Elvis And Me

[SatninLove]

What were your thoughts on the book Elvis And Me by Priscilla Presley,and the movie Elvis And Me?
-SatninLove

[Diane]

(n)(n)(n)(n)(n)(n)(n)

Diane

[Broussey]

See i didn't mind it .. Thats what made me a fan her movie was shown here a long time ago on t.v . Thats what started it for me , i know NOW that most of it was made her to look better but i still though they were OK ! So i will give it(y) and (n)

[1100ccRider]

The book wasn't too bad, though at the time (before its publication) I remember hearing that Priscilla was told by the publishers to spice it up and add some scandal, and that showed. Certainly, she comes across as a blameless angel, for the most part -- not surprising, and understandable, but not the truth of it.

The miniseries was utter and complete crap. The only good part of it (the title should have been Angry Elvis or Me and Me) was the brief clip of the real Elvis firing Roman candles. Bleh...

[ForeverTheKing]

The book wasn't too bad, though at the time (before its publication) I remember hearing that Priscilla was told by the publishers to spice it up and add some scandal, and that showed. Certainly, she comes across as a blameless angel, for the most part -- not surprising, and understandable, but not the truth of it.

The miniseries was utter and complete crap. The only good part of it (the title should have been Angry Elvis or Me and Me) was the brief clip of the real Elvis firing Roman candles. Bleh...

Totally agree about the movie (y)
I've not read the book but from the movie Priscilla seemed to be a poor victim and a angel and Elvis totally insane, nervous, egoist, insensitive...a real devil :) Of course he had his defects and he had some faults in their relationship but I can't believe that was the truth (y)
I didn't like the actor who played Elvis, better the actress who played Cilla (y)

[MissyM]

It's basically a fairy tale gone bad book with some embellishing and inconsistancies. I'd give it a 2.

[midnight]

(n)(n)(n)(n) I just loved the way she passed her "loving memories" on to Lisa Marie!!! I mean what a "wonderful" way to remember your daddy!!!:angry:

[MissyM]

That part is not nice. What is really missing in the book is any accountablity on Priscilla's part in anything. That alone to me makes if very fairytalish.

[presley31]

Like the book and hated the movie. What is all this talk about priscilla?? I would prefer to spend time talking about elvis.

[U.S. Male]

IMO the movie was totally one sided (n)

I agree that Elvis wasn't the "perfect man", but neither was she, and that part of the story seamed to have been left out (for obvious reasons) :whistling

[Diane]

I'm apologizing for the thumbs down on this one without explanation too. This is one book that I feel definitely should not have been written at all. It's not something that Lisa Marie should have had to live with and that should have been Priscilla's first concern. Elvis couldn't be hurt by it personally as he was already gone and his image had already been thrashed but Lisa shouldn't have had to live with it hanging over her head.

Diane

[presley31]

I'm apologizing for the thumbs down on this one without explanation too. This is one book that I feel definitely should not have been written at all. It's not something that Lisa Marie should have had to live with and that should have been Priscilla's first concern. Elvis couldn't be hurt by it personally as he was already gone and his image had already been thrashed but Lisa shouldn't have had to live with it hanging over her head.

Diane

accoding to Lisa diane she liked it very much;) and to be honest its not as bad as some books out there.

[franny]

accoding to Lisa diane she liked it very much;) and to be honest its not as bad as some books out there.

Right, Jen. I don't think it was that bad, either. I think most of it was written in a lovely way about how they met and there time together. I agree that some parts should have been left out, but overall it wasn't that bad.

franny

[presley31]

Right, Jen. I don't think it was that bad, either. I think most of it was written in a lovely way about how they met and there time together. I agree that some parts should have been left out, but overall it wasn't that bad.

franny

agreed franny

yes some parts didn't need to come out, but you could say that about every book that has been written about elvis.

something l came accoss


DID THE CANDOR OF THE GOLDMAN BOOK ABOUT ELVIS INSPIRE YOU TO WRITE YOURS?

Oh, absolutely. His was every reason why I wrote my book. After reading his book I just took the responsibility on my own, because there'd also been another book prior to that that a couple of bodyguards, Sonny & Red West, had written [ELVIS, WHAT HAPPENED?] that didn't paint a very nice picture. Then Albert Goldman's book came out. But he was a much more substantial writer, and it put him on the best-seller list for many, many weeks. I couldn't allow that to go down in history as the last definitive book on Elvis Presley that people would go to. And I didn't want my daughter to read something like that and think, "My God! Is this true? Could this be true?"

WITHOUT HAVING A BALANCE, YOU MEAN? SHE COULD READ IT ANYWAY.

Yeah. But there'd be a lot of questions, I think, in her head. And I think my book did discredit his book. My daughter loved it. And when I got her approval on it, she knew what I went thru, she read the excerpts, she saw what I was doing, she supported me, she read it 3 times and loved it. And I think that was enough for me to go on, to feel that it was okay.

WAS YOUR HAND FORCED BY THE GOLDMAN BOOK? WOULD YOU HAVE BEEN LESS INTIMATE OTHERWISE?

There were a lot of things I didn't say. There were a lot of things, of course, I wouldn't, but why? I mean, that wasn't the purpose of the book. I can not take the responsibility for something. And I wouldn't do that to the public. They were waiting for this book, and they felt that it had to be right. After I read Goldman's book and after the book that Red & Sonny West had written--believe me, this book wasn't intimate. To say the least.

YOKO ONO'S NOW IN A SIMILAR POSITION WITH GOLDMAN'S BOOK ON LENNON. WHAT WOULD YOU SAY TO HER?

I know the shock that I'm sure she felt from the exposure. I know that when you know someone as intimately as she knew John, you have some person who didn't even know him write such intimacies about him, & so damaging. I totally understand whatever she has to do to make it go right for John.

[renapap05]

I think it's a good movie,but i don't believe Cilla was such a good character...(n)(n)(n)No way...She didn't love Elvis so much IMO.:mad:
The whole movie was a fake if you ask me...Nice movie,but...(n)
But i have to admit that i cried in the end of the movie...:'(:'(:'(

[Donut]

(n)(n)(n)(n)(n)(n)(n)

Diane

(y)(y)(y)(y)(y)(y)(y)

[KPM]

I think she has the right to tell her version of this story. She is the girl we read about who met him in Germany. He wanted her in Memphis, she lived at Graceland, she slept in his room, she made the bus trips, the allnight movies, the vacations to Las Vegas, Hollywood, Hawaii, Bahamas, etc...she ate with him, shared holidays like Christmas with him, she was on the cattle ranch in 67 when he went on the farmer spending spree, then she married him, had Lisa with him, and finally divorced him. For any of us hear-she has a million more memories-from actual personal contact than we will ever read in a hundred books. So I think she has to be pretty well informed and her book to me was not that bad ...........................................
but that being said I also think she is like most anyone who writes a book. Most who write tend to play up their own good points and play down their own problems and screw-ups. Is she going to dish the dirt on herself-no. Do most who write these kind of books go into detail about their own shortcomings in dealing with Elvis-no-so she is no different in that respect. If Elvis was able to write his story-I'm sure he would also have a tendency to let himself off easy but thats human nature.

[buttonhead]

(n)(n)(n)(n)(n)(n)(n)

Diane


:lol::lol:

Where is Teddy when we need him :lol:

The book is ok....:doh:

[presley31]

I think she has the right to tell her version of this story. She is the girl we read about who met him in Germany. He wanted her in Memphis, she lived at Graceland, she slept in his room, she made the bus trips, the allnight movies, the vacations to Las Vegas, Hollywood, Hawaii, Bahamas, etc...she ate with him, shared holidays like Christmas with him, she was on the cattle ranch in 67 when he went on the farmer spending spree, then she married him, had Lisa with him, and finally divorced him. For any of us hear-she has a million more memories-from actual personal contact than we will ever read in a hundred books. So I think she has to be pretty well informed and her book to me was not that bad ...........................................
but that being said I also think she is like most anyone who writes a book. Most who write tend to play up their own good points and play down their own problems and screw-ups. Is she going to dish the dirt on herself-no. Do most who write these kind of books go into detail about their own shortcomings in dealing with Elvis-no-so she is no different in that respect. If Elvis was able to write his story-I'm sure he would also have a tendency to let himself off easy but thats human nature.

well said KPM and l couldn't agree more(y)

[SatninLove]

:lol::lol:

Where is Teddy when we need him :lol:

The book is ok....:doh:

lol.I forgot Teddy is a huge Priscilla fan.lol.I"m sure he'll post soon though.lol.
-SatninLove

[Teddy]

Elvis and Me is a literary accomplishment of staggering proportions and possibly the greatest book written by anybody, ever.

Having said that, I will freely admit that my longing to sleep with the author regularly affects the level of enthusiasm which I exhibit while discussing it.

[Merry]

You read it "just for the articles", Teddy? lol

[Teddy]

I see absolutely no point in letting the truth interfere with the most enjoyable version of a story.
People who say otherwise tend to be insufferably dull.
And I'm obliged to support my Virtual Wife.

[nash]

It was her version....I don´t trust her,I hated the book.

[utmom2008]

IMO the movie was totally one sided (n)

I agree that Elvis wasn't the "perfect man", but neither was she, and that part of the story seamed to have been left out (for obvious reasons) :whistling

(y)(y)(y)(y)(y)(y)(y)(y)(y)(y)

[utmom2008]

Having said that, I will freely admit that my longing to sleep with the author regularly affects the level of enthusiasm which I exhibit while discussing it.

Is "Mrs Bear" aware of this situation?:hmm::hmm:

[MojoElvis]

What were your thoughts on the book Elvis And Me by Priscilla Presley,and the movie Elvis And Me?
-SatninLove

it was Priscilla's ultimate B S story in print then made into a B.S. MOVIE.
yeah she was the innocent victim and her parents where so concerned.
I don't know many parents that would let their 14 year old daughter spend all nighters at the biggest sex symbol's house. That whole story about them not doing anything till they got married was b.S. too. Lamar was quoted as saying, Elvis told him, "I guess she was really a virgin", and Lamar's response was, "ok what prison are we going to do time in". He said, "was", meaning she wasn't before he had gotten to her.
that's only one part that's b.s. I could go on and on with that book.

[ehollier]

I think Ken hit it pretty much on the head with his post. Priscilla told her story from her point of view -- both as a child and as a young woman in a life that none of could ever possibly comprehend.

When any of us think of memories of when we were children, they are never going to be what an adult will recall. When she recalled memories of being a young woman, they would never be what an older adult would recall. I don't know of any young adult or child that would focus on her less than attractive side and then dish the dirt in a book.

Priscilla does have a very special point of view as she shared some very intimate times with Elvis that no one else has had the opportunity to share and at a time in his life when he was very very sad and lonely and vunerable in Germany which was a very crucial time in his life since he was still very deeply affected by the loss of his mother and separation from his fans and career.

She was also part of his life when his career had a second breathe of life in 1968 and 1969 and she was there for all of those desolate years that lead up to the Comeback and Vegas. She has said many times that she rode his highs and lows. That's the way it is any intimate relationship.

No doubt, there are many many other memories of her life with Elvis, but she choose to recall the ones only most pertinent to her story for the purposes of her book. She shouldn't be blamed if she left out things that she considered as too personal to publish or irrelevent at the time.

