Elvis lashes out a this critics!

[elvislady]

YouTube - Elvis lashes out at his critics

I found this clip on another site, is this elvis being so angry?

elvislady

[franny]

Yes, Jeanette. Elvis is a little upset here lol he was offended when he heard that people were saying, he was strung-out...

franny

[Tony Trout]

UGH! This is one rant where I can't stand to hear Elvis talk. By this point, September 2, 1974 (I believe) he's already in very deep denial about his drug problems......

(The rant can also be found on the 2-CD set, appropriately titled, "Desert Storm").

[Brian]

elvislady,

why is this off topic

it's about Elvis

[EnigmaticSun]

By this point, September 2, 1974 (I believe) he's already in very deep denial about his drug problems

I do agree prescription medication may often cause more harm than the ailment itself. However I'm inclined to believe Elvis meant something else he was supposedly being accused of. It's no secret Elvis didn't hold drugs of the street in high esteem.

[Tony Trout]

I do agree prescription medication may often cause more harm than the ailment itself. However I'm inclined to believe Elvis meant something else he was supposedly being accused of. It's no secret Elvis didn't hold drugs of the street in high esteem.



ES,

You would be correct in your assumption that it was something else that Elvis was being accused of doing - and that 'something' was heroin, I believe (if you listen to the full dialogue).

[elvislady]

elvislady,

why is this off topic

it's about Elvis

slap my wrist.... i am sure the mods will remove it if need be.

elvislady

[datalore]

When did he start taking dilaudid(Sp?) I heard that that was synthetic heroin in some Elvis special a while ago.

[Tony Trout]

When did he start taking dilaudid(Sp?) I heard that that was synthetic heroin in some Elvis special a while ago.


He started taking/using Dilaudid around 1974-1975, I believe. Dilaudid is, in fact, synthetic heroin or drugstore heroin. Quote taken from Lamar Fike from "Elvis Aaron Presley - Revelations From The Memphis Mafia (original 1995 hardback printing):

Later on, in the mid-70s he started using Dilaudid, which is synthetic heroin, drugstore heroin. You're talking about extremely strong **** here - five times stronger than morphine and two and a half times stronger than heroin (pure morphine and pure heroin). Doctors prescribe it only for terminally ill cancer patients.

You can find this info in page 534 of the first printing of "Elvis Aaron Presley: Revelations From The Memphis Mafia".

[datalore]

He started taking/using Dilaudid around 1974-1975, I believe. Dilaudid is, in fact, synthetic heroin or drugstore heroin. Quote taken from Lamar Fike from "Elvis Aaron Presley - Revelations From The Memphis Mafia (original 1995 hardback printing):

Later on, in the mid-70s he started using Dilaudid, which is synthetic heroin, drugstore heroin. You're talking about extremely strong **** here - five times stronger than morphine and two and a half times stronger than heroin (pure morphine and pure heroin). Doctors prescribe it only for terminally ill cancer patients.

You can find this info in page 534 of the first printing of "Elvis Aaron Presley: Revelations From The Memphis Mafia".

Thanks Tony for answering me. I wasn't too sure about the specifics but I did hear that he took that in some Elvis documentary that was on tv a decade or so ago. I don't actually have the book.

[elvislady]

Thanks for this info tony..i didnt know this!

elvislady:D

[Getlo]

Yes, Jeanette. Elvis is a little upset here lol he was offended when he heard that people were saying, he was strung-out...

Which, ironically, he pretty-much was.

[elvislady]

Thanks for the move, brian i hope you can sleep better now! :lmfao:

elvislady

[Sonny]

I made the move lol!

Brian is right, this is about Elvis!

[elvislady]

I made the move lol!

Brian is right, this is about Elvis!

lol i know i thought i would let you guys move it for me..thanks again!

elvislady:D(y)

[Nicole Presley]

Some people are really *****s. That´s really mean what some say about Elvis. I can understand why he´s angry.

[Tony Trout]

Which, ironically, he pretty-much was.


Agreed, Getlo.




Some people are really *****s. That´s really mean what some say about Elvis. I can understand why he´s angry.


They were only telling the truth, sadly. He was strung out during this tirade.

It's embarrasing to listen to him rant like this, to be honest.

[Pacerstar]

Agreed, Getlo.






They were only telling the truth, sadly. He was strung out during this tirade.

It's embarrasing to listen to him rant like this, to be honest.

I wish he hadn't felt the need to rant like he did. But, everyone has a breaking
point, I guess. Maybe, he was sick.:D:D:D:D:D:D

[datalore]

I wish he hadn't felt the need to rant like he did. But, everyone has a breaking
point, I guess. Maybe, he was sick.:D:D:D:D:D:D


As far as Elvis was concerned, the fact that his name was on the bottle meant that he didn't have a drug problem. When he did. It's really sad that there were no rehab clinics around back then even though I do think that a lot of the pills he was taking were what he legitimately needed due to various illnesses he'd had.

[Trelane P]

"freaks that carry luggage up to your room..."

That comment always makes me laugh.

[Pacerstar]

As far as Elvis was concerned, the fact that his name was on the bottle meant that he didn't have a drug problem. When he did. It's really sad that there were no rehab clinics around back then even though I do think that a lot of the pills he was taking were what he legitimately needed due to various illnesses he'd had.

I agree with you that Elvis didn't think he had a drug problem and that a lot
of his medication was for actual illness. I also have wondered if Elvis actually
used All of the medications prescribed in his name.:D:D:D:D

[artfromtex]

"freaks that carry luggage up to your room..."

That comment always makes me laugh.


me too.

i just wish Elvis had attacked his addiction with the vigor that he attacked these "sources" that ratted him out.

it's sad to hear a man fool himself.

[Joe Car]

ES,

You would be correct in your assumption that it was something else that Elvis was being accused of doing - and that 'something' was heroin, I believe (if you listen to the full dialogue).

This is exactly what Elvis mean't, and he had every right to be upset! Shooting heroin in those days was looked upon with the same disdain as somebody doing crack nowadays! Tell you what, after his rant, that rumor never surfaced again!

[dennis hauser]

I've heard this rant many years ago. Sadly, Elvis had many demons we are only now maybe understanding. When I hear him sing this song(walk a mile in my shoes/Joe South)I feel he was trying to tell us, in his' own way in song. > If I could be you and you could be me, for just one hour. If we coud find a way,to get inside each others minds. If you could see you, through my eyes, instead of your own ego. I believe you'd be, surprised to see, that you've been blind.<

[debtdbruno]

I've listened to the cd in full for the first time, and IMO, I think this has been blown out of all proportion. I am not saying he wasn't taking meds, but he's coherant, not sluring, singing fine and the audience is lapping it up.
Sure, he's talking and story telling, but..........why not?? The Man lived in a goldfish bowl. Was he not entitled to have 'his' say on things that p***** him off, or talk about things of interest to him.He didn't live a normal life, so he did things differently to the rest of us.

I certainly do not think he was 'strung out' by any stretch of the imagination.

[LuckyJackson]

And allegedly the rant was scripted by Elvis and Charlie. So if he was 'strung out' he would not have relayed it so well.

[Merry]

I've listened to the cd in full for the first time, and IMO, I think this has been blown out of all proportion. I am not saying he wasn't taking meds, but he's coherant, not sluring, singing fine and the audience is lapping it up.
Sure, he's talking and story telling, but..........why not?? The Man lived in a goldfish bowl. Was he not entitled to have 'his' say on things that p***** him off, or talk about things of interest to him.He didn't live a normal life, so he did things differently to the rest of us.

I certainly do not think he was 'strung out' by any stretch of the imagination.


Yes, he was entitled to have his say!!!!

Elvis also received a Standing Ovation at the end of what he said.......isn't that more telling than anything? (People judging the day, and not being present).

So many people who judge and wrote about what happened, weren't there. There is a member here, who was. He too, said that all is blown out of proportion.

Sandi Miller on FECC speaks in depth about it too. Tony Trout, aren't you a member there?

One thing Sandi said too, which is very insightful. Generally speaking -Stories are written about Elvis, with regard to what happened at the time, but never, ever, the build up to why he reacted as he did.

That is just plain wrong.

P.S. Any man who stands up for his family, is a man whom I would love in my life. That is what is right.

[GIORGIA]

Yes, Jeanette. Elvis is a little upset here lol he was offended when he heard that people were saying, he was strung-out...

franny
You right My Friend!

[debtdbruno]

Yes, he was entitled to have his say!!!!

Elvis also received a Standing Ovation at the end of what he said.......isn't that more telling than anything? (People judging the day, and not being present).

So many people who judge and wrote about what happened, weren't there. There is a member here, who was. He too, said that all is blown out of proportion.

