Post here your Elvis' pictures

Tue Nov 14, 2006 10:23 pm

Steve_M wrote:All your subsequent posts to me have suggested to me that it wasn't said in jest.


And how is that, exactly?

Steve_M wrote:The "strangely bloated" was not expressed as an opinion on second reading, but issued as a if fact, whether it is correct or not is another matter.


And therein lies the problem.

Not to mention the whole reason for this thread.

Steve_M wrote:just as you did with claiming as a fact that I have much to learn, hah! it wasn't even expressed as an opinion.


It was "issued as a if fact [sic], whether it is correct or not is another matter." :wink:

Steve_M wrote:If you insist on making demands of me then please forward your proposed offer of payment to me. I don't do demands but often will consider polite requests. If you want me to do as you tell me then pay up like any one else who employs my time. by the way, unless you have won the lottery jackpot at least 10 weeks in a row you wont be able to afford me.


Still wanna claim you weren't being facetious? The dial just got turned to "11"! HAHAHA!

(That was another film reference, BTW)

For what it's worth: I'm going to have to pass. A cheap prostitute could save me all that money and still show me a good time.

Tue Nov 14, 2006 10:54 pm

Cryogenic wrote:
Steve_M wrote:All your subsequent posts to me have suggested to me that it wasn't said in jest.


And how is that, exactly?

Steve_M wrote:The "strangely bloated" was not expressed as an opinion on second reading, but issued as a if fact, whether it is correct or not is another matter.


And therein lies the problem.

Not to mention the whole reason for this thread.

Steve_M wrote:just as you did with claiming as a fact that I have much to learn, hah! it wasn't even expressed as an opinion.


It was "issued as a if fact [sic], whether it is correct or not is another matter." :wink:

Steve_M wrote:If you insist on making demands of me then please forward your proposed offer of payment to me. I don't do demands but often will consider polite requests. If you want me to do as you tell me then pay up like any one else who employs my time. by the way, unless you have won the lottery jackpot at least 10 weeks in a row you wont be able to afford me.


Still wanna claim you weren't being facetious? The dial just got turned to "11"! HAHAHA!

(That was another film reference, BTW)

For what it's worth: I'm going to have to pass. A cheap prostitute could save me all that money and still show me a good time.


Yes, i do wish to claim that. Care to try me ? I'll give you my phone number, you can place a dollar sign in front of it just to know what i wont get up out of bed for for you.

Yes, Guralnick may have been wrong with his statement of fact, just the same as you most certainly are. I however tend to think his book was not ful of his opinions, but being as i only think that and have only said as much before then I doubt anyone could provide evidence to suggest what it is i dont think.

Tue Nov 14, 2006 11:00 pm

Steve_M wrote:I however tend to think his book was not ful of his opinions, but being as i only think that and have only said as much before then I doubt anyone could provide evidence to suggest what it is i dont think.


When you graduate to coherent sentences, give me a buzz. :wink:

Tue Nov 14, 2006 11:14 pm

How about you gents metaphorically shake hands and make up? :)

Wed Nov 15, 2006 2:23 am

Gosh, I hate when people fight, especially when it's two of our most informed people. Cry and Steve - you're both cool.

As for the topic, Cry, you're making a mountain out of a pill pile.

Guralnick's reference can be seen as acknowledgment that, although slim for the taping, Elvis was not in good health. A keen observer can sense that something is not quite right -- perhaps it's the old saying about hindsight being 20/20, but Elvis does seem a much different man and artist than the one filmed by MGM just two and a half years prior.

In any event, Linda Thompson underscored the health issues when she later recalled Elvis went right back to overloading on his prescriptions the day after the "Aloha" show. And in just four weeks time he'd be in his Las Vegas Hilton suite, losing his mind over a "problem" with Mike Stone.

For better or worse, Peter's critically-acclaimed, award-winning two-volume biography is the STANDARD by which any future Presley tome will be measured. Frankly, I love Guralnick's compassionate, emphathetic and accurate prose, and he knows his music. I learned a LOT in reading "Last Train To Memphis" and "Careless Love" -- not to mention his fascinating "Notes" in the back. It is certain Peter had a much easier time creating the first volume, and who can blame him? However, I'll wager there are other drafts of his second volume I'd like much more than the final result.