[LianaKaralivanou]

Sorry to disappoint you friends but I liked the book AND the movie. I think it was only fair to hear her point of view. Ok, maybe there were some parts about Elvis' character that I don't agree with but it was a good movie and a enjoyable-reading book in general.

[Diane]

She could have left out the story about the rape. No one can tell that was good for Lisa to read about and that she liked that part of the book. The movie was disgustingly all one-sided and I can't feel the love for Elvis in it at all.

Diane

[presley31]

She could have left out the story about the rape. No one can tell that was good for Lisa to read about and that she liked that part of the book. The movie was disgustingly all one-sided and I can't feel the love for Elvis in it at all.

Diane

I don't agree with that either that she wrote that in her book, but she didn't came out and said elvis rape it but forcefully made love to her, who knows we weren't there.

The movie l had read that she didn't get the last say on it cause the productor didn't like her way of telling it and he wanted it more real than a faiytale.

[utmom2008]

No doubt, there are many many other memories of her life with Elvis, but she choose to recall the ones only most pertinent to her story for the purposes of her book. She shouldn't be blamed if she left out things that she considered as too personal to publish or irrelevent at the time.

:lol:Good heavens...what could she have left out? Any one that writes in a book that her husband(and father of her child) raped her hasn't left out much that's too personal.:blush::blush:


She could have left out the story about the rape. No one can tell that was good for Lisa to read about and that she liked that part of the book. The movie was disgustingly all one-sided and I can't feel the love for Elvis in it at all.

Diane
I agree 100% Diane.(y)(y)(y)(y)

[Diane]

Aww, you know you've got me when you wave that flag at me Jen.:lol:

Diane

[presley31]

Aww, you know you've got me when you wave that flag at me Jen.:lol:

Diane

Yes that flag is the greatest and love it. Will try to find you a canadian one.

[midnight]

She could have left out the story about the rape. No one can tell that was good for Lisa to read about and that she liked that part of the book. The movie was disgustingly all one-sided and I can't feel the love for Elvis in it at all.

Diane

I agree with you Diane. I also hated the movie! The sad thing is many people believed it. I noticed the last few years she is trying to patch some things up and twist some of the stories around!! I would say too late , the damage is done. I lost a lot of respect for her the day I started reading her book! I lost a whole lot more respect for her the night I watched that movie!

[presley31]

Protecting her memories led directly to battles with director Larry Peerce. Son of the late tenor Jan Peerce, Larry says Priscilla gave him plenty of input -- ''I heard her **** loud and clear. She said to me, 'There were good times and bad, like any relationship. What was bad we know already.' As far as she was concerned the good far outweighed the bad. But if I honored that, I'd be doing her and Elvis' fans a disservice. I promised her that I wouldn't make a fool of her, but I went for the reality. Priscilla did not have the last word.''

source:http://simplycilla.com/mp/simplycilla/articles/Priscilla%20Prelsey%20Articles%20-%20A%20Mom%20Again-Feb%201988.htm

[ehollier]

:lol:Good heavens...what could she have left out? Any one that writes in a book that her husband(and father of her child) raped her hasn't left out much that's too personal.:blush::blush:




Priscilla never said that Elvis raped her. She described his reaction when she told him that she was leaving, but she never said he raped her.

[ehollier]

She could have left out the story about the rape. No one can tell that was good for Lisa to read about and that she liked that part of the book. The movie was disgustingly all one-sided and I can't feel the love for Elvis in it at all.

Diane

Priscilla never said that Elvis raped her. Priscilla wrote of when she told Elvis that she was wanted a divorce. Had she not told this story in her book, many would be left wondering what Elvis' reaction was to her news, because it was public knowledge that she left Elvis for someone else.

[SleepyJack]

The week the book was released here I actually found a copy of it lying in a bin at the bus shelter on my way to a dentist appointment...it didn`t do anything for my expectations! Back then I found a lot of things in it I didn`t like...but nowadays it seems almost tame. I haven`t seen the movie yet...not really in any great hurry to either!

[Donut]

Elvis and Me is a literary accomplishment of staggering proportions and possibly the greatest book written by anybody, ever.

Having said that, I will freely admit that my longing to sleep with the author regularly affects the level of enthusiasm which I exhibit while discussing it.

:lmfao::lmfao::lmfao:

[Donut]

Priscilla never said that Elvis raped her. She described his reaction when she told him that she was leaving, but she never said he raped her.

She never used that word but she was clearly imlying that.

[utmom2008]

She never used that word but she was clearly imlying that.

"He grabbed me and forcefullymade love to me. It was uncomfortable and unlike any other time he had made love to me before." All you need to do is read between the lines..I agree with Donut, that's what she was implying. What I find interesting about the remark is this...if we are to believe Pris' every word then this must have been about the 5th time they had ever actually had sex. She was a virgin until they married, and then he wouldn't touch her after she became a Mother. Their sex life must have been short and sweet. I bet she could remember the times before...since the number of times probably didn't reach double digits.:supriced::supriced::lol::lol:

[Donut]

"He grabbed me and forcefullymade love to me. It was uncomfortable and unlike any other time he had made love to me before." All you need to do is read between the lines..I agree with Donut, that's what she was implying. What I find interesting about the remark is this...if we are to believe Pris' every word then this must have been about the 5th time they had ever actually had sex. She was a virgin until they married, and then he wouldn't touch her after she became a Mother. Their sex life must have been short and sweet. I bet she could remember the times before...since the number of times probably didn't reach double digits.:supriced::supriced::lol::lol:

The 5th time they had sex and the second time someone tried to make love to her forcefully, do you remember? :blink:

[presley31]

Still don't buy the whole rape thing.

[ehollier]

Joyce Bova also wrote in her book about a similiar experience with Elvis -- that he was much like this when they were together -- he was very forceful and unapologetic. She attributed his behavior to the drugs.

[MissyM]

Here's a little tid bit that some may not know, In Mike Edwards book he wrote that when she and he were breaking up, he wanted to make love to her one more time. She bargined with him, he says, that if she let him would he then leave and leave her alone. He said they did and after he thought it would make a difference but it didn't.
Now considering what a scummy guy this was, that for sure has to be taken into consideration. But I just find it odd that she allows men to use her in such a way. No one could ever forcefully make love to me. If they tried they would get a good kick were it really hurt. So why did she go along with it. For this reason I don't think it was rape. And if she went along with it then I'm sorry, I have difficult time feeling sorry for her.
She said she wrote the book to set things straight about Elvis and Her. I don't think her story was much better than Goldmans or EWH. The only difference it that her story saves her reputation, not Elvis's.
As I said, I feel her motive was the clear her reputation not his.
And what I don't get is this. In other books it said she informed Elvis she was leaving in while visiting Graceland. Elvis told everyone that she wasn't coming back to Graceland, was leaving him because didn't love him anymore. So why did she need to tell him personally that she wanted a divorce. Why not do it via phone or a lawyer. Why do that right before he is ready to go on stage??? It doesn't make any sense.

[presley31]

Joyce Bova also wrote in her book about a similiar experience with Elvis -- that he was much like this when they were together -- he was very forceful and unapologetic. She attributed his behavior to the drugs.

thanks for posting that liz. I haven't read that book yet.

[Graceland Rain]

http://www.tcb-world.com/picture.php?albumid=379&pictureid=5593
personally the book was more in detailed the the movie and the movie had good parts but i think some things were not true!but we can say alot about every book thats been written. i wonder if Elvis wrote a book what would he tell or say! but over all i say it was both gossip and hot no matter how you sumed it up i like it ! but i would change the force scene in the book and the rape scene in the movie. i think Elvis was very good looking and didn't need to do what she said was done he didn't have a reason i could see to do it. women wanted to be with him i just don't believe he did that. He could have any women he basicly wanted so why would he.
i never met a women that said they never wanted him. and i never heard a women pass up on ELVIS unless there just blind or something. and priscilla was the producer over the movie she had a say what went in or out. but over i think there probably more she could say if she wanted to. but if it 's all true in her book, only God knows and Elvis .
but , i'm not her judge but i don't see ELVIS doing all of that. He's no saint but no devil either.
plus her book never talked about lisa marie that much or the given side of Elvis.
and it repeated how much she wanted him sexurally over and over.
that kept poping up alot in the book and the movie.

[MojoElvis]

I'm sorry this book and movie is as honest as Obama's campaign. She's not so innocent and she knew who Elvis Presley was.

[franny]

I think she has the right to tell her version of this story. She is the girl we read about who met him in Germany. He wanted her in Memphis, she lived at Graceland, she slept in his room, she made the bus trips, the allnight movies, the vacations to Las Vegas, Hollywood, Hawaii, Bahamas, etc...she ate with him, shared holidays like Christmas with him, she was on the cattle ranch in 67 when he went on the farmer spending spree, then she married him, had Lisa with him, and finally divorced him. For any of us hear-she has a million more memories-from actual personal contact than we will ever read in a hundred books. So I think she has to be pretty well informed and her book to me was not that bad ..............but that being said I also think she is like most anyone who writes a book. Most who write tend to play up their own good points and play down their own problems and screw-ups. Is she going to dish the dirt on herself-no. Do most who write these kind of books go into detail about their own shortcomings in dealing with Elvis-no-so she is no different in that respect. If Elvis was able to write his story-I'm sure he would also have a tendency to let himself off easy but thats human nature.

I agree with everything you said, KPM. (y) (y)


Here's a little tid bit that some may not know, In Mike Edwards book he wrote that when she and he were breaking up, he wanted to make love to her one more time. She bargined with him, he says, that if she let him would he then leave and leave her alone. He said they did and after he thought it would make a difference but it didn't.
Now considering what a scummy guy this was, that for sure has to be taken into consideration. But I just find it odd that she allows men to use her in such a way. No one could ever forcefully make love to me. If they tried they would get a good kick were it really hurt. So why did she go along with it. For this reason I don't think it was rape. And if she went along with it then I'm sorry, I have difficult time feeling sorry for her.
She said she wrote the book to set things straight about Elvis and Her. I don't think her story was much better than Goldmans or EWH. The only difference it that her story saves her reputation, not Elvis's.
As I said, I feel her motive was the clear her reputation not his.
And what I don't get is this. In other books it said she informed Elvis she was leaving in while visiting Graceland. Elvis told everyone that she wasn't coming back to Graceland, was leaving him because didn't love him anymore. So why did she need to tell him personally that she wanted a divorce. Why not do it via phone or a lawyer. Why do that right before he is ready to go on stage??? It doesn't make any sense.

I wouldn't believe a word that comes out of Mike Stones' mouth! He was just a jerk! :lol:

As I said before, some things should have been left out in Elvis and Me, the book and the movie...but, overall I didn't find the book that bad. If one who reads it dislikes Priscilla then they will most likely not like it from the start...But, I would not put Elvis and Me in the same category as Goldmans book...all just my opinion, of course :)

franny

[1100ccRider]

I appreciate that nobody but her can know what it's like to be the wife of someone like Elvis Presley -- of anyone, for that matter, but Being Elvis Presley was obviously a thing that forced some unique approaches to living life. Having said that, I have to say that I have very little respect for Priscilla and think that she is a person I wouldn't really like if I met her or got to know her (to whatever extent that is possible).