Sandi Miller on FECC speaks in depth about it too. Tony Trout, aren't you a member there?

One thing Sandi said too, which is very insightful. Generally speaking -Stories are written about Elvis, with regard to what happened at the time, but never, ever, the build up to why he reacted as he did.

That is just plain wrong.

P.S. Any man who stands up for his family, is a man whom I would love in my life. That is what is right.

Do you know if Sandi there on that night Jess?

[Merry]

Do you know if Sandi there on that night Jess?




Yes, she was. Sandi was backstage before Elvis went on, as well as in the audience.

First hand telling from Sandi. First hand telling from a member, here.

As far as I'm concerned, and common sense will tell us, that they are more reliable sources than second hand. (y)

[Getlo]

I am not saying he wasn't taking meds, but he's coherant, not sluring

Coherent?!! :rolleyes:

And a person doesn't slur when they're on speed-based drugs.

They rave, and alltheirwordsseemlikeonelongsentencethatneverends.

Slurring occurs when people are mainly on downer-type drugs.

And it's clear that, during this show and others like it, Elvis was speeding off his head.


Yes, he was entitled to have his say!!!!

Not from the stage of the Hilton where he was being paid to do his job, he wasn't.

It was highly unprofessional, and The Colonel was right to rake him over the coals for it.

And one doesn't need to have been there ... the audio and video evidence is clear for all to see and hear.

[Merry]

.


Did you miss me, Getlo? ;):D

[elvislady]

Did you miss me, Getlo? ;):D

I am sure he has kim! :D:D

jeanette :lmfao:

[EnigmaticSun]

singing fine and the audience is lapping it up

I take it that was his job.

If the medication he was taking is supposed to have been that strong, it amazes me how he managed to give such a performance. My performance is already impaired by drinking too much wine or sleep deprivation, haha!

[GraceeD1970]

First time I heard this I couldn't believe what I was hearing. It really makes you wonder when elvis was pi**ed, his wrath could be frightening.

[Tony Trout]

I wish he hadn't felt the need to rant like he did. But, everyone has a breaking
point, I guess. Maybe, he was sick.:D:D:D:D:D:D


He wasn't sick....he was stoned.




I agree with you that Elvis didn't think he had a drug problem and that a lot
of his medication was for actual illness. I also have wondered if Elvis actually
used All of the medications prescribed in his name.:D:D:D:D


If they were for him (and even if they weren't for him) he still took them no matter what they were. James Caughley tells of Elvis grabbing a pack of sweetener out of his hand thinking that it was drugs. Sonny West even tells of Elvis having drugs written out for himself using even their names or their own children's names. When Sonny heard about this - he told Elvis to stop doing that immediately.




I've listened to the cd in full for the first time, and IMO, I think this has been blown out of all proportion. I am not saying he wasn't taking meds, but he's coherant, not sluring, singing fine and the audience is lapping it up.
Sure, he's talking and story telling, but..........why not?? The Man lived in a goldfish bowl. Was he not entitled to have 'his' say on things that p***** him off, or talk about things of interest to him.He didn't live a normal life, so he did things differently to the rest of us.

I certainly do not think he was 'strung out' by any stretch of the imagination.


Then you are being mislead - he was definitely strung out/high/whatever you want to call it. No professional entertainer worth their weight would've gone onstage that night did what Elvis did. I'm surprised that the 'powers that be' at the Hilton that night didn't tear up the contract right then and there.




And allegedly the rant was scripted by Elvis and Charlie. So if he was 'strung out' he would not have relayed it so well.

The rant was scripted? Source, please?? :hmm::hmm:




Yes, he was entitled to have his say!!!!

Elvis also received a Standing Ovation at the end of what he said.......isn't that more telling than anything? (People judging the day, and not being present).

So many people who judge and wrote about what happened, weren't there. There is a member here, who was. He too, said that all is blown out of proportion.

Sandi Miller on FECC speaks in depth about it too. Tony Trout, aren't you a member there?

One thing Sandi said too, which is very insightful. Generally speaking -Stories are written about Elvis, with regard to what happened at the time, but never, ever, the build up to why he reacted as he did.

That is just plain wrong.

P.S. Any man who stands up for his family, is a man whom I would love in my life. That is what is right.


Kimmi,

Yes, I am also a member at FECC.




Coherent?!! :rolleyes:

And a person doesn't slur when they're on speed-based drugs.

They rave, and alltheirwordsseemlikeonelongsentencethatneverends.

Slurring occurs when people are mainly on downer-type drugs.

And it's clear that, during this show and others like it, Elvis was speeding off his head.



Not from the stage of the Hilton where he was being paid to do his job, he wasn't.

It was highly unprofessional, and The Colonel was right to rake him over the coals for it.

And one doesn't need to have been there ... the audio and video evidence is clear for all to see and hear.


Bingo, Getlo. I agree with every word. As I said earlier, no professional entertainer worth their weight would've ever gone onstage and said the things that Elvis said that night. If he was going to say something to someone, it should've been said behind the scenes/backstage to the Hilton officials and not to the entire showroom where he basically embarassed himself (and I'm sure the people around him).

[LuckyJackson]

Quote:
Originally Posted by LuckyJackson
And allegedly the rant was scripted by Elvis and Charlie. So if he was 'strung out' he would not have relayed it so well.

The rant was scripted? Source, please??

Sourced from Darrin Lee's book 'Desert Storm- Shattering of a Myth' page 64.
We did say ''allegedly''.......

[Pacerstar]

I take it that was his job.

If the medication he was taking is supposed to have been that strong, it amazes me how he managed to give such a performance. My performance is already impaired by drinking too much wine or sleep deprivation, haha!

(y)(y)(y)(y)It never ceases to amaze me that some people like to think
the worst of Elvis and not others.:D:D:D:D

[debtdbruno]

I'm sorry, but it still sounds like the people there were enjoying themselves.

[Getlo]

The rant was scripted? Source, please??

Sourced from Darrin Lee's book 'Desert Storm- Shattering of a Myth' page 64.

Aside from the pictures, everything in this book - and Lee's other ridiculous work "debunking" Houston '76 - is utter CRAP.

The drug rant was not scripted in any way, shape or form.

[Tony Trout]

I'm sorry, but it still sounds like the people there were enjoying themselves.


I'm sure they were enjoying themselves up until the point that Elvis unloaded on the media in front of the crowd at the Hilton - which he shouldn't have done. He knew better!

If I would've been an official with the Hilton at that time, I woul've fired him on the spot and told him to never come back. I think that this very thing happened during the College Park, MD shows in September of '74. After the show was over that night, he was told that they never wanted to see him again.




Aside from the pictures, everything in this book - and Lee's other ridiculous work "debunking" Houston '76 - is utter CRAP.

The drug rant was not scripted in any way, shape or form.



I agree on both counts, Getlo. His book about "Elvis In Concert" is the same type of crap. He tries (and fails) to convince the reader that there was absoutely nothing at all wrong with him during those two nights in June of 1977.

[Merry]

The way I see it, is that is all comes down to second hand information, that people are judging on. They weren't there.

Fact is, is that there was a standing ovation (so, yes, people were enjoying themselves), and the people who were present, had a different impression to those who reported this story with second, and third hand information.

Hugs for Tony :D lol

[Brian]

The way I see it, is that is all comes down to second hand information, that people are judging on. They weren't there.

Fact is, is that there was a standing ovation (so, yes, people were enjoying themselves), and the people who were present, had a different impression to those who reported this story with second, and third hand information.

Hugs for Tony :D lol

well, there has been audio from those concerts on bootleg so people can hear for themselves if Elvis was ranting or high on drugs or whatever.

I've never listened to the bootleg because i'm not really a fan of the audio quality of them but have heard from people who have that during the August 74 Vegas engagement where Elvis changes his repetoire to include a bunch of new songs that contrary to what has been written it was actually well received by the audience.

That doesn't surprise Elvis fans would applaud and cheer pretty much anything he did and they would keep coming back for more.
so if the audience applauds Elvis even going on a talk about his private life instead of just singing that's no shock.

[Getlo]

If I would've been an official with the Hilton at that time, I woul've fired him on the spot and told him to never come back.

And then you'd have been promptly thrown out on your arse by the higher-ups!

Firing Elvis would've been career suicide for anyone in a position of power.

At the very most, Elvis should have been fined and - as it turned out anyway - bollocked by The Colonel.

Same as in '73 when he made those remarks about the Hilton firing that guy.

Just so unprofessional. Blame the drugs here, wholly and solely.

[Getlo]

The way I see it, is that is all comes down to second hand information, that people are judging on. They weren't there.