Oh, and Elvis was indeed thinner in June 1968 than January 1973, probably a difference of at least ten pounds. Of course, most human beings never looked as wonderful and unique as Presley did for "Aloha." But then, that's one reason why we still yack about him in 2006, here on a little ol' internet MB.

Wed Nov 15, 2006 3:18 am

You're right, Doc.

I should save my passion for the likes of Goldman, not Guralnick.

Peter's volumes are compassionate. I just feel that some of his language is a tad unfair. Mountain out of a pill pile (relevant metaphor, too!)? Yeah, I can go with that, but... When the word "bloated" is used, given that a more precise word would serve better, it adds to myth. I wish Guralnick could have shaped his language here, and at several other points, with more *pre*cision and less *der*ision. And that's where I greatly differ with Steve: it is *his* opinions being expressed throughout both volumes. And, in this case, the photographic evidence doesn't bear his stance out. Ergo, his opinion is wrong, at least in the most literal sense. That was my impetus here.

The Mike Stone trinket, while sad, also brings greater context to the Aloha performance and mindset. Elvis was really feeling some of those songs. While any fan would almost certainly kill to have the Elvis of 1970 for many years to come, there is an attraction and mystique in the way Elvis performs numbers like "It's Over" and "What Now My Love". I think his expressions as a singer are vastly underrated, if not outright ignored, by many: his eyes express as much as his voice. In Aloha, they're sad eyes, and it's a sad ol' voice that goes with 'em, but that combination just begs to be savoured. It's pure, honest, open. An artist can aspire to nothing greater. I really don't think those songs could have been done with the same sense of disquiet a few years earlier. But that's a digression. I guess I'm simply trying to say that you have to look at the Elvis legacy for what it is, and in my mind, Guralnick didn't always look for the gold amidst the gravel. It's true there was more and more of the latter over the former with every year, but that's why a truly balanced account requires a good sifting and acknowledgement of both.

Doc, your kind words about me, as well as your interjection here, are appreciated.

Wed Nov 15, 2006 3:28 am

Cryogenic wrote:And, in this case, the photographic evidence doesn't bear his stance out.

Ah, but a viewing of the video/DVD is a different story.

Cryogenic wrote:Guralnick didn't always look for the gold amidst the gravel. It's true there was more and more of the latter over the former with every year, but that's why a truly balanced account requires a good sifting and acknowledgement of both.

I think Peter did as well as anyone could have in his second volume. It's clear this was his main struggle, along with his apparent inability to really go after the major transgressions of Elvis' management in the later years.

Wed Nov 15, 2006 3:34 am

drjohncarpenter wrote:
Cryogenic wrote:And, in this case, the photographic evidence doesn't bear his stance out.

Ah, but a viewing of the video/DVD is a different story.


Well, I already said he's right about the sullen appearance of Elvis -- there is *definitely* a malaise in his eyes that Guralnick astutely noted -- but I can't commit to the bloated charge. To be fair, he looks a little thickened up in the Jan 12th concert, but that's gone by the time he's had a haircut for Jan 14th. Nonetheless, his hair is still longer at that time than it was for the Comeback Special, not to mention the foreboding jumpsuit versus a tight black leather jacket, so I guess I can understand why people would say he was bloated for Aloha, but I cannot actually subscribe to that term in its most literal sense.

Yes, I know: Mountain. Pill pile.

*shutting up*

drjohncarpenter wrote:
Cryogenic wrote:Guralnick didn't always look for the gold amidst the gravel. It's true there was more and more of the latter over the former with every year, but that's why a truly balanced account requires a good sifting and acknowledgement of both.

I think Peter did as well as anyone could have in his second volume. It's clear this was his main struggle, along with his apparent inability to really go after the major transgressions of Elvis' management in the later years.


I completely agree.

