All posts with more than 3000 Hits, prior to 2008

Sat Jun 03, 2006 11:03 am

Telephone Babe wrote:Ask yourself if we have the right to invade Elvis' (or anybody's) privacy that much! Or are we all National Enquirer readers?


I'm not an enquirer reader but as a fan I'm fascinated by the man ( and his music of course ) and wants to know more tso where's the problem as long as the guys are honnest ??? Just watch this if you haven't which is more or less the video version of the book . it may change your mind

Image

Sat Jun 03, 2006 11:12 am

MauriceinIreland wrote: Beware the source! But read everything about Elvis you can get hold of. And THINK!
Yes.

Sat Jun 03, 2006 2:12 pm

Scatter wrote:
Telephone Babe wrote:What you guys miss is: why do we need to know about anybody's private life and why do friends tell-all?

What you miss is the fact that some people seek to understand history rather than just have the capacity to recite dates and deeds. All of what we and the greats of history accomplished springs from the fount of our personalities, and the influences that shaped us. If you are content with "In 1492 Columbus sailed the ocean blue" as your only grasp of that history, you are deprived of the much more fascinating story of WHY Columbus did it, and what the forces were that propelled him. Such understanding only comes from knowing him through his contemporaries (friends) warts and all.

Is Elvis a better singer now we know all about his private life?
Are these guys now better friends because they told us all about what Elvis kept private?

Is Washington a better General because we know about his reliance upon what he viewed as Divine Providence?? No, but it explains why he was able to withstand the deprivations of Valley Forge.

Is Benedict Arnold less of a traitor because of the Continental Congress' refusal to reimburse him for his personal expenses while he was a hero fighting the War?? No, but it helps us understand why he felt driven to betray his country.

Is Elvis a better singer because we know about the drug dependency?? No, but it explains much about the sad decline of his latter years.

If all these revelations about these men were kept secret, we would understand much less about them and the world they forged..........and the lessons lost would not be outweighed by the warmth of the fuzzy blanket of ignorance



I could not care less if Elvis shot a million TV's, gave away nothing, burped after dinner, pissed in his pants, never took a bath, cursed, and whatever important information we got from these tell-all books.

Then you have a minimalist view of history and are content to remain in the dark as to WHY the story ended as it did. That's fine........some of us seek to understand and learn from what we discover.

Ask yourself if we have the right to invade Elvis' (or anybody's) privacy that much! Or are we all National Enquirer readers?

Was I invading Washington's privacy when I read his diaries?? Was I invading Edison's privacy when I roamed his home and read the recollections of his friends and enemies alike?? Was there nothing of substance to be gained there??Please tell me the difference here between that and Elvis..........aside from your selective protectiveness.

Socrates
(he was a philosopher that led a rather interesting life himself.......though I'm certain that's of no interest to you) said "The unexamined life is not worth living." I would add that the life that does not examine isn't worth living either.

Some of us are compelled to examine.........some are content to spin their discs in the dark. To each their own.



Very well written, Scatter. I agree with this. In order to understand why a lot of things happened we need to know what went on behind the scenes. Whether one likes it or not, Elvis Presley is a historical figure and what he did is important to our cultural history. Nothing I have read about him has made his music sound worse but it has helped me to understand why certain things happened the way they did. That is what history is all about and learning from it.

"What is past is prologue."

William Shakespeare

Sat Jun 03, 2006 7:22 pm

Scatter wrote:
Telephone Babe wrote:What you guys miss is: why do we need to know about anybody's private life and why do friends tell-all?

What you miss is the fact that some people seek to understand history rather than just have the capacity to recite dates and deeds. All of what we and the greats of history accomplished springs from the fount of our personalities, and the influences that shaped us. If you are content with "In 1492 Columbus sailed the ocean blue" as your only grasp of that history, you are deprived of the much more fascinating story of WHY Columbus did it, and what the forces were that propelled him. Such understanding only comes from knowing him through his contemporaries (friends) warts and all.

Is Elvis a better singer now we know all about his private life?
Are these guys now better friends because they told us all about what Elvis kept private?

Is Washington a better General because we know about his reliance upon what he viewed as Divine Providence?? No, but it explains why he was able to withstand the deprivations of Valley Forge.