By that rationale, one can't give an accurate assessment of any Elvis concert, for good or bad, if one wasn't there. Which is quite obviously untrue.

The video and audio evidence is there for all to see and hear.


Fact is, is that there was a standing ovation (so, yes, people were enjoying themselves)

They gave him a standing ovation at every show, even his worst - Houston '76, Omaha '77, College Park 74 - so that means nothing.

An objective fan, eg Ger Rijff in Vegas in December '76 with his pull-no-punches reviews - can be honest.

"Fans" like the author mentioned above, Darrin Lee, are completely blinded by the myth and legend of Elvis Presley to be truly objective.

There was something wrong with Elvis at this show.

That is patently obvious, even to Blind Freddy.

[elvislady]

If I would've been an official with the Hilton at that time, I woul've fired him on the spot and told him to never come back. I think that this very thing happened during the College Park, MD shows in September of '74. After the show was over that night, he was told that they never wanted to see him again.


you would have to be a very brave man!

elvislady:)

[john carpenter]

Yes, Jeanette. Elvis is a little upset here lol he was offended when he heard that people were saying, he was strung-out...

franny
IMO, Elvis made a fool of himself:supriced:It hit a little close to the truth. In his mind the pills he took weren't drugs. But in the long run they are just as bad for you as heroin. And i agree he should've took his rant to the source, not the entire audience!(n)

[Lonniebealestreet]

"freaks that carry luggage up to your room..."

That comment always makes me laugh.
Yeah, I've always gotten a kick out of that part myself...Why are they freaks? :lol: And actually, to me that little comment is more out of character for Elvis than any of the rest of it; Elvis was usually much more sympathetic with the working folk. I suppose he must've really thought they were the ones leaking this stuff about him.

But yes, it is very embarrassing, awkward, hard to listen to. Infinitely interesting, of course, and part of the history so it's a great insight into this troubled time.

No question he was pretty messed up chemically during this time. Even if he's not talking fast, and really not speaking at a hundred miles an hour either, if you just compare the cadence and intonations in his speaking voice from this period to say, the TTWII period, it's just like a completely different human being. He speaks in this preacher-like, self-important, sing-song, gonna-hypnotize-you manner, and to me it's pretty off-putting. Elvis talking during this Vegas engagement and the tour that followed is sadly something I don't care too much to hear...to put it bluntly.

A standing O for that? Really? That's news to me. From listening to the tape it sounds like polite, bewildered applause but I wouldn't know.

[EnigmaticSun]

But yes, it is very embarrassing, awkward, hard to listen to..

..if you just compare the cadence and intonations in his speaking voice from this period to say, the TTWII period, it's just like a completely different human being.

I'm glad I don't suffer as much from whatever flaws Elvis had, comparing myself to other fans. I don't waste a second considering what family and friens might think of him, the only thing I know is that fans of other artists don't treat me accordingly, as I usually respect the particular artist more than the fans. I don't know a great deal about his behavior concerning medication, but he certainly didn't look like a walking skeleton. And most junkies who use hard drugs turn out that way.

It's obvious these pills weren't good for his health and I understand efforts from others to make him consider a change or withdrawal. Still there's no need to doubt his integrity, as he obviously differred street drugs from prescription medicine. More recently we've found out more about the negative side of (untreated) diabetes and pharmaceutical industry, which still carries too much power anyway.

Is it fair to blame all change on the drugs? Elvis appeared healthy around the turn of the decade, but his health had never been quite unbreakable and it's hard to tell what was going on internally. Even if you compare '67 to '69 it sounds like a different human being, or '54 to '56. To a degree a change in vocal dynamics and tone isn't unnatural, although there's no doubt the role of those pills in the '70's shouldn't be underestimated.

What was his reason to take pills? Escapism only, or..?

[Brian]

And then you'd have been promptly thrown out on your arse by the higher-ups!

Firing Elvis would've been career suicide for anyone in a position of power.

At the very most, Elvis should have been fined and - as it turned out anyway - bollocked by The Colonel.

Same as in '73 when he made those remarks about the Hilton firing that guy.

Just so unprofessional. Blame the drugs here, wholly and solely.

regarding the 1973 Vegas comments about the Chief Mario and the comments about the Hilton hotel I recall someone saying Elvis did that on purpose because he was tired of playing there and wanted to be fired.

His plan obviously didn't work because he was too big of a draw.

[KPM]

Actually dilaudid is closer to morphine in composition than to heroin-and it kills pain quick-but like morphine and heroin (any narcotic truthfully) it is highly addictive and the addiction can happen quickly with as little as a a couple months use......

Dilaudid is powerful narcotic which means that Dilaudid is only available by prescription. Dilaudid is the brand name for the drug hydromorphone which is milligram to milligram more powerful than morphine. Dilaudid comes in tablet form, syrup than can be taken orally or a solution that can be injected. In the same class as morphine and heroin, Dilaudid is prescribed for severe pain management and is not commonly prescribed because of its side effects including addiction. Dilaudid addiction can consume a person and become an obsession driven by physical dependence.
Scripts recognizes that many people become confused and frustrated when dealing with a problem like Dilaudid dependency. It is difficult sometimes to understand how a prescription for a legitimate pain can get out of control so quickly. The process of physical dependency and tolerance is a universal reaction to drugs and illustrates the importance of strictly sticking to the prescribed dose. Tolerance of Dilaudid happens when the body adapts to the effects of the drug and compensates to find its natural balance. For some individuals, taking Dilaudid for several weeks, the pain experienced can seem to return or even get worse. Since Dilaudid blocks the pain receptors in the brain and spinal column, the fact that pain is felt means the body has chemically adjusted to the reduced pain transmissions and is now more sensitive to pain than ever.

[Lonniebealestreet]

You know the other thing that always struck me about this rant is his apparent mistaking of the term "strung out" for simply "high" in the statement, I've never been strung out in my life, except on music. They are closely related but not quite synonymous. The way he worded that always struck me as odd anyway.

[jak]

I bought Desert Storm when it was first released.Back then that disc was absolutely shocking to hear.I will never forget when I first played that cd.I havent played it again since.It's to brutal.I hate the fact Elvis ever got to that point.There is nothing redeeming in that recording IMO.It just shows when the wheels were starting to come off.

[Lonniebealestreet]

Is it fair to blame all change on the drugs? Elvis appeared healthy around the turn of the decade, but his health had never been quite unbreakable and it's hard to tell what was going on internally. Even if you compare '67 to '69 it sounds like a different human being, or '54 to '56. To a degree a change in vocal dynamics and tone isn't unnatural, although there's no doubt the role of those pills in the '70's shouldn't be underestimated.

What was his reason to take pills? Escapism only, or..?
That's a fair point to raise and it can certainly also be said there were significant changes to his singing voice in short spans of time throughout his career, which we've discussed a lot, and there were obviously much more significant factors than drugs behind that (though I believe they played some part). And his speaking voice changed considerably over the years too but IMO this particular way of talking that I described is one that in his case is mostly brought about by artificial means. He sounded normal when he spoke on recordings from a few short months before that, and he sounded normal again not too long thereafter.

...to these ears anyway.

We're speculating here of course, even if we are basing our opinions on the words of those who were there, but I would say escapism probably was the biggest factor but not his only reason for taking the stuff he took. Lamar Fike says he just loved being &@(%ed up but I tend to think there was more to it than that, and not just because I want to think that about him. I think that was part of it though and also some degree of pain management. Many days though I am sure it was just simple habit (with of course stronger addictions to certain meds) along with his admitted fascination with medicine.

[EnigmaticSun]

..mostly brought about by artificial means. He sounded normal when he spoke on recordings from a few short months before that, and he sounded normal again not too long thereafter.

Thank you for elaborating and discussing this fairly (y) . Yes I agree some drugs - prescription or not - may cause you to formulate sentences without putting any borders to seperate words. However some songs came out all right and this amazes me.

There was already an incredible shift in both speaking and singing voice from 1970 to '72, but I bet something was causing him to have trouble in '74 which can not only be explained by ageing. In spite of all his personal hardship I still appreciate him and it's not way out of line to claim the press ain't honest and integrity means nothing to them. I guess that, if they were to write about Elvis, they could at least have kept it accurate.

Whatever false steps he might have taken during the course of his life, I'm quite sure he has made it up with his creator - that's how I look at it from a believer's point of view.

[Lonniebealestreet]

Well said.

And let me elaborate just a tad bit more, since I don't think I really articulated this point too well.

I believe whatever he was taking at that time put him in a state of mind which, when in it, perhaps he was inclined to talk a certain way. In other words I'm not so sure that the drug itself directly caused a certain vocal condition (something that is in evidence at other times). My impression is that this was a temporary thing and not part of the overall changing of his voice that we referred to previously.