I am most definitely not one of those fans -- most seemed to be women, anyway -- who have been out for her blood since '67, or at least since she had the temerity to leave Elvis a few years later. I don't even blame her for leaving him, and if she cheated on him it's not only most properly a thing between the two of them but is rendered even more pointless an observation to harp on about because of Elvis' rampant inability to remain faithful. Yes, there's ripe territory for hypocrisy here when she bemoans Elvis' infidelities and ignores her own, but the bottom line is that both made mistakes or worse and that as much as we love Elvis as a performer and as good a person as he otherwise was, marital or other romantic fidelity was hardly his strongest virtue. In all likelihood, Elvis Presley was just not one of those people who should have ever been married (to anyone).

When I first read Priscilla's book I wasn't especially scandalized or mortified by it. Actually, a while before it came out I wrote a letter to her and Lisa Marie, I think in care of her publicist, expressing my regret over them being subjected to Goldman's piece of filth (I was not and am not given to writing letters to 'celebrities,' but that whole situation really began weighing on my mind, given the coverage accorded that awful tome). Her book left me feeling, to the best of my recollection now, that she was not only telling a very selective part of the Truth -- inevitable, really -- but that, in real terms, we gained little insight into Elvis from it and more than most of us needed in terms of Priscilla's life. I knew it'd been jazzed up by order of the publishers, but it was tame compared to the 1977 betrayals by The Bodyguards and Lamar F***'s revelations to Goldman (and, of course, that little warped putz' own unsubstantiated vitriol toward Elvis).

The miniseries, though, descended further into the realm of total trash, and Elvis was portrayed as almost entirely and perpetually cloaked in despair and violent anger, much to the dismay of sweet, virginal Priscilla. I thought the piece was not only an insult to Elvis (oh, yeah, and who could forget that giant fake stomach Dale Midkiff -- perhaps the least Elvis-like of potential leading men for the project, at least this side of Don Johnson -- sported toward the end) but was also an insult to viewers. It was an insult to the entire ****ed universe. It took the beyond-awful TV project Elvis and the Colonel (I think that was the title...the one that entirely squandered one of the Bridges brothers' considerable acting talents) to eclipse the badness of Elvis and Me.

But, still, I had not yet come to see Priscilla as the one with the black hat. What did it for me was seeing some 'news' show segment on TV that focused on her and that showed footage of her in her EPE offices. She said she didn't want any pictures of Elvis around and, sure enough, the place was devoid of any indication that 'EPE' includes the name 'Elvis Presley' in its corporate title. I can't recall the rest of it, but she spoke very dispassionately about him and seemed dismissive of him. Now, I fully realize that we're forever on the outside looking in, and I understand that by then she may have been weary of the focus of interviewers' questions being so heavily on Elvis, as opposed to her, and even though it's fact that he was a huge part of her development as a person I can understand her wanting to get away from the presence of Elvis in her life (look around..it's impossible, and Mojo Nixon really was right about the pervasiveness of Elvis). Still, there was something infinitely cold and heartless in her demeanor on this show. These are the impressions I got, directly from her demeanor and her answers to soft-ball questions, and it was quite an unequivocal impression.

All right, I'll say it: if it wasn't for Elvis, nobody in wider society would have a clue who Priscilla was. For that matter, most people undoubtedly still have no clue who Priscilla Beaulieu is, but Presley they sure know right off the bat. That's a given. She'd for **** sure never have landed any of the TV and movie roles she got. That Presley name opened every door she ever went through. Why do you think she switched back to it? And her claims that she doesn't want to be surrounded by mementos of The King because she's conscious of her son (and his father) and their feelings seems awfully disingenuous when you realize that (a) the bulk of her life is tied up with work related to EPE and (b) if she really felt THAT strongly about it perhaps she'd again switch back to having Beaulieu as a surname.

The bottom line is that I see Priscilla now as something of a cold, calculating opportunist. I'm not saying that she was like that in the '60s when, even if you consider the alternate story told in Child Bride, she was just a kid and sheltered in some ways even by Elvis, but I do think it's likely that the basic blocks of her personality were in place then and as far back as when she first met Elvis. I certainly believe only a fraction of what she says and am aware that -- even more so than is perhaps inevitable in anyone -- much of what she says about Elvis is primarily intended to make herself look better, worthy of outsized compassion, or whatever. Elvis And Me (again, Me and Me is a far more apt title) is perhaps the fullest expression of that need for recognition and forced empathy.

Again, I don't know her on a personal level, but this impression of her comes from a mélange of inputs that includes the interview I referenced and others I've seen or read along the way, in which her words were definitely not twisted or placed out of context. I found Child Bride an interesting read, and her reaction to it somewhat ironic in that she wrote at least as one-sided a perspective on Elvis herself. Of course, I'd hope anyone who was a fan of Elvis would know all too well not to believe everything they read, or anyone's perspective and imperfect memory in its entirety, and I think that if you put her book and Child Bride together the truth will be found somewhere in the middle, as it usually is...put them in a blender, even, and maybe the result will be the truth, or an approximation thereof.

And the more I read about her, I less I like her...Larry Geller's account of her burning Elvis' books for instance, is a bit chilling. Yes, she was young and did not understand what Elvis was into, but I think the fact she was threatened by his interests says a lot about her base character. She had plenty of other reasons to feel threatened -- the other women in Elvis' life and the constant and numbing presence of the 'Boys' leap to mind -- but Elvis' quest for truth in his life wasn't one of them (actually, maybe it really was, because I think him marrying her was a big mistake that he might not have made had he been more self-aware at the time...also, of course, consider the timing of nuptials in the wake of that concussion and the Colonel regaining control and seizing an unprecedented and untenable cut of Elvis' earnings).

I always thought she was a beautiful woman (still could be, physically, if she hadn't gone with the trendy but unfortunate trout-lip appearance), but I find it hard to believe she's not essentially an icy person at heart. And I haven't even gone into the pathology that might make her attracted to $cientology, an outfit that Elvis (despite on occasion giving us cause to wonder how gullible he was) immediately saw right through and would probably be horrified to find Lisa Marie dragged into by Priscilla.




EDIT: the auto-profanity feature here always provides hours of fun...the asterisks in my post are for the slightly more risqué version of 'darn,' in case you were thinking I'd written something much naughtier...

[utmom2008]

I always thought she was a beautiful woman (still could be, physically, if she hadn't gone with the trendy but unfortunate trout-lip appearance), but I find it hard to believe she's not essentially an icy person at heart. And I haven't even gone into the pathology that might make her attracted to $cientology, an outfit that Elvis (despite on occasion giving us cause to wonder how gullible he was) immediately saw right through and would probably be horrified to find Lisa Marie dragged into by Priscilla.




I agreed with your entire post, every word, and loved your summary. I have long thought that she is icy and cold...to everyone, not just "Elvis" people. She seems to have the personality traits that I dislike most in people...there is nothing warm and inviting about her plastic appearance. The women I have known through the years that seem icy and distant usually turn out to be the ones you can't trust. I would not be a Pris "fan" no matter who her ex-husband might be.:blink::blush:

[utmom2008]

Here's a little tid bit that some may not know, In Mike Edwards book he wrote that when she and he were breaking up, he wanted to make love to her one more time. She bargined with him, he says, that if she let him would he then leave and leave her alone. He said they did and after he thought it would make a difference but it didn't.

And what I don't get is this. In other books it said she informed Elvis she was leaving in while visiting Graceland. Elvis told everyone that she wasn't coming back to Graceland, was leaving him because didn't love him anymore. So why did she need to tell him personally that she wanted a divorce. Why not do it via phone or a lawyer. Why do that right before he is ready to go on stage??? It doesn't make any sense.

Isn't there a word for women that use sex to "barter" for things?;);):lol::lol::lol:

If I could ask her one question it would be.....why on earth did you choose to tell him you wanted a divorce in between shows in Vegas? I feel sorry for any fans that had waited on that particular show for months and months.:blink::blink::blink:(n)

[Dino78]

The movie is total rubbish, absolutely crap.
The book? Well she had to spice it up. She had to include some darker points. She had to play the good girl part in it.
So what people expected?

[Teddy]

Is "Mrs Bear" aware of this situation?:hmm::hmm:

Mrs Bear is a person of almost saintly patience and understanding.
Plus, the licentious twinkle which appears in Mrs Bear's eye when Elvis is on television prohibits her from casting an unreservedly punitive judgement on my weakness.

[Teddy]

Isn't there a word for women that use sex to "barter" for things?;);):lol::lol::lol:


Yes- "attractive".
It wouldn't work otherwise (y):lol:

[Diane]

I also agree 100% with 1100ccRider's post. It mirrors my reaction to Priscilla exactly in every way.

Diane

[Teddy]

I find it hard to believe she's not essentially an icy person at heart. And I haven't even gone into the pathology that might make her attracted to $cientology, an outfit that Elvis (despite on occasion giving us cause to wonder how gullible he was) immediately saw right through and would probably be horrified to find Lisa Marie dragged into by Priscilla.

I'm inclined to think that any perceived 'iciness' is more of a consequence of the $cient*l*gy than a personality trait which led her to it. John Travolta led her to it, for which he will remain indefensible in my eyes.
If you compare Priscilla's overall disposition and composure before and after her introduction to $cient*l*gy, the difference is palpable.
If you're looking for someone to demonize for the fact that Elvis's hereditary successors are now $cient*l*gists, look no further than Danny Zuko.

[presley31]

I agree with everything you said, KPM. (y) (y)



I wouldn't believe a word that comes out of Mike Stones' mouth! He was just a jerk! :lol:

As I said before, some things should have been left out in Elvis and Me, the book and the movie...but, overall I didn't find the book that bad. If one who reads it dislikes Priscilla then they will most likely not like it from the start...But, I would not put Elvis and Me in the same category as Goldmans book...all just my opinion, of course :)

franny

well said franny.

[Teddy]

I agree that Elvis wasn't the "perfect man", but neither was she

I completely agree.
However, she was the perfect woman. http://smiley.net.ru/lovhea006.gif

[Teddy]

"He grabbed me and forcefullymade love to me. It was uncomfortable and unlike any other time he had made love to me before." All you need to do is read between the lines..I agree with Donut, that's what she was implying.
If she had intended for us to view this 'rougher-than-usual-intercourse' as a 'rape', I don't think she would have employed the words "made love".
I agree that "forcefully" was an unwise and potentially misleading choice of words (for which her collaborator Sandra Harmon must accept shared responsibility), but in this context it is being used to describe the nature of the 'lovemaking' as opposed to a complete lack of consent. In fact, as you pointed out, the full extent of her complaint is that it was "uncomfortable" and unlike previous times.

In its entirety, the passage doesn't paint a pretty picture but it doesn't necessarily reveal a woman crying "rape" either.
The 'rape' tends to occur in the minds of people who already subscribe to the unfounded contention that Priscilla will stop at nothing in her quest to defame the memory of their King.

Having said all of that, I am still inclined to question the merit of including the passage at all and again one has to wonder about the extent to which she was being led by her 'collaborator', whose interests obviously extended to marketability as well as good sentence structure.

