 2006 6:29 pm

Ahhh my apologies sir. I will go back and re-read the thread.

Re: .

Fri Nov 17, 2006 7:16 pm

Cryogenic wrote:
Blue-Gypsy wrote:Thanks for the links Doc! You have turned a rather bland thread into somthing very informative.


The Doc is virtually always to be credited, but you evidently missed my own refutation of JLGB's claims and my allusions to both of Greil Marcus essays. Since the Doc posted those, here is another great refutation of Goldman's goop:

http://www.ulmus.net/ace/aceworks/presley.cfm
For the record. I think it was/is a very cool myth contrary to Goldman's view having no credit to Elvis at all or very little. I cannot stress that enough. I read that part and right away agreed with the Myth but disagreed with author's contempt of Elvis. Nevertheless I learned from it and by that time in the book knew how to weed out the meanness of the author against his subject. Interesting read over 20 years ago with lots of NEW info....lucky us today with the internet and sites like this one.