He didn't talk the way he did in Omaha '77, for example -- slurred, too slow -- and he didn't talk the way he did in the final tour of '76 -- hyped up, way too fast. But he sounded affected...It's almost like it was more of a change in personality and that personality just had a different voice associated with it. But again, I think that change was brought about chemically.

Earlier I said that a few months prior he sounded more normal but look closer than that actually to the Aug. 16 rehearsals. (If you don't have the import CD, fear not (http://www.tcb-world.com/showthread.php?t=29711)!) I think he sounds great in every way on those tapes.

As you said it is indeed amazing how, when he was in much worse shape, he could still sing incredibly well. I think it was in Omaha (mighta been Rapid City though) that he himself admitted, "I can sing, but I can't talk." Sad and odd. It was definitely Omaha where he instructed the sound people to turn him up but just when he was talking because he was talking kind of softly, obviously not by choice. I should point out I'm not saying Omaha was an incredible show but it had its moments for sure.

[KEVIN WILDE]

I AGREE WITH TRELANE IT MAKES ME LAUGH ALSO

[EnigmaticSun]

he himself admitted, "I can sing, but I can't talk." I should point out I'm not saying Omaha was an incredible show but it had its moments for sure.

I'm not too sure, but I recall something similar in Dallas, december '76. All things you've described are pretty accurate and as I've said before it is not only to be explained by an artistic change of direction or ageing.

Good to see there are fans out there who appreciate at least something from the Omaha show! :king:

[Lonniebealestreet]

Oh, absolutely. When I first got the Elvis In Concert CD, by far my favorite track was And I Love You So. (I got that before I got Today with the studio version of that track.) And though I am not blind to the negatives I can find a lot to enjoy about the show. It's better than it's reputed to be.

The most difficult moments probably are some of the things that he says and the way that he says them.

[Unchained Melody]

Agreed, Getlo.






They were only telling the truth, sadly. He was strung out during this tirade.

It's embarrasing to listen to him rant like this, to be honest.

Hmm, I don't see it as embarrasing the man standing up for himself when the critics etc are spreading stuff like that about him, get to see a more personal side of Elvis and I don't mind it at all as those shows were very powerful imo his voice was so full, sure he oversung alittle bit, but no where as bad as he did during that fall 74 tour.

[Unchained Melody]

I've listened to the cd in full for the first time, and IMO, I think this has been blown out of all proportion. I am not saying he wasn't taking meds, but he's coherant, not sluring, singing fine and the audience is lapping it up.
Sure, he's talking and story telling, but..........why not?? The Man lived in a goldfish bowl. Was he not entitled to have 'his' say on things that p***** him off, or talk about things of interest to him.He didn't live a normal life, so he did things differently to the rest of us.

I certainly do not think he was 'strung out' by any stretch of the imagination.

WELL SAID!!!!(y)(y)

[Unchained Melody]

He wasn't sick....he was stoned.



I don't really know what your definition of "stoned" is but I assure you he could not have put on a show like that and be stoned.
He wasn't slurring his words or nothing that shows he would be stoned, sure he was bouncing off the walls with energy from the way he talks but that does not mean he was stoned.:doh::doh::doh:

[Unchained Melody]

I'm sure they were enjoying themselves up until the point that Elvis unloaded on the media in front of the crowd at the Hilton - which he shouldn't have done. He knew better!

If I would've been an official with the Hilton at that time, I woul've fired him on the spot and told him to never come back. I think that this very thing happened during the College Park, MD shows in September of '74. After the show was over that night, he was told that they never wanted to see him again.







I agree on both counts, Getlo. His book about "Elvis In Concert" is the same type of crap. He tries (and fails) to convince the reader that there was absoutely nothing at all wrong with him during those two nights in June of 1977.

Just out of curiosity Tony, do you enjoy ANY of Elvis' work post 1973. You talk like was strung out of his mind 24/7 all the time. I mean seriously if he was strung out as you put it he could not have put on a good show like he did on september 2nd 1974 CS, sure the talking was wierd abit but that don't mean anything else....jmo man.

[debtdbruno]

WELL SAID!!!!(y)(y)


Thanks CJB(y)(y)(y)(y)(y)


Deb

[sasha]

I've listened to the cd in full for the first time, and IMO, I think this has been blown out of all proportion. I am not saying he wasn't taking meds, but he's coherant, not sluring, singing fine and the audience is lapping it up.
Sure, he's talking and story telling, but..........why not?? The Man lived in a goldfish bowl. Was he not entitled to have 'his' say on things that p***** him off, or talk about things of interest to him.He didn't live a normal life, so he did things differently to the rest of us.

I certainly do not think he was 'strung out' by any stretch of the imagination.

Agree !! I bet many of us would have said worse !! (y)(y)

[sasha]

Just out of curiosity Tony, do you enjoy ANY of Elvis' work post 1973. You talk like was strung out of his mind 24/7 all the time. I mean seriously if he was strung out as you put it he could not have put on a good show like he did on september 2nd 1974 CS, sure the talking was wierd abit but that don't mean anything else....jmo man.

I've often wondered the same thing. :hmm::hmm:

[Unchained Melody]

I've often wondered the same thing. :hmm::hmm:

I wasnt saying to be a smart a, because i know elvis did drugs in the late 70s really bad and a few times had some bad shows, but it wasnt like that ALL the time thats just what i was trying to point out.:king:

[Getlo]

Hmm, I don't see it as embarrasing the man standing up for himself when the critics etc are spreading stuff like that about him.

The critics were absolutely spot-on in their criticisms.

Except for one thing: the type of drugs he was using.

Elvis' drug problems were known by some in the media at the time, and certainly in "celebrity" circles.


I don't really know what your definition of "stoned" is but I assure you he could not have put on a show like that and be stoned. He wasn't slurring his words or nothing that shows he would be stoned

Clearly, you have never taken drugs (much) or been around those who have.

One can either be stoned on things like marijuana, where one becomes slow and indolent; or on things like speed and amphetamines, where one's speech is very rapid, rambling and running together.

"Ihadahunnetantwotemprichatheywoodenlemmeperform..."

Elvis' drug regimen in '74 was mostly comprised of the speed-type drugs. His on-stage verbal diahhroea from Desert Storm is classic speed stoner.

And if you think someone who is stoned (either slow or fast) and therefore couldn't put on a show, you're wrong.

[Unchained Melody]

Clearly, you have never taken drugs (much) or been around those who have.

Sorry Can't say that I have :supriced:;)

And if you think someone who is stoned (either slow or fast) and therefore couldn't put on a show, you're wrong.
Then we have to agree to disagree:)

[EnigmaticSun]

One can either be stoned on things like marijuana, where one becomes slow and indolent; or on things like speed and amphetamines, where one's speech is very rapid, rambling and running together.

Now marijuana gets bad press.. You'd have to put in tobacco in a joint to get this effect, or use very, very strong MJ. That's because MJ and tobacco have opposite effects and the substances work against each other (blood vessel widening against blood vessel tightening).

The feeling of getting stoned can also be realized by drinking too much alcohol.. :lol:

Yes I do agree something was causing Elvis to be rapid, as in rapid city. Amphetamines? Well, one learns it in the army, right?

[Getlo]

Sorry Can't say that I have :supriced:;)

Then - and with all due respect - you can't speak with authority about what it's like to function under the influence of anything.

Elvis was a functioning addict; a term I'm sure you've heard before.

[KPM]

Well having had some experience with prescription drug problems, depression and alcohol I can say you can have these problems and work your job and function in life.
But I would not say I was ever totally stoned when I worked-but I was under the influence. The distinction of stoned-and just under the influence is clear to me and would probably be different for each person. Stoned for me is -beyond any reason, totally out of it. When I began to approach this in life too often-it became obvious to everyone around me and action for me was taken. Its funny how it sneaks up on you and you think its under control.................its never under control really.

[Unchained Melody]

Stoned for me is -beyond any reason, totally out of it. .

Thats what my definition for it is aswell, which is why I said I don't see how Elvis could be stoned and put on a show....:doh:

[Brian]

Thats what my definition for it is aswell, which is why I said I don't see how Elvis could be stoned and put on a show....:doh:

people do it all the time.

Elvis was really out of it for some shows he gave.

[LovePresley]

Can we PLEASE stop with the Elvis stoned crap?
Elvis was NEVER stoned!First of all,Elvis took medication becouse HE NEEDED IT!There's a BIG difference between taking medication,and being stoned..