[ehollier]

I am still dumbfounded how the word 'rape' has been so easily and widely accepted as what Priscilla was trying to describe in her book, when in fact, she never ever refers to Elvis has ever raping her. Also, why did she tell him between shows? According to all the sources that have spoken about this night, Elvis knowing she was in attendence after not having been out to Vegas all season except for the opening night, requested that she go and see him between the shows, not doubt to talk about their relationship, which apparently led to the forceful sex and her telling him she wanted a divorce.

[Vany]

If Priscilla wouldn've wanted it to look like rape in the movie, she could've changed it. It was her movie, she was the one to decide if it's going to be in the movie or not.
But she decided to leave it in, so no one can tell me that she didn't want it to look like rape.

In the beginning I really liked the book - until him leavin Germany. That was a cute little story of a 14-year old girl's first love - and nothing more.
They should've cherished what they had and leave it like that.
In my opinion she shouldn've come to Memphis in the first place - it would've been better for the both of them.

What's really bothering me, is that the whole book makes her look like a saint. Like she didn't do anything wrong, she just had to leave him...she was so lonely...and he cheated on her all the time...Excuse me? What was she doing? She did the same to him...

I'm just wondering why she wrote the book after his death!?!? Why didn't she write it when he was still alive? He could've defend himself. But it's always easier to blame someone if he can't tell his side of the story.

Never liked Cilla and never will!!!

[Vany]

And this whole story about her telling him about wanting a divorce...

In the book it was the next morning after that so called rape..
in the movie it was shortly before he had to go on stage...

So what's the truth???

[Teddy]

If Priscilla wouldn've wanted it to look like rape in the movie, she could've changed it. It was her movie, she was the one to decide if it's going to be in the movie or not.
But she decided to leave it in, so no one can tell me that she didn't want it to look like rape.


I'm not taking that for granted either.
In fact it's probably naive to assume that this was "her movie" and that she had the last word in its content.
I'm guessing that she probably had to relinquish the power of veto in order for it to be made at all.

[Vany]

I'm not taking that for granted either.
In fact it's probably naive to assume that this was "her movie" and that she had the last word in its content.
I'm guessing that she probably had to relinquish the power of veto in order for it to be made at all.

This movie is based on her book, so if she wouldn've wanted it to be made...wells she could've stopped it.

And if she left the rape scene in, just for the movie to be made at all...well then she just proved that she's exactly the person I thought she was.

[Donut]

If she didn't want that story to be known she wouldn't have told it in the first place. Give someone non Elvis or Priscilla fan that passage of the book to read and you'll see how they come to the same conclusion, and you know why? because that's what she was saying in it. She had control over the book and she had control over the film, the film included that scene because she wanted it to be included, she was executive producer of that film.

[presley31]

This movie is based on her book, so if she wouldn've wanted it to be made...wells she could've stopped it.

And if she left the rape scene in, just for the movie to be made at all...well then she just proved that she's exactly the person I thought she was.


DID THE CANDOR OF THE GOLDMAN BOOK ABOUT ELVIS INSPIRE YOU TO WRITE YOURS?

Oh, absolutely. His was every reason why I wrote my book. After reading his book I just took the responsibility on my own, because there'd also been another book prior to that that a couple of bodyguards, Sonny & Red West, had written [ELVIS, WHAT HAPPENED?] that didn't paint a very nice picture. Then Albert Goldman's book came out. But he was a much more substantial writer, and it put him on the best-seller list for many, many weeks. I couldn't allow that to go down in history as the last definitive book on Elvis Presley that people would go to. And I didn't want my daughter to read something like that and think, "My God! Is this true? Could this be true?"

WITHOUT HAVING A BALANCE, YOU MEAN? SHE COULD READ IT ANYWAY.

Yeah. But there'd be a lot of questions, I think, in her head. And I think my book did discredit his book. My daughter loved it. And when I got her approval on it, she knew what I went thru, she read the excerpts, she saw what I was doing, she supported me, she read it 3 times and loved it. And I think that was enough for me to go on, to feel that it was okay.

WAS YOUR HAND FORCED BY THE GOLDMAN BOOK? WOULD YOU HAVE BEEN LESS INTIMATE OTHERWISE?

There were a lot of things I didn't say. There were a lot of things, of course, I wouldn't, but why? I mean, that wasn't the purpose of the book. I can not take the responsibility for something. And I wouldn't do that to the public. They were waiting for this book, and they felt that it had to be right. After I read Goldman's book and after the book that Red & Sonny West had written--believe me, this book wasn't intimate. To say the least.

YOKO ONO'S NOW IN A SIMILAR POSITION WITH GOLDMAN'S BOOK ON LENNON. WHAT WOULD YOU SAY TO HER?

I know the shock that I'm sure she felt from the exposure. I know that when you know someone as intimately as she knew John, you have some person who didn't even know him write such intimacies about him, & so damaging. I totally understand whatever she has to do to make it go right for John.

[presley31]

If she didn't want that story to be known she wouldn't have told it in the first place. Give someone non Elvis or Priscilla fan that passage of the book to read and you'll see how they come to the same conclusion, and you know why? because that's what she was saying in it. She had control over the book and she had control over the film, the film included that scene because she wanted it to be included, she was executive producer of that film.

You don't see rape victims saying they were made love to forceful:doh:

[presley31]

Protecting her memories led directly to battles with director Larry Peerce. Son of the late tenor Jan Peerce, Larry says Priscilla gave him plenty of input -- ''I heard her **** loud and clear. She said to me, 'There were good times and bad, like any relationship. What was bad we know already.' As far as she was concerned the good far outweighed the bad. But if I honored that, I'd be doing her and Elvis' fans a disservice. I promised her that I wouldn't make a fool of her, but I went for the reality. Priscilla did not have the last word.''

source:www.simplycilla.com

[ehollier]

You don't see rape victims saying they were made love to forceful:doh:

I wonder what the reactions would be if Priscilla had portrayed Elvis as such a calm, completely civil, understanding husband who took the news in stride rather than with fury and anger. I'm not sure that I know if I think I could imagine that.

[ehollier]

Protecting her memories led directly to battles with director Larry Peerce. Son of the late tenor Jan Peerce, Larry says Priscilla gave him plenty of input -- ''I heard her **** loud and clear. She said to me, 'There were good times and bad, like any relationship. What was bad we know already.' As far as she was concerned the good far outweighed the bad. But if I honored that, I'd be doing her and Elvis' fans a disservice. I promised her that I wouldn't make a fool of her, but I went for the reality. Priscilla did not have the last word.''

source:www.simplycilla.com (http://www.simplycilla.com)

As I understand it, Priscilla's "Executive Producer" title was limited mostly to her financial contribution to the film, not the creative input.

[Donut]

You don't see rape victims saying they were made love to forceful:doh:

Really? Which is the compulsory word you have to use? And why the scene in the film looks like a rape? Come on...

[Donut]

As I understand it, Priscilla's "Executive Producer" title was limited mostly to her financial contribution to the film, not the creative input.

The film is based on her book, the story came from her mouth and she was involved with the film. This is not my opinion E, these are facts.

[presley31]

Really? Which is the compulsory word you have to use? And why the scene in the film looks like a rape? Come on...

Not going to get personl donut but there is a good reason, l don't consider that word rape and if you were raped you would say the same. maybe cause the other people involved didn't like priscilla version, but explaining anything to you is worthless anyway;)

[Donut]

Not going to get personl donut but there is a good reason, l don't consider that word rape and if you were raped you would say the same. maybe cause the other people involved didn't like priscilla version, but explaining anything to you is worthless anyway;)

Don't quote my posts then.

[Vany]

I wonder what the reactions would be if Priscilla had portrayed Elvis as such a calm, completely civil, understanding husband who took the news in stride rather than with fury and anger. I'm not sure that I know if I think I could imagine that.

I don't know how I would've reacted...

but he got the news after that so called rape, so at this point he couldn've been furious at all...

[presley31]

Don't quote my posts then.

no worries skipping you is the easy part:P

[ehollier]

Really? Which is the compulsory word you have to use? And why the scene in the film looks like a rape? Come on...

Why does it matter what label you attach to the scene??? Whether it be 'rape', sexual intercourse, sex without consent, passionate lovemaking......call it what you will.......the fact the Elvis responded to her in this way when she asked him for a divorce or suspecting that there was another man (as the movie led you to believe) --- what does this say about Elvis and his state of mind????? Everyone around him, Priscilla included, says that it was not in his nature to be sexually agressive; however, clearly, something triggered a very violent response in him and apparently couldn't control his fury. I think Priscilla said "he responded with unrestrained fury" when she told him that she wanted a divorce.

[Donut]

no worries skipping you is the easy part:P

Thank you, have a nice day.

[Vany]

Not going to get personl donut but there is a good reason, l don't consider that word rape and if you were raped you would say the same. maybe cause the other people involved didn't like priscilla version, but explaining anything to you is worthless anyway;)

If this rape theory would've been only about the book, then I'd say that this could've been a misinterpretation...but considering the movie - it totally without a doubt looks like rape..

[presley31]

Thank you, have a nice day.

always do thank you:D

[ehollier]

I don't know how I would've reacted...

but he got the news after that so called rape, so at this point he couldn've been furious at all...


???? not furious????? His wife tells him she is leaving and taking his daughter and he's not the least bit upset.....give me a break. Even if he didn't not love her or care about her at all (which I do not believe to be the case), he still cared very much for his daughter and did not want to be separated from Lisa Marie.

[Vany]

the fact the Elvis responded to her in this way when she asked him for a divorce or suspecting that there was another man (as the movie led you to believe) --- what does this say about Elvis and his state of mind?????

According to her book, she told him after this whole 'rape thing' happened...

[Vany]

???? not furious????? His wife tells him she is leaving and taking his daughter and he's not the least bit upset.....give me a break. Even if he didn't not love her or care about her at all (which I do not believe to be the case), he still cared very much for his daughter and did not want to be separated from Lisa Marie.

Of course he didn't wanted her and Lisa to leave, but Cilla told him afterwards that she would leave him...so why should he have been furious before?

[ehollier]

Of course he didn't wanted her and Lisa to leave, but Cilla told him afterwards that she would leave him...so why should he have been furious before?

Oh, I apologize. I misunderstood your post. I see what you are trying to say now. Well, as I recall reading in Careless Love, Priscilla left the day after Christmas with Lisa Marie and didn't see Elvis again until Lisa's birthday, and then again didn't hear from her until Feb. 23rd. I imagine I would be pretty upset if my wife and child were out of touch for that long period of time. And again, what the book and movie do not explore is what exactly was the conversation that led to the 'rape'/sexual intercourse. Something was said that would have triggered such a reaction to Elvis.

[Donut]

Why does it matter what label you attach to the scene??? Whether it be 'rape', sexual intercourse, sex without consent, passionate lovemaking......call it what you will.......the fact the Elvis responded to her in this way when she asked him for a divorce or suspecting that there was another man (as the movie led you to believe) --- what does this say about Elvis and his state of mind????? Everyone around him, Priscilla included, says that it was not in his nature to be sexually agressive; however, clearly, something triggered a very violent response in him and apparently couldn't control his fury. I think Priscilla said "he responded with unrestrained fury" when she told him that she wanted a divorce.

I have never excused Elvis (if the story is true) and I have not seen anyone here doing it either but what she wrote can't be changed and that's what she was implying. If I'm not wrong I think in the film he even grabs her from the arm and throw her to the floor.