Is Benedict Arnold less of a traitor because of the Continental Congress' refusal to reimburse him for his personal expenses while he was a hero fighting the War?? No, but it helps us understand why he felt driven to betray his country.

Is Elvis a better singer because we know about the drug dependency?? No, but it explains much about the sad decline of his latter years.

If all these revelations about these men were kept secret, we would understand much less about them and the world they forged..........and the lessons lost would not be outweighed by the warmth of the fuzzy blanket of ignorance



I could not care less if Elvis shot a million TV's, gave away nothing, burped after dinner, pissed in his pants, never took a bath, cursed, and whatever important information we got from these tell-all books.

Then you have a minimalist view of history and are content to remain in the dark as to WHY the story ended as it did. That's fine........some of us seek to understand and learn from what we discover.

Ask yourself if we have the right to invade Elvis' (or anybody's) privacy that much! Or are we all National Enquirer readers?

Was I invading Washington's privacy when I read his diaries?? Was I invading Edison's privacy when I roamed his home and read the recollections of his friends and enemies alike?? Was there nothing of substance to be gained there??Please tell me the difference here between that and Elvis..........aside from your selective protectiveness.

Socrates
(he was a philosopher that led a rather interesting life himself.......though I'm certain that's of no interest to you) said "The unexamined life is not worth living." I would add that the life that does not examine isn't worth living either.

Some of us are compelled to examine.........some are content to spin their discs in the dark. To each their own.




The stories about these people was done long after they lived. Elvis has only been gone for almost 29 years.
It was no thorough research, just people who were fired who suddenly decided to tell all private things to the world.
Anyone ever examined why? They were fired many times, according to their own books. Did they blackmail Elvis to hire them back? Did they now do something so bad that Elvis rather had a tell-all book then hire them back?

Sat Jun 03, 2006 7:27 pm

It's funny. Some people seem to think that others have to keep their mouth shut, just because the don't want to know any bad detail that could harm their nice cosy picture that they have created of their great big hero in their small little brains....

Sun Jun 04, 2006 11:15 am

dl wrote:It's funny. Some people seem to think that others have to keep their mouth shut, just because the don't want to know any bad detail that could harm their nice cosy picture that they have created of their great big hero in their small little brains....


It has nothing to do with the details being bad and the fan's image of Elvis!
It has everything to do with friends betraying trust.
People who do not get that have a small brain, not the people who think friends should not betray trust.

Sun Jun 04, 2006 11:18 am

Telephone Babe wrote:
dl wrote:It's funny. Some people seem to think that others have to keep their mouth shut, just because the don't want to know any bad detail that could harm their nice cosy picture that they have created of their great big hero in their small little brains....


It has nothing to do with the details being bad and the fan's image of Elvis!
It has everything to do with friends betraying trust.
People who do not get that have a small brain, not the people who think friends should not betray trust.



you're wasting ur fingers TB, most here don't get that concept, and never will.

Sun Jun 04, 2006 10:41 pm

But Kylan, have bought this or any of the other MM books ?....... :lol:

Mon Jun 05, 2006 12:08 am

Ezzz wrote:But Kylan, have bought this or any of the other MM books ?....... :lol:


Sure, he has. He also has a copy of the 1977 CBS Special, Elvis In Concert. He doesn't believe anyone should watch that, either, yet he does "once or twice a year."

But that's different. :wink:

Mon Jun 05, 2006 12:14 am

KHoots wrote:
Ezzz wrote:But Kylan, have bought this or any of the other MM books ?....... :lol:


Sure, he has. He also has a copy of the 1977 CBS Special, Elvis In Concert. He doesn't believe anyone should watch that, either, yet he does "once or twice a year."

But that's different. :wink:


Khoots, im afraid ur not welcome back at the house if you're gonna tell people what i have, what i read, what i watch and when I watch it! :wink:

all funnies aside, if you aren't aware of such material and haven't read it, then there is no opinion to be offered up on it. so putting up that argument is quite lame.

Mon Jun 05, 2006 10:21 am

Telephone Babe wrote:
Scatter wrote:
Telephone Babe wrote:What you guys miss is: why do we need to know about anybody's private life and why do friends tell-all?