That comes as such a shock to some people:supriced:
Second of all,you can not be stoned and put on a show.If your stoned,there is NO possible way he could put on a show..If your stoned,your totally out of it..
Obviously,some people around here have either no respect,don't know or care to know,and are talking before they know the facts!

[Unchained Melody]

Can we PLEASE stop with the Elvis stoned crap?
Elvis was NEVER stoned!First of all,Elvis took medication becouse HE NEEDED IT!

That comes as such a shock to some people:supriced:
Second of all,you can not be stoned and put on a show.If your stoned,there is NO possible way he could put on a show..If your stoned,your totally out of it..
Obviously,some people around here have either no respect,or are talking before they know the facts!
I can't say that he was NEVER stoned because I dont believe that, but everything else I can say very well put !!!!(y)

[Brian]

Can we PLEASE stop with the Elvis stoned crap?
Elvis was NEVER stoned!First of all,Elvis took medication becouse HE NEEDED IT!There's a BIG difference between taking medication,and being stoned..



I think you don't know what you are saying.

To say Elvis was never stoned or he took all those drugs because he needed is pure B.S.

This is a case of a fan wearing blinders and ignoring the truth Elvis needed liquid cocaine sure he did.
He needed demerol.
He needed medicine that is only given to terminally ill cancer patients.

There are many performers that give performances when they are drunk or stoned or both.

[LovePresley]

I think you don't know what you are saying.

To say Elvis was never stoned or he took all those drugs because he needed is pure B.S.

This is a case of a fan wearing blinders and ignoring the truth Elvis needed liquid cocaine sure he did.
He needed demerol.
He needed medicine that is only given to terminally ill cancer patients.

There are many performers that give performances when they are drunk or stoned or both.

Thank You Brian!Nice to meet you too :D

[KPM]

I think you don't know what you are saying.

To say Elvis was never stoned or he took all those drugs because he needed is pure B.S.

This is a case of a fan wearing blinders and ignoring the truth Elvis needed liquid cocaine sure he did.He needed demerol.
He needed medicine that is only given to terminally ill cancer patients.

There are many performers that give performances when they are drunk or stoned or both.
I think I have made several posts on this subject in the past.
It is not proven that Elvis used liquid cocaine-many of the guys thought the cotton balls stuffed into his nose were liquid cocaine-but according to Dr. Nick they were jumping to conclusions-he claims they were a combination of bronchial dilators to open the throat, lidocaine-a topical anesthetic used to numb and relax tissue (whos chemical properties are similar to cocaine without the stimulant ability) and other things to loosen and help Elvis to breath and sing better. Sonny West has said Elvis lost his voice once in performance and it scared him so that he became paranoid about it happening again. So Nick came up with this procedure which helped to ease those worries which Elvis had.

[Unchained Melody]

I think I have made several posts on this subject in the past.
It is not proven that Elvis used liquid cocaine-many of the guys thought the cotton balls stuffed into his nose were liquid cocaine-but according to Dr. Nick they were jumping to conclusions-he claims they were a combination of bronchial dilators to open the throat, lidocaine-a topical anesthetic used to numb and relax tissue (whos chemical properties are similar to cocaine without the stimulant ability) and other things to loosen and help Elvis to breath and sing better. Sonny West has said Elvis lost his voice once in performance and it scared him so that he became paranoid about it happening again. So Nick came up with this procedure which helped to ease those worries which Elvis had.

Thanks for that Ken that makes perfect sense. Of course the MM will exaggerate almost anything to make Elvis look worse at times(n)

[KPM]

I have no idea what pain (or perceived pain) that Elvis felt he needed demerol-or if he just liked the feeling it gave him-but I do know that it is a fallacy that demerol is only used for terminal cancer patients-that is another myth that started with a couple of the guys.
My wife had gall stones in 1981 and she was given demerol to help with the pain of the attacks until she finally had the surgery to have the gall bladder removed. Now gall stones is rarely terminal:lol:


From a site on pain killers:
Demerol is in a group of drugs called narcotic pain relievers. It is similar to morphine.

Demerol is used to treat moderate-to-severe pain.
Demerol may also be used for purposes other than those listed in this medication guide.

[KPM]

I do not want to downplay the fact that Elvis did abuse prescription meds nor that he became dependant.
I have said this many times -Elvis thought that there was a drug or treatment for everything. He wanted to sidestep the hardwork of keeping healthy, keeping fit-well who doesn't-but to rely on medications for everything is a mistake for anyone.
He wanted a quick easy way to sleep, to lose weight, to keep fit mentally and physically-instead of tackling the demons which kept him from sleeping thru therapy or counseling he took the pills, and then when 1 doesn't work you try 2 then you try stronger pills when even increasing the dose does not work etc.......a horrid circle.
His first doctor who gave him sleeping pills should have got him into a therapy situation to discover what kept him sleepless-but the pills were easier to prescribe and easier to explain to the patient.

[debtdbruno]

:notworthy
I do not want to downplay the fact that Elvis did abuse prescription meds nor that he became dependant.
I have said this many times -Elvis thought that there was a drug or treatment for everything. He wanted to sidestep the hardwork of keeping healthy, keeping fit-well who doesn't-but to rely on medications for everything is a mistake for anyone.
He wanted a quick easy way to sleep, to lose weight, to keep fit mentally and physically-instead of tackling the demons which kept him from sleeping thru therapy or counseling he took the pills, and then when 1 doesn't work you try 2 then you try stronger pills when even increasing the dose does not work etc.......a horrid circle.
His first doctor who gave him sleeping pills should have got him into a therapy situation to discover what kept him sleepless-but the pills w
ere easier to prescribe and easier to explain to the patient.

Excellent post Ken:notworthy:notworthy

[Diane]

I do not want to downplay the fact that Elvis did abuse prescription meds nor that he became dependant.
I have said this many times -Elvis thought that there was a drug or treatment for everything. He wanted to sidestep the hardwork of keeping healthy, keeping fit-well who doesn't-but to rely on medications for everything is a mistake for anyone.
He wanted a quick easy way to sleep, to lose weight, to keep fit mentally and physically-instead of tackling the demons which kept him from sleeping thru therapy or counseling he took the pills, and then when 1 doesn't work you try 2 then you try stronger pills when even increasing the dose does not work etc.......a horrid circle.
His first doctor who gave him sleeping pills should have got him into a therapy situation to discover what kept him sleepless-but the pills were easier to prescribe and easier to explain to the patient.

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

[Brian]

I think I have made several posts on this subject in the past.
It is not proven that Elvis used liquid cocaine-many of the guys thought the cotton balls stuffed into his nose were liquid cocaine-but according to Dr. Nick they were jumping to conclusions-he claims they were a combination of bronchial dilators to open the throat, lidocaine-a topical anesthetic used to numb and relax tissue (whos chemical properties are similar to cocaine without the stimulant ability) and other things to loosen and help Elvis to breath and sing better. Sonny West has said Elvis lost his voice once in performance and it scared him so that he became paranoid about it happening again. So Nick came up with this procedure which helped to ease those worries which Elvis had.

I don't know if I'd believe Dr.Nick he seems to try and justify all the over prescribing he did.
According to him he never gave Elvis anything he didn't need and he did the same for all his other patients.
instead of just admitting he did overprescribe.
I also think it could be possible that Elvis could've been getting liquid cocaine from other doctors without Nick's knowledge.
I suppose Dr.Nick could be telling the truth about this the MM weren't doctors so they might not know all the medicines and all the procedures Elvis was involved in.

[Brian]

I have no idea what pain (or perceived pain) that Elvis felt he needed demerol-or if he just liked the feeling it gave him-but I do know that it is a fallacy that demerol is only used for terminal cancer patients-that is another myth that started with a couple of the guys.
My wife had gall stones in 1981 and she was given demerol to help with the pain of the attacks until she finally had the surgery to have the gall bladder removed. Now gall stones is rarely terminal:lol:


From a site on pain killers:
Demerol is in a group of drugs called narcotic pain relievers. It is similar to morphine.

Demerol is used to treat moderate-to-severe pain.
Demerol may also be used for purposes other than those listed in this medication guide.

I didn't mean to say demerol was for or only for terminally ill cancer patients
my english isn't very good sometimes.
if you get into a car accident and are wheeled into the emergency room they'll give you demerol for the pain or if you are in severe pain for some reason they'll give you demerol.
I meant to say Elvis was abusing liquid cocaine, demerol, and a drug they only give out to terminally ill cancer patients the name of it escapes me.

[Getlo]

Elvis was NEVER stoned! First of all,Elvis took medication becouse HE NEEDED IT!

Please. You must be kidding. :rolleyes:

[Sonny]

LovePresley, keep it nice please.