Wed Nov 15, 2006 11:44 am

Dont know if I am right here but.........didnt Elvis have some treatment for Glaucoma around the same time as Aloha, I remember reading somewhere he had to have fluid drained from one of his eyes because it was that bad, this could account for the sadness theory :?

Wed Nov 15, 2006 11:50 am

sid wrote:... didnt Elvis have some treatment for Glaucoma around the same time as Aloha ...

No, he was feeling sadness in March 1971, when he had to cut short a great studio session because of eye trouble. When he got back to Nashville in May, things didn't go quite so well.

Wed Nov 15, 2006 12:07 pm

Thanks Doc :wink:

Thu Nov 16, 2006 2:42 pm

drjohncarpenter wrote:Gosh, I hate when people fight, especially when it's two of our most informed people. Cry and Steve - you're both cool.


I think Mr. Cryo is actually the legendary N880EP. Either that or he is N880EP's son. Trust me, I am the new Sherlock Holmes.

Keith Richards, Jr.

Thu Nov 16, 2006 3:41 pm

Keith Richards, Jr. wrote:
drjohncarpenter wrote:Gosh, I hate when people fight, especially when it's two of our most informed people. Cry and Steve - you're both cool.


I think Mr. Cryo is actually the legendary N880EP. Either that or he is N880EP's son. Trust me, I am the new Sherlock Holmes.


What makes you say that, Keith?

Do tell. :wink:

Thu Nov 16, 2006 5:47 pm

Well, what can I say, Cryo. I started an investigation a couple of days ago. Your behaviour has been very suspicious. This finally made me convinced that you are in fact N880EP:

Cryogenic wrote:In any case,.............. >>> the manner of your analogy suggests a "splash" is a noun, when...


That part with all the dots and the little "arrow" is very much like N880EP's style. You have also - on more than one occation - written EP instead of Elvis, just like N880EP used to do. I realize the evidence is kind of weak so far, but I will definitely keep an eye on you and your posts in the future! :D :shock:

Keith Richards, Jr.

Thu Nov 16, 2006 7:17 pm

Keith Richards, Jr. wrote:Well, what can I say, Cryo. I started an investigation a couple of days ago. Your behaviour has been very suspicious. This finally made me convinced that you are in fact N880EP:

Cryogenic wrote:In any case,.............. >>> the manner of your analogy suggests a "splash" is a noun, when...


That part with all the dots and the little "arrow" is very much like N880EP's style. You have also - on more than one occation - written EP instead of Elvis, just like N880EP used to do. I realize the evidence is kind of weak so far, but I will definitely keep an eye on you and your posts in the future! :D :shock:


How do you know I haven't done all that in honour of a great man?

Thu Nov 16, 2006 7:24 pm

Cryogenic wrote:...How do you know I haven't done all that in honour of a great man?


Another clue? Sorry to interrupt your investigative work, Keith, but you raised an interesting thought. Either way, I think most of us welcome intelligent conversations with learned individuals, so having a style similar (or equal) to N880EP is a good thing!

Thu Nov 16, 2006 8:07 pm

Cryogenic wrote:
Keith Richards, Jr. wrote:Well, what can I say, Cryo. I started an investigation a couple of days ago. Your behaviour has been very suspicious. This finally made me convinced that you are in fact N880EP:

Cryogenic wrote:In any case,.............. >>> the manner of your analogy suggests a "splash" is a noun, when...


That part with all the dots and the little "arrow" is very much like N880EP's style. You have also - on more than one occation - written EP instead of Elvis, just like N880EP used to do. I realize the evidence is kind of weak so far, but I will definitely keep an eye on you and your posts in the future! :D :shock:


How do you know I haven't done all that in honour of a great man?


Okay Cryo, come clean. :lol:

Thu Nov 16, 2006 9:01 pm

I have. I am a completely different person.

Image

Thu Nov 23, 2006 9:38 am

Cryogenic wrote:
Steve_M wrote:Guralnick's books are full of his opinions. FACT.

FYI: Guralnick also received a payment from EPE when writing "Careless Love". Something for critical minds to process.


I totally agree regarding Guralnick's books, especially "CareLess Love". "A Suckup to certain individuals" for "obvious reasons" as stated above.