What you miss is the fact that some people seek to understand history rather than just have the capacity to recite dates and deeds. All of what we and the greats of history accomplished springs from the fount of our personalities, and the influences that shaped us. If you are content with "In 1492 Columbus sailed the ocean blue" as your only grasp of that history, you are deprived of the much more fascinating story of WHY Columbus did it, and what the forces were that propelled him. Such understanding only comes from knowing him through his contemporaries (friends) warts and all.

Is Elvis a better singer now we know all about his private life?
Are these guys now better friends because they told us all about what Elvis kept private?

Is Washington a better General because we know about his reliance upon what he viewed as Divine Providence?? No, but it explains why he was able to withstand the deprivations of Valley Forge.

Is Benedict Arnold less of a traitor because of the Continental Congress' refusal to reimburse him for his personal expenses while he was a hero fighting the War?? No, but it helps us understand why he felt driven to betray his country.

Is Elvis a better singer because we know about the drug dependency?? No, but it explains much about the sad decline of his latter years.

If all these revelations about these men were kept secret, we would understand much less about them and the world they forged..........and the lessons lost would not be outweighed by the warmth of the fuzzy blanket of ignorance



I could not care less if Elvis shot a million TV's, gave away nothing, burped after dinner, pissed in his pants, never took a bath, cursed, and whatever important information we got from these tell-all books.

Then you have a minimalist view of history and are content to remain in the dark as to WHY the story ended as it did. That's fine........some of us seek to understand and learn from what we discover.

Ask yourself if we have the right to invade Elvis' (or anybody's) privacy that much! Or are we all National Enquirer readers?

Was I invading Washington's privacy when I read his diaries?? Was I invading Edison's privacy when I roamed his home and read the recollections of his friends and enemies alike?? Was there nothing of substance to be gained there??Please tell me the difference here between that and Elvis..........aside from your selective protectiveness.

Socrates
(he was a philosopher that led a rather interesting life himself.......though I'm certain that's of no interest to you) said "The unexamined life is not worth living." I would add that the life that does not examine isn't worth living either.

Some of us are compelled to examine.........some are content to spin their discs in the dark. To each their own.




The stories about these people was done long after they lived. Elvis has only been gone for almost 29 years.

Incorrect..........Lincoln's and Washington's biographers began writing before the grass grew over the graves. Same with most historical personages..........contemporaries always try to strike while the iron is hot (news of the death is recent and bankable).

It was no thorough research, just people who were fired who suddenly decided to tell all private things to the world.

Again........not correct. Red and Sonny's motives may well have been mixed (they have been honest enough to state as much many times), but so are the motives of nearly ALL biographers. Usually an equal mix of admiration and mammon. No crime there. I doubt you will find many who agree with your assessment that Red and Sonny were in it strictly for the money........at least not anyone who knows the subject well, anyway. To their credit, and toward the confirmation of their stated motive of reaching Elvis before it was too late, they wrote while Elvis lived and could refute them.

Anyone ever examined why? They were fired many times, according to their own books. Did they blackmail Elvis to hire them back? Did they now do something so bad that Elvis rather had a tell-all book then hire them back?

You would know the answers to those questions if you had "examined why" yourself. There is no mystery about it.This all goes back to the original issue........you don't care to "examine". Perhaps if you did, you wouldn't have so many misconceptions.You fairly berated those who read these books to "examine" the why's and how's, then rely on us to glean the information you lack. I don't understand this........I thought you didn't care??

Tue Jun 06, 2006 2:03 am

Kylan wrote:...Khoots, im afraid ur not welcome back at the house if you're gonna tell people what i have, what i read, what i watch and when I watch it! :wink:

all funnies aside, if you aren't aware of such material and haven't read it, then there is no opinion to be offered up on it. so putting up that argument is quite lame.



Kylan, I'm well aware of the material in question. I own it, read it, and study it like I'm taking the bar exam. If you'd spend more time snooping around my house as I do yours, you'd know that. :D

Re:

Thu Nov 29, 2012 5:54 pm

Old Shep wrote:Well, it´s a very honest book, but I know a lot of fans, that don´t like it, because it countains a lot of tough things and because of Lamar´s black humor. But it´s my favourite Elvis book. :roll:

O.S.

I agree 100% it is my fav about Elvis as well!!!!

Re: REVELATIONS OF MEMPHIS MAFIA

Thu Nov 29, 2012 5:56 pm

This was the best book I've ever read on Elvis Presley.

I had a hard time putting it down.