And believe it or not (you don't have to of course) but Elvis was stoned in some way or another, and certainly he was on heavy stuff this particular evening.

Discuss this in a normal manner please.

[Jumpsuit Junkie]

I agree it was unprofessional of Elvis to use the stage for his own agenda, he was there to entertain the fans who had come to see him, however I also believe this whole incident is blown out of all proportion given the bad shows circa 1976. Elvis isn't flashing his dangly bits at the audience like Jim Morrison, he is blowing of a little steam.

I'm sure there have been many occasions when Elvis spilled out of a limo having been "Tired" and thought his day show was at night etc. The staff at hotels see this and do pass comment, its natural for them to be shocked! Instead of looking at himself he deflected.

We can argue the rights and wrongs of what Elvis was saying e.g. not being "Strung Out" which he clearly 'was'. The bit for me that really hurts is the bit about the 'FREAKS' whilst it maybe funny, if I had worked at that hotel I would be really P*I*S*S*E*D off with that comment. Given that Elvis was seen as a good guy who related well to all walks of life, it would seem he obviously had a class system mentality which sucks a little!

When all is said and done this is where the work life balance blurred into one, before Elvis seemed to be able reasonably deliver the goods under the influence, after this Elvis seemed unable to control his life, it controlled him. A real shame because up until mid 1975 there was hope of pulling back from the brink after 1975 it was free-fall.

[Tony Trout]

What was his reason to take pills? Escapism only, or..?


He took them because of the 'buzz' or feeling that he got from them.



Just out of curiosity Tony, do you enjoy ANY of Elvis' work post 1973. You talk like was strung out of his mind 24/7 all the time. I mean seriously if he was strung out as you put it he could not have put on a good show like he did on september 2nd 1974 CS, sure the talking was wierd abit but that don't mean anything else....jmo man.

Brad,

Yes, I do enjoy Elvis's work (at least some of it) post - 1973 but I also don't wear the rose-colored glasses, either. By the 1970s, according to those around him (especially Billy Smith) he always had stuff in him. There was never a time in the 1970s when he was totally 'clean' of any type of substance (whatever the substance may have been).




Can we PLEASE stop with the Elvis stoned crap?
Elvis was NEVER stoned!First of all,Elvis took medication becouse HE NEEDED IT!There's a BIG difference between taking medication,and being stoned..

That comes as such a shock to some people:supriced:
Second of all,you can not be stoned and put on a show.If your stoned,there is NO possible way he could put on a show..If your stoned,your totally out of it..
Obviously,some people around here have either no respect,don't know or care to know,and are talking before they know the facts!


I think you don't know what you are saying.

To say Elvis was never stoned or he took all those drugs because he needed is pure B.S.

This is a case of a fan wearing blinders and ignoring the truth Elvis needed liquid cocaine sure he did.
He needed demerol.
He needed medicine that is only given to terminally ill cancer patients.

There are many performers that give performances when they are drunk or stoned or both.


I agree with the first part of your response but I disagree with your second response, Brian. There was no excuse whatsoever in this world for him to be taking Demerol or Dilaudid or any of the 'harder' drugs he took. Sure, he had ailments but he overused the medications he was given and he took most of them because of the feeling that they gave him.

Like I said, in the 1970s, Elvis had this stuff in his system nearly all the time. The stuff that Elvis took by this time were things that he had no business whatsoever taking.

[Brian]

[/I]











I agree with the first part of your response but I disagree with your second response, Brian. There was no excuse whatsoever in this world for him to be taking Demerol or Dilaudid or any of the 'harder' drugs he took. Sure, he had ailments but he overused the medications he was given and he took most of them because of the feeling that they gave him.

Like I said, in the 1970s, Elvis had this stuff in his system nearly all the time. The stuff that Elvis took by this time were things that he had no business whatsoever taking.

I was being sarcastic Tony

of course Elvis didn't need to be taking Demerol or Dilaudid.

[Tony Trout]

I was being sarcastic Tony

of course Elvis didn't need to be taking Demerol or Dilaudid.


Ahh, I see. I apologize for missin' the sarcasm, bro. :blush:

[KPM]

I will play the devils advocate for pain and how it affects each person differently because of age, overall health and tolerance.
I had a knee reconstruction in 1982 after a sports injury at a family reunion(we play rough:D) I had 3 steel pins put into the knee and it took about 5 months for it to heal. I was 27. I was given Vicodin for the pain problem which lessened as it healed. The doctor who did the surgery warned me when he released me for work again that it would give me more trouble as I aged....and.....I would probably get arthritis in it in my late 40s/ early 50s.
I did not worry about it-and it eventually got back to near full strength.
At about 35 I noticed now and then it would hurt but not for long-like a dull ache. Each year since it has got worse and the pain lasts longer.
I finally went back to the doctor at 50 and told him the pain was so bad some nights that I could not sleep. He once again gave me Vicodin and told me that it was arthritis.
Now at 27 I thought "huh arthritis" big deal it could not hurt as bad as the original injury.
But I will tell you at 54 when the weeks of pain 24/7 hit and I can not stand, nor sit, nor lay anyway which eases it I reach for the Vicodin and am glad I have it.
Once again at 27-the same injury did not bother me much and I laughed at the idea of "ARTHRITIS" being truely a problem..............
At 54 having actually lived for years with it coming and going, lasting longer when it strikes, and getting painfully worse I realise I did not understand the situation at 27-had no experience with this type condition so I thought I knew how I would react.................and I was wrong.
So I can not judge what another person may need-by the pains they have (or think they have)
Dr. Nick says Elvis had arthritis in his neck and back-if that is true-I can understand needing increasing pain medication because the pain worsens, speads and lasts longer as you age. It can be debilitating.
Now perhaps Nick is covering his rear, perhaps he was the worse of all the docs who treated Elvis.... depends on who you talk to.....
I have mentioned the congenital ganglionic fold in Elvis's colon-which when young would have caused little pain-but as Elvis aged and the fold closed off more-painful stomach and lower intestinal pain would get worse as his digestive track slowed. Now did his "pill for everything" attitude help this-no.
But was this a real condition that he was born with-yes.
How these things affected his condition and his pain problems is just a guess by anyone.
I will almost never say that is not possible-concerning someone elses health or conditions-it is not me. I can only speak for conditions and ailments I have which may or may not give me some insight into others problems.
Devils advocate opinion-????Why is it the devils advocate:blush: I feel like I have crossed over to the dark side:):)

[sasha]

I have a question. This is taken from Dr Hoffmans interview.
IF Elvis could do this, why do people claim he took drugs? :doh:



Dr. Lester Hoffman Interview

Q : When did you first meet Elvis?
A : I first met Elvis, it was just after he had come back from Hawaii, from making Blue Hawaii. It was my day out of the office, the girl called me and said, "There's a phone call, somebody said Elvis Presley needs a dentist." And I said, "Well, it must be one of my friends playing a practical joke." But, I said, "I'll come on down." And I came on down and sure enough Elvis came in the office. And he was sent to the office by George Klein. I was Elvis dentist from then to the time he passed away.
Q : You told me a story where Elvis mentally psyched himself up when you were gonna give him a numb.
A : Yes, we were doing a little dental surgery on Elvis. I was taking out an old broken root tip. And, of course I reached for the syringe to get him numb and he said, "What's that?" And I said, "I'm gonna get you numb." And he said, "Well, just give me a moment, a minute." And, he went into sort of like a trance. And at the end of the minute he said, "Ok, I'm ready." And I reached for the syringe again. And he said, "No, that won't be necessary." He had gone into some deep meditation and I said, "Come on, Elvis I said this..." He said, "You go ahead, if it bothers me I'll stop." I went ahead and did the surgery, got the root tip out, sewed him up. He never blinked, he never moved. And when I finished I said, "Elvis, I'm through." He said, "I never felt a thing." He could put himself into this meditative trance, he was a student of meditation and he used it.



Then Dr Hoffman was asked about the night of Aug.15th.
Very different than what's been claimed .:hmm:



A : Oh yes, good frame of mind, good frame of mind, just normal. And when the news broke the day following when he passed away and I heard about the news, I didn't believe it. But as you know it was true.

Q : Did Elvis still not take anesthetics that night?

A : No, it was just a routine visit, a cleaning and a check up, that was all.

[Getlo]

"Meditative trance ..."

Yeah, right.

Sure.

Very believable.

[sasha]

"Meditative trance ..."

Yeah, right.

Sure.

Very believable.