[Vany]

Oh, I apologize. I misunderstood your post. I see what you are trying to say now. Well, as I recall reading in Careless Love, Priscilla left the day after Christmas with Lisa Marie and didn't see Elvis again until Lisa's birthday, and then again didn't hear from her until Feb. 23rd. I imagine I would be pretty upset if my wife and child were out of touch for that long period of time.

Sure, who wouldn've been? They both meant everything to him, most of all Lisa...



And again, what the book and movie do not explore is what exactly was the conversation that led to the 'rape'/sexual intercourse. Something was said that would have triggered such a reaction to Elvis.

Maybe she told him before, who knows....but why didn't she mention it then? I mean if she told him about her affair with Stone, it wouldn've been an exscuse for Elvis to do what he did, but it wouldn've made him look like a rapist...

[Vany]

If I'm not wrong I think in the film he even grabs her from the arm and throw her to the floor.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xzOS9O3Hfzs

[presley31]

I can see the mods closing this one really soon

[Donut]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xzOS9O3Hfzs

Not exactly what I said but very close. Is this what you wanted to show me?

www.youtube.com/watch?v=xzOS9O3Hfzs

[Vany]

Not exactly what I said but very close. Is this what you wanted to show me?

www.youtube.com/watch?v=xzOS9O3Hfzs

Yes, but when I tried to post it...it didn't show up...

[Merry]

You don't see rape victims saying they were made love to forceful:doh:


Absolutely Jen ......... hugs............

Love,
Kimmi

[Donut]

Yes, but when I tried to post it...it didn't show up...

I couldn't embed it either ;)

[ehollier]

I couldn't embed it either ;)

Must be another conspiracy against all of the Priscilla bashers....:lol::lol::lol:

[Donut]

Must be another conspiracy against all of the Priscilla bashers....:lol::lol::lol:

That's what I thought too, luckily copy and paste is still working for me :D

[MojoElvis]

The book should have been named,

Me & Elvis

The only thing I give Cilla credit for and it's time that her greed for money benefited Lisa Marie and the fans was when she beat the Colonel in court for the rights to Elvis' image and Name in the 80s.
Other than that I'm sorry but she is far from what Elvis' spirit represented.
He was a very humble and generous man.

[U.S. Male]

Lets drop the rape subject from this discussion NOW! :cop:

[Teddy]

I promised her that I wouldn't make a fool of her, but I went for the reality. Priscilla did not have the last word.''

source:www.simplycilla.com

Thank you, Jen :notworthy
And Sandra Harmon's 'ghostwriter' duties would follow a similar tack, subject to the authority of the publisher.
The logical outcome being that Elvis & Me is a book and a film about Priscilla Presley but not expressly by Priscilla Presley.
The tasteless description of the so-called 'r**e' most likely wasn't hers and she probably regrets the anecdote which led to its inclusion in the book and subsequent film. An anecdote which presumably surfaced during an uncharacteristically unguarded moment at some point during the 3 years it took for Harmon to coax this book out of Priscilla.
I rest my case.

[franny]

I can see the mods closing this one really soon

Let's hope so! :lol:

franny

[Donut]

An anecdote which presumably surfaced during an uncharacteristically unguarded moment at some point during the 3 years it took for Harmon to coax this book out of Priscilla.
I rest my case.

I've never heard her complain about the content of the book, quite the opposite and you know it well.
You are blinded by love.

[Teddy]

I've never heard her complain about the content of the book, quite the opposite and you know it well.
You are blinded by love.

Elvis and Me was a publishing phenomenon, earning a vast fortune and inhabiting the bestseller lists for a sizable chunk of the '80s.
It was also essentially a Biography written in the style of an Autobiography.
Do you seriously think that she is going to turn around after all these royalty cheques and say "Thanks for the money but, y'know, some of it was a little overblown (at the encouragement of my sales-motivated publisher) and, err, I actually didn't write it anyway- it was cobbled together from many hours of interview material and ghostwritten for maximum entertainment value"?

But even that doesn't make it especially dubious.
Priscilla Presley is no more guilty of subterfuge and dishonesty than any other public figure who has relied upon professional collaborators to peddle their biography and make a living.
We can't really complain either, since that would be like arguing that The Monkees conned us into buying their records by allowing Boyce and Hart to write a few good tunes for them.

Of course, The Monkees never claimed to be singing the true story of one of the world's most beloved entertainers, and once Elvis and Me was in the public domain it took on a life of its own, which Cilla must unfortunately live with for the rest of hers.

As for the TV mini-series, 'Executive Producer' titles are regularly awarded in an honorary capacity, often in return for relinquishing ultimate control of the project while projecting the impression of involvement to enhance the credibility of the undertaking. When a film is based on a book which someone has ostensibly 'written', it is considered desirable for integrity purposes to somehow reflect their participation in the production credits.
When Robert Lovenheim, who actually produced Elvis and Me was made aware of the C*rrie Gr*nt allegations (as filming completed), his reaction to suggestions that this additional information might be considered for belated inclusion in the film was that it "didn't suit the story we were telling".
His choice of words says it all.

Priscilla's main deception is the extent of her involvement in the Elvis and Me 'brand'. If the book or film really do appear to be 'avenging Elvis's domination of her life', it is most likely down to the style and artistic license of her collaborators and the freedom which she granted them when accepting the advance fee in exchange for her purported authorship- not a hostile crusade on the part of Priscilla Presley.

This is where a smear campaign such as Ch*ld Br*de, despite all of its boasted research, is compromised by the barely concealed hatred of the author for her subject. It assembles all the facts and consistently manages to draw the wrong conclusion.

[Diane]

This is where a smear campaign such as Ch*ld Br*de, despite all of its boasted research, is compromised by the barely concealed hatred of the author for her subject. It assembles all the facts and consistently manages to draw the wrong conclusion.[/QUOTE]


So then can we assume that all the trash that was written by some of the people close to Elvis was of the same type of "smear campaign"? His image certainly suffered as much if not more than Priscilla's....

Diane

[Donut]

Priscilla Presley is no more guilty of subterfuge and dishonesty than any other public figure who has relied upon professional collaborators to peddle their biography and make a living.
We can't really complain either, since that would be like arguing that The Monkees conned us into buying their records by allowing Boyce and Hart to write a few good tunes for them.


Maybe but what we are discussing here is "Elvis and Me" and she is very proud of it. These are not my words, these are Priscilla's and you are trying to make me believe she had nothing to do with it when you know that's not true. Those stories came from Priscilla's mouth and she has repeated them countless times. I'm not saying he made them up because I have no way to know but don't tell me they kidnapped her and forced her to accept that deal. That book was meant to portrait her like a victim and she was well aware of it. I know it because she hasn't stopped blaming Elvis for all her own mistakes in life since 77 and not only in that book, she did the same in "Elvis by the Presleys" and in many interviews.

[Vany]

This is where a smear campaign such as Ch*ld Br*de, despite all of its boasted research, is compromised by the barely concealed hatred of the author for her subject. It assembles all the facts and consistently manages to draw the wrong conclusion.

The wrong conclusion?
Child bride was supposed to be a biography about Cilla. The author interviewed Cilla and Cilla was fine with the book - until the author interviewed some old school friends back from germany. Cilla didn't like what they told the author and so she didn't want this book to be written. The author though did some more research and finished it.

I don't believe everything that's been written in this book, but some things I do believe.

For example, I don't believe that she didn't love Elvis. I really think she did, but not in the way she should've, if she wanted to spend the rest of her life with him.

[presley31]

Let's hope so! :lol:

franny

you and me both:lol::lol:

[Donut]

So then can we assume that all the trash that was written by some of the people close to Elvis was of the same type of "smear campaign"? His image certainly suffered as much if not more than Priscilla's....

Diane

You should know by now that Priscilla is always a very sensitive subject. For a strange reason everyone must be held responsible for their own actions but her.

[Vany]

You should know by now that Priscilla is always a very sensitive subject. For a strange reason everyone must be held responsible for their own actions but her.


I wonder why :hmm:

[Donut]

I wonder why :hmm:

One of those misteries of life http://smiley.net.ru/emocnf020.gif

[Teddy]

So then can we assume that all the trash that was written by some of the people close to Elvis was of the same type of "smear campaign"? His image certainly suffered as much if not more than Priscilla's....

Diane

Of course we can assume that some of the written material out there about Elvis is a deliberate smear campaign! I'm not defending Priscilla at the pointed exclusion of Elvis.

Having said that, I would argue that Elvis's image has not sustained anywhere near the same level of damage by these campaigns as Priscilla's has, since the most popular view of Elvis remains that he was an enormously talented and pioneering entertainer, as legendary for his generosity and Christianity as for his regrettably fatal substance-abuse.
By contrast, the majority opinion of Priscilla appears to be that she is a bitter, gold-digging, harlot and a compulsive liar who has been grotesquely deformed by pathologically acquired cosmetic surgery.
Of the two, I'd say that Priscilla's reputation is in slightly greater need of defense. ;)

[Teddy]

The wrong conclusion?
Child bride was supposed to be a biography about Cilla. The author interviewed Cilla and Cilla was fine with the book - until the author interviewed some old school friends back from germany. Cilla didn't like what they told the author and so she didn't want this book to be written. The author though did some more research and finished it.


F*nstad's Ch*ld Br*de is like a sister piece to Albert Goldman's Elvis, in that its style and defamatory purpose is almost identical, except it's about his ex-wife.
But while Goldman's Elvis is justifiably reviled, Ch*ld Br*de is lauded for its "exhaustive research".
As usual, it's one rule for Elvis and another one for Priscilla.

If Elvis had been alive and available to consult for Goldman's biography, and had learned about some of the opinions that were being sourced and the direction that the writing was taking, do you think he would have reacted any differently to Priscilla?

Both books are excr*ment! :mad:

[Teddy]

For a strange reason everyone must be held responsible for their own actions but her.

How can you say that when the woman is pilloried for practically every move she makes and every word she utters?!

[Donut]

How can you say that when the woman is pilloried for practically every move she makes and every word she utters?!

Just take a look around here and you'll see what is the game ;)

[presley31]

How can you say that when the woman is pilloried for practically every move she makes and every word she utters?!

how true teddy (y)(y)

[Teddy]

how true teddy (y)(y)

Thank you, Jen! (y)

[ehollier]

F*nstad's Ch*ld Br*de is like a sister piece to Albert Goldman's Elvis, in that its style and defamatory purpose is almost identical, except it's about his ex-wife.
But while Goldman's Elvis is justifiably reviled, Ch*ld Br*de is lauded for its "exhaustive research".
As usual, it's one rule for Elvis and another one for Priscilla.

If Elvis had been alive and available to consult for Goldman's biography, and had learned about some of the opinions that were being sourced and the direction that the writing was taking, do you think he would have reacted any differently to Priscilla?

Both books are excr*ment! :mad:


Child Bride is as contemptous as Albert Goldman's Elvis. Each book contains a meaure of truth, but its written with so much contempt and scorn for its subject, that the truths in each book get lost.

[ehollier]

How can you say that when the woman is pilloried for practically every move she makes and every word she utters?!

