Return To Chaos, 9/27/74

I fully endorse Mike Sanders's (sic) discussion of my previously cited quandry (sic) , and virtually all of his critiques. Debate away!

Who is Mike Sanders?

Who is the Doc?

I know M.Sanders & would like to say he is a nice guy (one of the good guys)... I have my suspicions on the Doc, but we must adhere to the rules of this MB & keep these "suspicions" to ourselves.

Oh boys.... are we going to another 300+ CHAOS IN COLLEGE PARK topic?

Firstly, thanks pseudonym for the vote of support in your earlier post.

eknee wrote:

In show business, performers often perform under circumstances beyond their control or they have chaos going on at the time in their personal lives.

This should not be ammunition for a negative review.

Rest assured it wasn't. I based my review on my impressions through listening to this audience recording and later addressed its infamous reputation in my conclusion.

I'm sorry if you don't consider my conclusions to be a fair assessment in this instance, but we are all free to differ.

Moreover, I don't mean to take your criticism personally, but do most definitely take exception to your suggestion that I had not listened to this CD, as all my reviews to date have aimed to present an in-depth assessment regarding all aspects of the release concerned.

Mike wrote: Moreover, I don't mean to take your criticism personally, but do most definitely take exception to your suggestion that I had not listened to this CD,

******************************

I didn't mean to suggest you didn't actually listen to the cd, I was trying to illustrate how someone could hear some of the performances on the disc and grade them as very poor. As if to say you heard them, but weren't listening. Man, I am having a hard time getting my point across. It was like we are listening to 2 different shows, but instead just listening with 2 different ears.

Just a side note: You made reference to Elvis naming "return to sender" a movie. He wasn't doing that. If you listen carefully he starts naming movie titles,(which are also songs) and he is surprised at each one he names he gets a huge applause. So he just keeps naming things to get a "reaction". I think it just amused him. You don't really think Elvis thought he made a movie called "return to sender"? Do You? These are the kind of negative assumptions I don't care for.

ekenee wrote:

As if to say you heard them, but weren't listening. Man, I am having a hard time getting my point across.

Are you surprised with this level of reasoning? Whilst I welcome constructive criticism, I'm afraid the remark above sums up only too well the lack of careful thought displayed in your posts on this topic.

If you listen carefully he starts naming movie titles,(which are also songs) and he is surprised at each one he names he gets a huge applause. So he just keeps naming things to get a "reaction". I think it just amused him. You don't really think Elvis thought he made a movie called "return to sender"? Do You? These are the kind of negative assumptions I don't care for.

As a side note, these are the kinds of erroneous comments and conclusions I don't care for

So you really think Elvis thought he made a movie called, "return to sender" as you state in your review? You are basically saying he was so out of it that he didn't know what he was saying.

This is plain ludicrous.

Bottomline: I dissagree with your interpretation of this show in more ways than one. Your review was way too negative.

I bet there are about 10,000 people who were actually there that would agree with me on this one.

I know M.Sanders & would like to say he is a nice guy (one of the good guys)... I have my suspicions on the Doc, but we must adhere to the rules of this MB & keep these "suspicions" to ourselves.

Agreed. Mike is an ok guy!!

I don't agree with his Chaos review conclusions, but as Mike rightly points out, we are bound to disagree on certain issues, and that's what makes a forum fun.

On the flip side of the coin we have a bad guy called John. Why bad? Well because he cannot disagree in a pleasant manner, but rather rubbishes anybody who posts stuff that does not conform to his view of the Elvis legacy.

Knowledge is a great thing, and Johnny certainly has some knowledge. However wisdom is a far better attribute, and DJC needs to apply this and a large dose of diplomacy to his posts. They are far too savage and scathing.

So you really think Elvis thought he made a movie called, "return to sender" as you state in your review? You are basically saying he was so out of it that he didn't know what he was saying.

This is plain ludicrous.

Elvis just repeated Return To Sender when someone shouted it out.

Mike just made a mistake in his review, no big deal. The first time I listened to the Cd I thought he named Return To Sender as a movie

But after the storm erupted on the original thread I studied the Cd in intimate detail.

The "terrible" comment is one that is etched on my brain having played those 2 segments over and over via wave editor!!

I bet there are about 10,000 people who were actually there that would agree with me on this one.

Ekenee, you are correct in saying this, I do not want to sound mean spirited but those same 10,000 are the ones that cheered Elvis on with his mediocre performances and they are the ones that cheered when he farted out of tune.

All Elvis had to do was appear in person and the majority of the fans were satisfied.

I even know of one fan to this day that believes Elvis never abused any drugs and was always perfect in EVERY performance!

Maybe this performance doesn't appear as bad as it was touted but never the less Elvis had problems and was not on the top of his game.

Maybe this performance doesn't appear as bad as it was touted but never the less Elvis had problems and was not on the top of his game.

No maybe about it!!

You are quite correct that Elvis was not at the top of his game, far from it. You are also correct that for Elvis to appear was sensational enough for a lot of fans to be bowled over. But this show was no way as bad as Johnny insists, basing his opinion on disproved recollections.

Remember the cut short show comment and the barely make it through the introductions one. We debated this to exhaustion on the real Chaos thread, but DJC never once commented on specific refutations. Just came back 8 weeks lated spouting the same garbage, like he just has to believe that Elvis really was that bad (why????)

Bigredg wrote: Johnny insists, basing his opinion on disproved recollections.

Remember the cut short show comment and the barely make it through the introductions one.

**********************************

This is key because if you are gathering evidence from a person and they have been proven wrong on say 2 pieces of evidence, then you must really question their memery on a 3rd piece. Basically it proves that their recolletion cannot be trusted. Any logical person, (DJC aside) would know this to be logical in any type of fact checking endeavor.
Since the two above items were proven to be recollected wrong,
logic dictates you must discount any other items of evidence that is recollected without actual proof from this individual.
This is basic detective skills 101.