You seem to take great pleasure in putting others down.Especially Elvis.
Do people do the same to you with your interviews? Just wondering. :hmm:

http://www.biwa.ne.jp/~presley/elnews251.htm

[debtdbruno]

I will play the devils advocate for pain and how it affects each person differently because of age, overall health and tolerance.
I had a knee reconstruction in 1982 after a sports injury at a family reunion(we play rough:D) I had 3 steel pins put into the knee and it took about 5 months for it to heal. I was 27. I was given Vicodin for the pain problem which lessened as it healed. The doctor who did the surgery warned me when he released me for work again that it would give me more trouble as I aged....and.....I would probably get arthritis in it in my late 40s/ early 50s.
I did not worry about it-and it eventually got back to near full strength.
At about 35 I noticed now and then it would hurt but not for long-like a dull ache. Each year since it has got worse and the pain lasts longer.
I finally went back to the doctor at 50 and told him the pain was so bad some nights that I could not sleep. He once again gave me Vicodin and told me that it was arthritis.
Now at 27 I thought "huh arthritis" big deal it could not hurt as bad as the original injury.
But I will tell you at 54 when the weeks of pain 24/7 hit and I can not stand, nor sit, nor lay anyway which eases it I reach for the Vicodin and am glad I have it.
Once again at 27-the same injury did not bother me much and I laughed at the idea of "ARTHRITIS" being truely a problem..............
At 54 having actually lived for years with it coming and going, lasting longer when it strikes, and getting painfully worse I realise I did not understand the situation at 27-had no experience with this type condition so I thought I knew how I would react.................and I was wrong.
So I can not judge what another person may need-by the pains they have (or think they have)
Dr. Nick says Elvis had arthritis in his neck and back-if that is true-I can understand needing increasing pain medication because the pain worsens, speads and lasts longer as you age. It can be debilitating.
Now perhaps Nick is covering his rear, perhaps he was the worse of all the docs who treated Elvis.... depends on who you talk to.....
I have mentioned the congenital ganglionic fold in Elvis's colon-which when young would have caused little pain-but as Elvis aged and the fold closed off more-painful stomach and lower intestinal pain would get worse as his digestive track slowed. Now did his "pill for everything" attitude help this-no.
But was this a real condition that he was born with-yes.
How these things affected his condition and his pain problems is just a guess by anyone.
I will almost never say that is not possible-concerning someone elses health or conditions-it is not me. I can only speak for conditions and ailments I have which may or may not give me some insight into others problems.
Devils advocate opinion-????Why is it the devils advocate:blush: I feel like I have crossed over to the dark side:):)


Great post Ken, I thought it was an enlarged colon, can you explain what you have posted above? thanks

We can judge him all we like.but as he said..........'walk a mile in my shoes'. Nobody knows what he had to put up with


Deb

[Diane]

Nobody knows what he had to put up with Deb

Exactly!(y)(y)(y)

Diane

[elvislady]

Great post Ken, I thought it was an enlarged colon, can you explain what you have posted above? thanks

We can judge him all we like.but as he said..........'walk a mile in my shoes'. Nobody knows what he had to put up with


Deb

well said deb!

elvislady

[Getlo]

Someone explain to me how anyone needs amphetamines and downers? ;)

For what illnesses are they used?

[Sonny]

sasha, Getlo... Take it easy.

I have to side with Getlo here, since this interview is a tough one to believe.

Stay on topic, no personal remarks anymore.

[Getlo]

If Elvis wasn't feeling anything during this alleged needle in the mouth, you can bet it was due more to his general body and mind numbness rather than his "stunning" mental discipline :rolleyes: all of which had gone by '77.

It's like that crap story about Elvis parting the clouds.

Oi vay!

[Sonny]

Didn't he part the clouds??? Bummer!!!

Now lol, let's stick to the topic...

[Diane]

Shoot what a disillusionment!:lmfao::lmfao::lmfao:

Diane

[May]

UGH! This is one rant where I can't stand to hear Elvis talk. By this point, September 2, 1974 (I believe) he's already in very deep denial about his drug problems......

(The rant can also be found on the 2-CD set, appropriately titled, "Desert Storm").

I feel the same way.(n)

[May]

Then - and with all due respect - you can't speak with authority about what it's like to function under the influence of anything.

Elvis was a functioning addict; a term I'm sure you've heard before.

Yes, like you get functioning alcoholics. People dont think they are alcoholics because they drink two bottles of wine every night and then get up the next day and go to work like normal. Just because you can function each and every day and not be hungover, doesnt make you not an alcoholic!

[elvislady]

Yes, like you get functioning alcoholics. People dont think they are alcoholics because they drink two bottles of wine every night and then get up the next day and go to work like normal. Just because you can function each and every day and not be hungover, doesnt make you not an alcoholic!

A friend who i worked with drank 2 bottles of wine a night and in the morning she had a drink before she came to work... we could tell because she acted diffrently under the influance of alchol. she was told by proffesional people she went to for help that she was a alchoholic!


elvislady

[May]

Hmm, I would say thats a bit different. Having a drink in the morning before work I would say it was obvious that person was an alcoholic. I take it to be more the person who drinks a lot at night, but tells themselves that because they "dont need a drink in the morning, well they clearly arent an alcoholic." Its the people who try to kid themselves they arent an alcoholic because they "dont drink everyday" etc.

[elvislady]

Hmm, I would say thats a bit different. Having a drink in the morning before work I would say it was obvious that person was an alcoholic. I take it to be more the person who drinks a lot at night, but tells themselves that because they "dont need a drink in the morning, well they clearly arent an alcoholic." Its the people who try to kid themselves they arent an alcoholic because they "dont drink everyday" etc.

I know it is obvious she was a alcoholic... my point is a alcoholic is someone who drinks all the time not just every night... they drink first thing in the morning and when they can through the day... they simply can not go with out alcohol!

elvislady

[Diane]

I know it is obvious she was a alcoholic... my point is a alcoholic is someone who drinks all the time not just every night... they drink first thing in the morning and when they can through the day... they simply can not go with out alcohol!

elvislady

Actually Jeanette that's not always true. There are alcoholics who are called "bingers" because although they don't drink every day they do go on binges for several days at a time and then stop for a while and then "binge" again. My dad was that kind of alcoholic.

Diane

[elvislady]

Actually Jeanette that's not always true. There are alcoholics who are called "bingers" because although they don't drink every day they do go on binges for several days at a time and then stop for a while and then "binge" again. My dad was that kind of alcoholic.

Diane

thanks diane...my hubbys dad was what i described in my post... i dont know a lot about alcholics but i know most people cant go a day without a drink and he was one of them!

elvislady

[Diane]

thanks diane...my hubbys dad was what i described in my post... i dont know a lot about alcholics but i know most people cant go a day without a drink and he was one of them!

elvislady

You're welcome Jeanette. I only know because of my dad. Most alcoholics do need to drink every day.

Diane

[Pacerstar]

Great post Ken, I thought it was an enlarged colon, can you explain what you have posted above? thanks

We can judge him all we like.but as he said..........'walk a mile in my shoes'. Nobody knows what he had to put up with


Deb

I agree totally. No one can know beyond a shadow of a doubt what Elvis felt
and how Elvis felt but him.:D:D:D:D

[EnigmaticSun]

Most alcoholics do need to drink every day

I also need certain things every day.

The group among the population suffering from this condition is called oxygenolics.

Withdrawal is useless and makes me feel bad if not worse. Going to a shrink one is told you hate horses because you secretly crave your mother while identifying your father with a horse. Oxygen is abused by such people to get away from it all.

Has anyone perhaps noticed that diabetics may appear to be drunk when their sugal levels are too low? I reckon Elvis had it.. don't flame me if you think I'm wrong!

[May]

I know it is obvious she was a alcoholic... my point is a alcoholic is someone who drinks all the time not just every night... they drink first thing in the morning and when they can through the day... they simply can not go with out alcohol!

elvislady

We are talking at crossed purposes I think here.:doh:
The most obvious type of alcoholic, that most people automatically think of when the word alcoholic is mentioned, is the type you are describing - someone who needs to drink all the time.

Then there are the 'functioning alcoholics' who (a lot of the time) deny to themselves they have a problem. They drink in the evening but because they dont "need" a drink in the morning kid themselves that they dont have a problem because " lots of people drink in the evening" etc.

I was just agreeing with a point Getlo made about "functioning (drug) addicts". The type of drug addicts who are heavy drug users, but not the stereotypical type of drug users, just as alcoholics arent just the tramps drinking out a paper bag and falling asleep on park benches stereotype.

[elvislady]

We are talking at crossed purposes I think here.:doh:
The most obvious type of alcoholic, that most people automatically think of when the word alcoholic is mentioned, is the type you are describing - someone who needs to drink all the time.