So true!! No matter what Priscilla does or doesn't do, she is always criticized. From her marrying Elvis and divorcing him - she was criticized for her actions, from her handling of Graceland and raising Lisa Marie - she was heavily criticized what she did and didn't do, with every interview she gives and every question she answers or doesn't answer - she is criticized. Its like she's d*mned if she does and d*amned if she doesn't.

In my opinion, she is very gracious given the enormity of the negative reaction she gets. I would have told her detractors to kiss my b*tt a long time ago.

[ehollier]

...........I know it because she hasn't stopped blaming Elvis for all her own mistakes in life since 77 and not only in that book, she did the same in "Elvis by the Presleys" and in many interviews.

Exactly what makes you think this??? I haven't heard this. In fact, she has always said that her life with Elvis was a good one.

[Teddy]

No matter what Priscilla does or doesn't do, she is always criticized. From her marrying Elvis and divorcing him - she was criticized for her actions, from her handling of Graceland and raising Lisa Marie - she was heavily criticized what she did and didn't do, with every interview she gives and every question she answers or doesn't answer - she is criticized. Its like she's d*mned if she does and d*amned if she doesn't.

In my opinion, she is very gracious given the enormity of the negative reaction she gets. I would have told her detractors to kiss my b*tt a long time ago.

Exactly! http://smiley.net.ru/lovflo039.gif

[ehollier]

The wrong conclusion?
Child bride was supposed to be a biography about Cilla. The author interviewed Cilla and Cilla was fine with the book - until the author interviewed some old school friends back from germany. Cilla didn't like what they told the author and so she didn't want this book to be written. The author though did some more research and finished it.

I don't believe everything that's been written in this book, but some things I do believe.

For example, I don't believe that she didn't love Elvis. I really think she did, but not in the way she should've, if she wanted to spend the rest of her life with him.

Let me remind the fans of Child Bride that one of Suzanne Finstead's main sources were the Stanley brothers - who are unreliable at best and would not be my first choices if I doing "exhaustive research" for a biography.

[Teddy]

Yes indeedy (y)

[cibetty]

That was the first book what I read about Elvis and I think it is very honest and very intimate. I think Priscilla and Elvis were both very honest persons, I felt she loved him and I don't think she wrote that book only for money. But the movie is much different I think... There are many parts in the book what are missing from the movie. I liked the actrees who played Cilla, she really looked like her, but I didn't like the actor that much. The ending of the movie was very very touching anyways.

[Vany]

Let me remind the fans of Child Bride that one of Suzanne Finstead's main sources were the Stanley brothers - who are unreliable at best and would not be my first choices if I doing "exhaustive research" for a biography.

I never said I'd be fan of the book, I only said that I believe in a lot of things that's been mentioned in the book.

Of course Cilla gets blamed for a lot of things, but honestly - maybe I would believe her if she wouldn't change her statements all the time.

Starting from the moment she told him about leaving (like I already mentioned before) until to the song he sang to her while carrying her over the threshold.
(in her book she says it was the hawaiin wedding song, in EBTP she says it was blue hawaii)

[presley31]

I never said I'd be fan of the book, I only said that I believe in a lot of things that's been mentioned in the book.

Of course Cilla gets blamed for a lot of things, but honestly - maybe I would believe her if she wouldn't change her statements all the time.

Starting from the moment she told him about leaving (like I already mentioned before) until to the song he sang to her while carrying her over the threshold.
(in her book she says it was the hawaiin wedding song, in EBTP she says it was blue hawaii)

I seen lisa, the memphis mafia. all change there stories so priscilla isn't any different:doh::lol:

[Vany]

I seen lisa, the memphis mafia. all change there stories so priscilla isn't any different:doh::lol:

When did Lisa change her statements? (an example?)

Those members of the MM who change their stories, are the ones I don't really trust either. It just leaves mit suspicious....'cause when they change their mind so often it makes me wonder if they said the truth in the first place...

[Teddy]

Of course Cilla gets blamed for a lot of things, but honestly - maybe I would believe her if she wouldn't change her statements all the time.

Starting from the moment she told him about leaving (like I already mentioned before) until to the song he sang to her while carrying her over the threshold.
(in her book she says it was the hawaiin wedding song, in EBTP she says it was blue hawaii)

This is because 50% of the time it is other people paying making statements on her behalf and trying to make it more interesting :lol:
She didn't write the book.

And I hardly think that the changing song title is a devious example of her compulsion to mislead! She just got the title wrong- in EBTP she was referring to the movie that the song is from and slipped up. It's not a hanging crime! At the very worst it is a very minor lapse of memory.

[MissyM]

Here is the problem I have with her story. She acts innocent and says that she needed to counter what Childbride said but......she started talking about Elvis and her, long before Childbride was written. Matter of fact she started doing interviews right after the divorce. Was that really needed??????? And I feel that with Elvis being a private person, would have found her doing so and some of the things said hurtful.
That is what drives me nuts sometimes. She is the one who got the ball rolling. Maybe others wanted to actually "set the record straight" after her interveiws! And maybe not, but to act like they were the ones marring his image is ludicrist at best.
From the time she left him she set out to be a public figure. With that comes all the critism and poking. She was the first to expose Elvis and intimate goings on. (I can get the interveiw or maybe it's here somewhere) She could have faded into the dull-lights like many divorced women of famous men. But she didn't. It served a purpose for her to put herself and her life with Elvis out there, from the get go and has ever since. So sorry if I don't feel sorry for her.
And all this exposure has had an effect on Lisa. Had she just opened her little shop and lived her life quietly her life and it's challenges of fame would have been eleviated for the most part.
But that is not what she wanted. She wanted the notariety from being his only wife, and she wanted to use that name to open doors to her own fame. Well when you open one nice door sometimes you open one's that aren't as nice.
But the bottom line is that she exposed their private life before anyone else did. She did not have to say anything. She could have said no comment and not done any interveiws.
And then she wonders why others felt the need to expose more of the truth about her???
I'm not saying that Childbride is not with out it's ugly side of journalism. But it seems to me that like some peices, most people would have forgotten it pretty easy had she not made a big deal about it and kept quieter all these years.

[ehollier]

When did Lisa change her statements? (an example?)

Those members of the MM who change their stories, are the ones I don't really trust either. It just leaves mit suspicious....'cause when they change their mind so often it makes me wonder if they said the truth in the first place...

Please do not take offense to this, but if you will wonder about those closest Elvis changing their minds, then everything that you read is a lie b/c there isn't anyone -- ANYONE -- who hasn't changed their story, whether it be for personal, private, or public reasons to fit the occassion. As an educated fan, you are charged with reading all of the material at hand, sifting through it and making an educated guess based on what you think is correct. The ONLY thing anyone here will agree to is that everyone close to Elvis (and to an extent, Elvis himself!), has changed their stories.

[Vany]

This is because 50% of the time it is other people paying making statements on her behalf and trying to make it more interesting :lol:
She didn't write the book.

Then it was ghost writing or whatever, but the point is that she is okay with the book...she doesn't regret anything she 'wrote', neither is she admiting that some things were changed to sell more books.


And I hardly think that the changing song title is a devious example of her compulsion to mislead! She just got the title wrong- in EBTP she was referring to the movie that the song is from and slipped up. It's not a hanging crime! At the very worst it is a very minor lapse of memory.

You could be right about that one (y)

[Vany]

Please do not take offense to this, but if you will wonder about those closest Elvis changing their minds, then everything that you read is a lie b/c there isn't anyone -- ANYONE -- who hasn't changed their story, whether it be for personal, private, or public reasons to fit the occassion. As an educated fan, you are charged with reading all of the material at hand, sifting through it and making an educated guess based on what you think is correct. The ONLY thing anyone here will agree to is that everyone close to Elvis (and to an extent, Elvis himself!), has changed their stories.

You may be right...

[presley31]

Please do not take offense to this, but if you will wonder about those closest Elvis changing their minds, then everything that you read is a lie b/c there isn't anyone -- ANYONE -- who hasn't changed their story, whether it be for personal, private, or public reasons to fit the occassion. As an educated fan, you are charged with reading all of the material at hand, sifting through it and making an educated guess based on what you think is correct. The ONLY thing anyone here will agree to is that everyone close to Elvis (and to an extent, Elvis himself!), has changed their stories.

well said Liz. I wish i had a dime every time someone mixed there stories up;)

[Donut]

I would have told her detractors to kiss my b*tt a long time ago.[/COLOR]

She never will :greedy::greedy::greedy:


Exactly what makes you think this??? I haven't heard this. In fact, she has always said that her life with Elvis was a good one.

That's not true and you know it well. I could show you many quotes from her telling just the opposite but I won't waste my time because I KNOW you have read the same books that I have read.

[Donut]

So true!! No matter what Priscilla does or doesn't do, she is always criticized. From her marrying Elvis and divorcing him - she was criticized for her actions, from her handling of Graceland and raising Lisa Marie - she was heavily criticized what she did and didn't do, with every interview she gives and every question she answers or doesn't answer - she is criticized. Its like she's d*mned if she does and d*amned if she doesn't.

In my opinion, she is very gracious given the enormity of the negative reaction she gets. I would have told her detractors to kiss my b*tt a long time ago.

That's what happens when you disclose the private life of a dead person. Personally I wouldn't cry if she'd shut up her mouth and disapeared from the public eye and I highly doubt you or anyone here would cut her so much slack if she did it to someone close to you.
No matter how many turns you or anyone want to give to her stories or pathetic victimism, I'll always try to put myself in Elvis' shoes. You know, that one under the ground unable to defend himself.

[KPM]

I think Priscilla is like anyone else-she has the right to say how she sees it when her own life is involved.
If you do not like her-then it will rub you wrong and you will be suspect at most of what she says.
If you have no problem with her-then you will most likely accept what she says knowing everyone will tend to play up the good and play down the bad when discussing their life.
I have no problem with her telling her side-but like any side told by any of these people-I remember human nature.

[Donut]

Let me remind the fans of Child Bride that one of Suzanne Finstead's main sources were the Stanley brothers - who are unreliable at best and would not be my first choices if I doing "exhaustive research" for a biography.

Please open that book to page 438 or I swear to you I will type all those people's names aknwoleged in Child Bride one by one in the next few days :smoke:.

[MissyM]

Lis, with all due respect, I just want to ask one thing...even before they were divorced she did an article with McCall about her life after Elvis. Why, why did she do that? Why did she have to talk about her then wonderful, better life with Mike Stone?? She knew Elvis was hurting and she knew of his drug problems. Why would she do that to him?
Then, when he was sick later she went to see him and made sure he put a contingency on the deed to Graceland to make sure she got the rest of her money. Considering she got one of the largest settlements ever heard of at the time, why on earth was she so worried about the money. I mean what did she do to deserved that kind of money?? She was getting very good maintenance money and child support. She lived a very good life. (after Elvis)
People say the MM should have never said anything when Elvis was in such bad shape, well she did it first. He was having an aweful time dealing with the pending divorce, you can see it in the pix of him at the court house how he had gone down hill. Why hit the man when he is down for gosh sakes?? His pride was on the floor, why did she have to do the darn interview??
So you see, I don't think Elvis was perfect by any means. But he never once, not ever exposed any of her little secrets or said anything negative about her. And yet before they were even divorced she was running her mouth off about their life.
She got what she wanted, Lisa, her freedom, and a huge amount of money, I would have thought the least she could have done is given him his privacy that he so dearly charished.
I'm sorry, Childbride or not, or EWH, she should have never joined the ranks of those who exposed his personal life if she professes that it is such a bad thing. And especially when she herself was the first to do it.
Nothing personal here, just my opinion.

[Donut]

I think Priscilla is like anyone else-she has the right to say how she sees it when her own life is involved.


Personally I have no problem with anyone telling their own story, Priscilla included, but living off an ex for 30 years stinks.

[presley31]

I think Priscilla is like anyone else-she has the right to say how she sees it when her own life is involved.
If you do not like her-then it will rub you wrong and you will be suspect at most of what she says.
If you have no problem with her-then you will most likely accept what she says knowing everyone will tend to play up the good and play down the bad when discussing their life.
I have no problem with her telling her side-but like any side told by any of these people-I remember human nature.

well said and agreed too(y)

[KPM]

Personally I have no problem with anyone telling their own story, Priscilla included, but living off an ex for 30 years stinks.
Well look at this way, most of the insiders have done this in one way or another also during that time. Thats par for this course. She takes the heat, from fans who see it your way, but Lisa and her kids are secure for a couple lifetimes at least. I have no doubt- Elvis would be happy for that.
Whether you credit her with all the praise for that situation, or you say she was just the figure head of that situation-she had something to do with it. Any other money made off Elvis's name from all the other insiders did not go anywhere- but in the pockets of those people and the publishers of the books and videos.
As a father I identify with that-the kids are taken care of. Sure she has done somethings which are self serving, and played up her story-If she were a perfect human that would disappoint me-but shes human like all of us-none of us is perfect.

[Donut]

Well look at this way, most of the insiders have done this in one way or another also during that time. Thats par for this course. She takes the heat, from fans who see it your way, but Lisa and her kids are secure for a couple lifetimes at least. I have no doubt- Elvis would be happy for that.
Whether you credit her with all the praise for that situation, or you say she was just the figure head of that situation-she had something to do with it. Any other money made off Elvis's name from all the other insiders did not go anywhere- but in the pockets of those people and the publishers of the books and videos.
As a father I identify with that-the kids are taken care of. Sure she has done somethings which are self serving, and played up her story-If she were a perfect human that would disappoint me-but shes human like all of us-none of us is perfect.

Well you may be right KPM but the thing is I'm not Elvis and I don't care if they had to make a living in any other way. Neither I think Lisa would be starving if Priscilla had not kept beating that dead horse for 30 years.
I see what you are trying to tell me but I guess we are talking about two different things.

[presley31]

Well look at this way, most of the insiders have done this in one way or another also during that time. Thats par for this course. She takes the heat, from fans who see it your way, but Lisa and her kids are secure for a couple lifetimes at least. I have no doubt- Elvis would be happy for that.
Whether you credit her with all the praise for that situation, or you say she was just the figure head of that situation-she had something to do with it. Any other money made off Elvis's name from all the other insiders did not go anywhere- but in the pockets of those people and the publishers of the books and videos.
As a father I identify with that-the kids are taken care of. Sure she has done somethings which are self serving, and played up her story-If she were a perfect human that would disappoint me-but shes human like all of us-none of us is perfect.

agreed KPM..sure elvis wouldn't like the things priscilla has done, but he would be more than happy knowing his baby girl is doing good and not having worries like he did growing up;)

[KPM]

Well you may be right KPM but the thing is I'm not Elvis and I don't care if they had to make a living in any other way. Neither I think Lisa would be starving if Priscilla had not kept beating that dead horse for 30 years.
I see what you are trying to tell me but I guess we are talking about two different things.
No problem-I think we are talking about the same things but we just see it differently. Different people, different views thats why we discuss these things.

[ehollier]

Please open that book to page 438 or I swear to you I will type all those people's names aknwoleged in Child Bride one by one in the next few days :smoke:.

Please do not waste your time doing that. I've already read the book -- several times -- and have examined the list of references that are listed. I never stated that there were no other references or interviews for this book; however, many of those listed there are obscure individuals from her childhood who were interviewed for this book. Personally, I cannot remember important things from last year, much less what happened during junior high and high school.

If you read through Child Bride again, pay attention to those individuals who are quoted throughout. The Stanleys make up a large portion of this these quotes. The problem I have with this is that they have never been a reliable source of credibility or truthfulness and honestly, were never close to main subject of this biography while she was with Elvis. They didn't live at Graceland and didn't work for Elvis until after she was gone. Additionally, there are no sources in this book that would be considered credible from the standpoint of knowing her to contribute a substantial wealth of knowledge for a biography. I do not considered childhood friendships and acquaintances very fruitful sources.

In order to write about Priscilla during the crucial years with Elvis, Finstead would have to have interviewed those who were close to her -- and who would that be -- possibly Joan Esposito, Pasty Presley, Sandy Schilling, Pat West.

I guess my problem with Child Bride being a good source of information on Priscilla is that its written in the same contemptous manner as Albert Goldman's book with the same illogical conclusions made to simply cast much doubt on Priscilla that is simply unfounded. Finstead paints Priscilla as a very cold and calculating teenage girl whose father was an alcoholic and wife abuser. I am sorry, but I'll need more evidence than what Finstead has to offer before I'll buy her story.

[ehollier]

Lis, with all due respect, I just want to ask one thing...even before they were divorced she did an article with McCall about her life after Elvis. Why, why did she do that? Why did she have to talk about her then wonderful, better life with Mike Stone?? She knew Elvis was hurting and she knew of his drug problems. Why would she do that to him?
Then, when he was sick later she went to see him and made sure he put a contingency on the deed to Graceland to make sure she got the rest of her money. Considering she got one of the largest settlements ever heard of at the time, why on earth was she so worried about the money. I mean what did she do to deserved that kind of money?? She was getting very good maintenance money and child support. She lived a very good life. (after Elvis)
People say the MM should have never said anything when Elvis was in such bad shape, well she did it first. He was having an aweful time dealing with the pending divorce, you can see it in the pix of him at the court house how he had gone down hill. Why hit the man when he is down for gosh sakes?? His pride was on the floor, why did she have to do the darn interview??
So you see, I don't think Elvis was perfect by any means. But he never once, not ever exposed any of her little secrets or said anything negative about her. And yet before they were even divorced she was running her mouth off about their life.
She got what she wanted, Lisa, her freedom, and a huge amount of money, I would have thought the least she could have done is given him his privacy that he so dearly charished.
I'm sorry, Childbride or not, or EWH, she should have never joined the ranks of those who exposed his personal life if she professes that it is such a bad thing. And especially when she herself was the first to do it.
Nothing personal here, just my opinion.

Missy, I do not know the circumstances of her interview with Ladies Home Journal. I am almost certain that she had been approached by less ethical magazines to get an interview about her relationship with Elvis and turned them down. I've read this interview and it doesn't appear to me as sounding nasty towards Elvis and their relationship. In fact, she didn't reveal anything such as the drug abuse and guns and all of the other women and such. She could have chosen to slander his name from here to kingdom come. She didn't. It can be argued that she didn't because of Lisa, because of her inability to tell the truth as you see it, or she simply didn't want to spread Elvis' negative business around.

Insofar as her divorce settlement, she was granted an amount that she was entitled to under the Laws of California, which was one-half of his income and community property. She may have been awarded a large sum, but Elvis was a larger than life figure making a larger than life salary. There is nothing sinister about it. It is the way in which divorces work and she was entitled to the amount of money that she received. Whether or not Elvis' deeded Graceland so she would be assured a complete payout is irrevalent. She would have been paid this sum in the end anyway.

Some here have said that Elvis' appearance after 1972 had nothing to do with the separation and divorce. I do not agree, but there is this theory out there that states that he would have been in this situation whether or not Priscilla left. Admitting that the divorce was a contributing factor to his downhill slide means that he wasn't ready for his marriage to be over and that he still loved her. It is unfortunate that things were the way that they were. However, by Elvis' own admission, he didn't want Priscilla with him in Vegas anymore or on the road, he spent virtually no time with her, took copious amount of drugs, kept a constant group of body guards around, and as best we can figure, had many other girlfriends installed at various homes and locations around the country. It is difficult for me to use the old adage "But he was ELVIS and he shouldn't have ever gotten married." Well, he did get married, under whatever circumstances that came his way and he was unable to keep his wife happy and his marriage came to an end.

Now, we have argued before that Elvis didn't want to spend time with Priscilla. If that was the case, then he should have happy to let her go. If Elvis didn't want Priscilla in Vegas or on the road or in his bed, then he should have been happy to be divorced from her. If he preferred guns and drugs to family gatherings and time alone with his wife, then he should have been jumping up and down to get rid of Priscilla. He was ELVIS - superstar and sex symbol, but he was also Elvis - dad and husband and in marriage and life, the same rules apply to him as they do to you and me, your husband and mine.

Its easy to paint a picture of Priscilla being a gold digger and heartless b!tch, but while Elvis was out doing his thing, how did Priscilla cope? She didn't have a group of bodyguards around to hang out with, she didn't travel the country meeting men in all of her different homes and vacation spots. Yes, she had 2 affairs, one after Lisa was born and she knew Mike Stone for all of what 4 or 5 months before she left Elvis. With Elvis' lifestyle, she could've gone months and months with Mike Stone and Elvis wouldn't have been the wiser. But instead, she decided to leave.

I don't know if we will ever agree about this. I commend you for your tremendous sensitivity to Elvis and his troubles. You never fail to remind me time and time again that there was human side to him and he hurt very much. It is so easy to get caught up in listing all of his downfalls and forget that he was so very talented, charming, charismatic, generous, beautiful and HUMAN. I extend that same sensitivity to Priscilla too.

[Donut]

Please do not waste your time doing that. I've already read the book -- several times -- and have examined the list of references that are listed. I never stated that there were no other references or interviews for this book; however, many of those listed there are obscure individuals from her childhood who were interviewed for this book. Personally, I cannot remember important things from last year, much less what happened during junior high and high school.


You don't remember who you befriended or dated at school? :hmm:
What is so wrong in dating boys in your teens like Priscilla did?

I have no problem with people liking Priscilla but you can't rule out every piece of information as false because you don't like what they have to say about her.
I find it strange that you or anyone can believe most said about Elvis but when it comes to Priscilla everything is so hard to believe.
As for the the time the Stanleys spent with her well... I don't like them either but we could say the same about Priscilla speaking about Elvis as if she knew him since he was born when she was only 7 or 8 years in his life.

I guess like you say we'll have to agree to disagree E ;)

[MissyM]

I respect your point of veiw Liz, and I know you probably understand that it is impossible for me to be as easy on Priscilla.
I just don't think she should have done any article prior to the divorce, and I don't feel she had good enough reason to write her book or do the movie. I feel she made excuses so that she could carve her path to celebrity, and at the expense of Elvis. I personally could never do that to anyone. And I could never do some of the things she has done to my famiy either. So I guess my veiw (I admit it) is quite tainted.
We are on very different planes here. But none the less, I am not here to change your mind. Just to give my veiwpoint.

[presley31]

Missy, I do not know the circumstances of her interview with Ladies Home Journal. I am almost certain that she had been approached by less ethical magazines to get an interview about her relationship with Elvis and turned them down. I've read this interview and it doesn't appear to me as sounding nasty towards Elvis and their relationship. In fact, she didn't reveal anything such as the drug abuse and guns and all of the other women and such. She could have chosen to slander his name from here to kingdom come. She didn't. It can be argued that she didn't because of Lisa, because of her inability to tell the truth as you see it, or she simply didn't want to spread Elvis' negative business around.

Insofar as her divorce settlement, she was granted an amount that she was entitled to under the Laws of California, which was one-half of his income and community property. She may have been awarded a large sum, but Elvis was a larger than life figure making a larger than life salary. There is nothing sinister about it. It is the way in which divorces work and she was entitled to the amount of money that she received. Whether or not Elvis' deeded Graceland so she would be assured a complete payout is irrevalent. She would have been paid this sum in the end anyway.

Some here have said that Elvis' appearance after 1972 had nothing to do with the separation and divorce. I do not agree, but there is this theory out there that states that he would have been in this situation whether or not Priscilla left. Admitting that the divorce was a contributing factor to his downhill slide means that he wasn't ready for his marriage to be over and that he still loved her. It is unfortunate that things were the way that they were. However, by Elvis' own admission, he didn't want Priscilla with him in Vegas anymore or on the road, he spent virtually no time with her, took copious amount of drugs, kept a constant group of body guards around, and as best we can figure, had many other girlfriends installed at various homes and locations around the country. It is difficult for me to use the old adage "But he was ELVIS and he shouldn't have ever gotten married." Well, he did get married, under whatever circumstances that came his way and he was unable to keep his wife happy and his marriage came to an end.

Now, we have argued before that Elvis didn't want to spend time with Priscilla. If that was the case, then he should have happy to let her go. If Elvis didn't want Priscilla in Vegas or on the road or in his bed, then he should have been happy to be divorced from her. If he preferred guns and drugs to family gatherings and time alone with his wife, then he should have been jumping up and down to get rid of Priscilla. He was ELVIS - superstar and sex symbol, but he was also Elvis - dad and husband and in marriage and life, the same rules apply to him as they do to you and me, your husband and mine.

Its easy to paint a picture of Priscilla being a gold digger and heartless b!tch, but while Elvis was out doing his thing, how did Priscilla cope? She didn't have a group of bodyguards around to hang out with, she didn't travel the country meeting men in all of her different homes and vacation spots. Yes, she had 2 affairs, one after Lisa was born and she knew Mike Stone for all of what 4 or 5 months before she left Elvis. With Elvis' lifestyle, she could've gone months and months with Mike Stone and Elvis wouldn't have been the wiser. But instead, she decided to leave.

I don't know if we will ever agree about this. I commend you for your tremendous sensitivity to Elvis and his troubles. You never fail to remind me time and time again that there was human side to him and he hurt very much. It is so easy to get caught up in listing all of his downfalls and forget that he was so very talented, charming, charismatic, generous, beautiful and HUMAN. I extend that same sensitivity to Priscilla too.

well said Liz(y)(y)

[Vany]

That's not true and you know it well. I could show you many quotes from her telling just the opposite but I won't waste my time because I KNOW you have read the same books that I have read.

(y)



No matter how many turns you or anyone want to give to her stories or pathetic victimism, I'll always try to put myself in Elvis' shoes. You know, that one under the ground unable to defend himself.

Well said (y)

Elvis can't defend himself, so everyone or at least a lot of people believe Priscilla. And who could prove that she's only telling lies - only Elvis...
(to me, this is the reason she didn't write the book earlier, 'cause Elvis would've been there to defend himself)



I have no problem with people liking Priscilla but you can't rule out every piece of information as false because you don't like what they have to say about her.

This is exactly what I'm thinking. A lot of people just can't see her doing this things or her being that cold - because poor little Cilla would never have been capable of this things :lmfao:




I guess like you say we'll have to agree to disagree E ;)

guess so...

[Vany]

funny but red west, sonny west and dave write elvis what happens before elvis died and elvis did read it, but he didn't defend him self. priscilla also wrote a article in 73 so elvis had enough time to defend himself, but did he???? no.

It's definitely a different story if someone's writing a book on your prescribed drugs addiction than writing a tell-all book about your marriage. (or at least that's my opinion)

btw...if Elvis would've tried to defend himself because of the west's book, he would've - in a way - admit that what they wrote was true. So he just didn't comment on it..



Some of us just have different opinions and have more things to do with our lives than the downfill of priscilla's mistakes..who cares is really how we feel.


Sure some have different opinions (which I think is a good thing) but though there's no need for becoming personal...

[Donut]

Vany, you just have to compare her interview on Ladies Journal after the divorce (have you read it?) with her book after his death. She waited untill he couldn't defend himself. Opportunistic and to top it all coward.

[Vany]

Vany, you just have to compare her interview on Ladies Journal after the divorce (have you read it?) with her book after his death. She waited untill he couldn't defend himself. Opportunistic and to top it all coward.

I've read it a long time ago, but I can't really remember what it was all about...

But I though remember that she definitely did hold something back, like she didn't have the courage yet to tell her truth. (sorry, but there's not other way to put it into words)

[Donut]

I've read it a long time ago, but I can't really remember what it was all about...

But I though remember that she definitely did hold something back, like she didn't have the courage yet to tell her truth. (sorry, but there's not other way to put it into words)

It's easier when that person is under the ground. She wouldn't bite the hand that was feeding her anyway ;)

[Vany]

It's easier when that person is under the ground. She wouldn't bite the hand that was feeding her anyway ;)

Well in a way she did, she just wouldn't risk to get him mad...though I doubt that he would've been...even after the book...he wasn't that kind of person...

[presley31]

Once again this has gone off topic again and really sad to see that some just come here to post put downs about priscilla.. Like elvis would say never creases to amaze me.

[Donut]

Well in a way she did, she just wouldn't risk to get him mad...though I doubt that he would've been...even after the book...he wasn't that kind of person...

Well he seemed very forgiving but I don't think he would have taken it well. He was a private person.

[franny]

Once again this has gone off topic again and really sad to see that some just come here to post put downs about priscilla.. Like elvis would say never creases to amaze me.

I agree, Jen. (y) These Priscilla threads are getting old! Funny how they get the most responses...:lol:

franny

[waymore44]

I think that overall it's a good book and movie. It's obviously one-sided but EP's not here to defend himself. My wife LOVES the movie more than she does watching actual Elvis movies. Whatever.... The end is VERY VERY SAD. Everytime I hear "Always On My Mind" that movie is the first thing I think about: the final scene.

JD

[Unique Dog]

Liked the book. Thought the movie lacked class.

[KPM]

It's easier when that person is under the ground. She wouldn't bite the hand that was feeding her anyway ;)
Its easier for all books written about dead individuals in general- not just Priscilla and Elvis.
I have always loved biographies and when the person has died its a field day for friends, associates, relatives, and just the independant authors.
They can really know something and do great research, or they can do shoddy research and know nothing-(or they can just take a rumor and run with it for 200 pages of supposition).
When that person is no longer able to give their answers, their versions, their reasoning and justifications for their life-its always one sided.
But some of these people have the right to do these books.

[Diane]

I agree that friends and relatives of people who have passed on do have the right to write stories about them but it's the way they choose to represent them in the books that also gives us the readers the right to feel about them according to how the book strikes us.

Diane

[Donut]

Its easier for all books written about dead individuals in general- not just Priscilla and Elvis.
I have always loved biographies and when the person has died its a field day for friends, associates, relatives, and just the independant authors.
They can really know something and do great research, or they can do shoddy research and know nothing-(or they can just take a rumor and run with it for 200 pages of supposition).
When that person is no longer able to give their answers, their versions, their reasoning and justifications for their life-its always one sided.
But some of these people have the right to do these books.

Like I said to you in my previous post I think she has a right to tell her own story. I think you misunderstood the post you are quoting. I was talking about the difference between her interview on that magazine and her book, a total different story from her before and after Elvis died. So cool with him in the first one when he was alive and just the opposite when he wasn't here to defend himself. Is it easy to write about someone who is not here anymore? Of course, and more yet when you blame that person of every bad choice you did in your life.

I don't like that book at all KPM but I'm sure you already noticed it ;)

[Merry]

I agree that friends and relatives of people who have passed on do have the right to write stories about them but it's the way they choose to represent them in the books that also gives us the readers the right to feel about them according to how the book strikes us.

Diane


That is the quote of the year, Diane.

Thank you.

Hugs,
Kimmi

[cbg84]

Didn't care too much for the movie. But I actually enjoyed the book. I think that most of it is very sweet and you can see the love she has for him.

[Donut]

I agree that friends and relatives of people who have passed on do have the right to write stories about them but it's the way they choose to represent them in the books that also gives us the readers the right to feel about them according to how the book strikes us.

Diane

You are as usual the voice of reason Diane ;)

[Teddy]

Vany, you just have to compare her interview on Ladies Journal after the divorce (have you read it?) with her book after his death. She waited untill he couldn't defend himself. Opportunistic and to top it all coward.

I can see I'm going to have to put my Scolding Trousers on :mad:

[Donut]

I can see I'm going to have to put my Scolding Trousers on :mad:

No pleeeeease :'(

[presley31]

(y)
Its easier for all books written about dead individuals in general- not just Priscilla and Elvis.
I have always loved biographies and when the person has died its a field day for friends, associates, relatives, and just the independant authors.
They can really know something and do great research, or they can do shoddy research and know nothing-(or they can just take a rumor and run with it for 200 pages of supposition).
When that person is no longer able to give their answers, their versions, their reasoning and justifications for their life-its always one sided.
But some of these people have the right to do these books.

another great post KPM (y)(y)

[ehollier]

I can see I'm going to have to put my Scolding Trousers on :mad:

Teddy, she said "pleeeeease"........

[Donut]

Teddy, she said "pleeeeease"........

Hey! what I said was NO pleeeeease :lol:

[Tommy]

Please stay on topic, please do not become personal with statements.

[dstrattenfan]

It has been probably 10 years since I read E&Me..As a matter of fact it was the 1st book I read about Elvis..U guys were saying that the movie was different from the book...I don't remeber it being different.:blink:

[Unchained Melody]

Elvis And Me was one of the very first Elvis books I read when I was about 13..maybe its time I go back and revisit it..actually no, I remember it well enough...thought it was a one side story and of course shes going to make herself look like the victim and the movie, it was good but to much stuff that was not true and it just made elvis look like a monster.

[utmom2008]

Once again this has gone off topic again and really sad to see that some just come here to post put downs about priscilla.. Like elvis would say never creases to amaze me.

:lol::lol:It all comes down to the eye of the beholder. People are going to give their opinion of Pris, and that's all it is....their opinion. Pris fans just choose to see it as a "putdown", while others simply see it as an opinion.;);):blink:

[MissyM]

If she didn't write the book, if she just faded out of the picture, if she didn't take the famous name back, if she didn't keep her face out in the limelight, and if she didn't try to act like the long-suffering widow, what would people talk about. The book would be a blip and nothing more. From the time she left Elvis, it is she who sought notariety. How many famous wives have divorced (one's married longer than 5 years to the man) and you never hear from them again?
Really, how often do you even hear about Yoko Ono?? She WAS married to John when he died, and has had to keep his legacy alive, and yet, she pretty much lives her life out quietly and doesn't make a huge deal out of who she was married to.