Then there are the 'functioning alcoholics' who (a lot of the time) deny to themselves they have a problem. They drink in the evening but because they dont "need" a drink in the morning kid themselves that they dont have a problem because " lots of people drink in the evening" etc.

I was just agreeing with a point Getlo made about "functioning (drug) addicts". The type of drug addicts who are heavy drug users, but not the stereotypical type of drug users, just as alcoholics arent just the tramps drinking out a paper bag and falling asleep on park benches stereotype.

lol, i re read the posts may and i got the wrong end of the stick! i can see your point.

elvislady :D

[KPM]

Great post Ken, I thought it was an enlarged colon, can you explain what you have posted above? thanks

We can judge him all we like.but as he said..........'walk a mile in my shoes'. Nobody knows what he had to put up with


Deb
A congenital defect is one which you are born with.
A ganglionic fold in the colon is a twist-which just by the twisting narrows that section of the colon. When you are younger and the colon is new-it is not so bad-but as the colon itself ages the twisted narrow section narrows even more and the colon moves slower then you get the problem of waste not being totally removed from the colon and it becomes even narrower and painful. Add Elvis's "pill for all problems idea" and doctors who are willing to do so and the colon as he aged would become very painful and it would not remove bodily waste as it should. Also his horrible unhealthy eating habits with foods he liked added to this problem.
Dr. Nick says in the book "Elvis UP Close" that he checked in 1975 for a specialist to remove the ganglionic fold (twisted) section but no specialist wanted to take the case.
My point was this was something he was born with, he did not help it with the way he lived (but he would have eventually had some problems even if he had lived totally different) How painful this was is anyones guess.
I have no idea what the pain from something like this would be-I have had divertriculitis and it was quite painful but changes in diet and medication helped me avoid surgery.
Thats all I was pointing out ......from my own perspective.

[KPM]

Someone explain to me how anyone needs amphetamines and downers? ;)

For what illnesses are they used?
The only thing I can say about amphetamines is that I know they were used as diet aids for 30 plus years and were thought to be fairly safe. Then the real problem with them-dependency/addiction was finally acknowledged.
The fact that the Army used them to help soldiers in the field up until the truth about them came true-shows the use of them was to add "energy and alertness" to people when tired. The way the government hides facts-they may still use them.
So the only use I can see is to help when you are extremely tired and need a boost-but the problem is you get such a boost you then think you can pop one everytime you feel tired-thats the catch and the addiction.
Downers are still used to help people with sleep problems, mental problems, physical problems which hinder rest. They are not intended for long term use. Doctors today in 2009 use much more care and oversight than 30 -40 years ago.
My own problems were with these type drugs-and drugs which helped anxiety and depression Xanex, Valium, etc....
My family has a history of depression, in my case I had problems being able to turn off my brain all the way back to 10 years old-I would obsess on problems-going over and over them in my mind-thus I could not sleep.
I finally went to a doctor and told him "I need sleep" he went straight to the downer medicines-then I told him of my family history and Xanex Valium and the antidepressant Wellbutron were prescribed-thats how it begins. I went on like that for a couple years with ever increasing doses............and would tell the doctor everything was fine.....but it wasnt and my family saw this.

I know it sounds like some type of justification for how this type thing can easily get away from you-but its the truth.(at least in my case)

[debtdbruno]

Thanks Ken, it does make you wonder why he didn't have an op to remove the area of his colon that was damaged.

I definitely read on one book about him taking Gladys's diet pills in the 50's to keep him awake whilst touring with Bill and Scotty.
For a chronic insomniac working at night and sleeping all day is not condusive to good sleep patterns, creating problems that are there already and accerbating them.
Resulting in the need for uppers and downers.

[May]

lol, i re read the posts may and i got the wrong end of the stick! i can see your point.

elvislady :D

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

[May]

You know what I think sometimes people forget. Decades ago, film stars (Im thinking Judy Garland / Marilyn Monroe era) were given pills by a "doctor" on set who wasnt necessarily a doctor, probably at the most a registered nurse and yet because they were labelled doctor, these people trusted them, as we have heard it said about Elvis many times. A doctor gives you something, how can that be wrong?

they didnt know back then how bad smoking was for you, just as they didnt know what long term effects these pills did.

I saw a clip on Michael Jackson this morning, and it said if you take too many 'downers' for such a long period of time, (for insominia for eg) your brain over compensates and becomes hyperactive. Therefore you need more drugs to calm down the brain and its a vicious circle once you have started.

I think we (obviously) judge practices back then by todays standards. I mean, its obvious to us you shouldnt take so many drugs over such a long period, but back then it wasnt such a big deal.

[8mmlowa]

Yes, he was entitled to have his say!!!!

Elvis also received a Standing Ovation at the end of what he said.......isn't that more telling than anything? (People judging the day, and not being present).

So many people who judge and wrote about what happened, weren't there. There is a member here, who was. He too, said that all is blown out of proportion.

Sandi Miller on FECC speaks in depth about it too. Tony Trout, aren't you a member there?

One thing Sandi said too, which is very insightful. Generally speaking -Stories are written about Elvis, with regard to what happened at the time, but never, ever, the build up to why he reacted as he did.

That is just plain wrong.

P.S. Any man who stands up for his family, is a man whom I would love in my life. That is what is right.



its just ridiculus and some sort of funny what people came up with when it comes to the point what elvis said....he had a reason and the right to say what he did ...
i think he was absolut right ...

if you want to know about the backrounds
see the documentary

Elvis Paternity Suit

[Getlo]

....he had a reason and the right to say what he did ...

Yes, but to say it from the stage - his place of work where people paid good money to hear him sing - was unprofessional in the extreme.

He should have kept his complaints private.

[Getlo]

The only thing I can say about amphetamines is that I know they were used as diet aids ... Downers are still used to help people with sleep problems

Okay.

But a poor diet and sleep problems - both of which Elvis had - are not illnesses.

And the effects of amphetamines, speed, upper and downers were known long before August 1977.

[elvislady]

Yes, but to say it from the stage - his place of work where people paid good money to hear him sing - was unprofessional in the extreme.

He should have kept his complaints private.

I agree, he should have gone back to his hotel and yelled to himself! if i would have been at a show when this happend i would think he didnt give a dam about his fans, i understand his view but not this way!

elvislady

[SleepyJack]

Or it is possible that these relatively rare outbursts are only surprising and shocking because of the public image that the world had been fed since the 1950`s.... had Elvis spoken his mind in public all through his career and payed less attention to the squeaky-clean image that Colonel Parker wanted everyone to see then not only would we be less shocked by these moments of anger (drug-fuelled or not) but Elvis` own frustrations and ideas would not have had to have been kept on such a tight rein... and who knows?...maybe he would have learned to stand up for himself a bit more and not just do what he was told.

[Pacerstar]

Yes, but to say it from the stage - his place of work where people paid good money to hear him sing - was unprofessional in the extreme.

He should have kept his complaints private.

It may well have been unprofessional; but, it seems the audience didn't
mind it. People loved Elvis and were interested in hearing his side of the story
any way they could. IMO.:D:D:D:D

[Pacerstar]

Or it is possible that these relatively rare outbursts are only surprising and shocking because of the public image that the world had been fed since the 1950`s.... had Elvis spoken his mind in public all through his career and payed less attention to the squeaky-clean image that Colonel Parker wanted everyone to see then not only would we be less shocked by these moments of anger (drug-fuelled or not) but Elvis` own frustrations and ideas would not have had to have been kept on such a tight rein... and who knows?...maybe he would have learned to stand up for himself a bit more and not just do what he was told.


You could be right. And if Elvis had spoken out more, we wouldn't have to
rely on "he said, she said information" so much now.:D:D:D:D

[Diane]

Or it is possible that these relatively rare outbursts are only surprising and shocking because of the public image that the world had been fed since the 1950`s.... had Elvis spoken his mind in public all through his career and payed less attention to the squeaky-clean image that Colonel Parker wanted everyone to see then not only would we be less shocked by these moments of anger (drug-fuelled or not) but Elvis` own frustrations and ideas would not have had to have been kept on such a tight rein... and who knows?...maybe he would have learned to stand up for himself a bit more and not just do what he was told.


I agree, I think it would have been better for Elvis to speak up long before he did. You can bet he had a lot of bottled up frustration from all the flack he got from the very beginning of his career.

Diane

[debtdbruno]

You know what I think sometimes people forget. Decades ago, film stars (Im thinking Judy Garland / Marilyn Monroe era) were given pills by a "doctor" on set who wasnt necessarily a doctor, probably at the most a registered nurse and yet because they were labelled doctor, these people trusted them, as we have heard it said about Elvis many times. A doctor gives you something, how can that be wrong?

they didnt know back then how bad smoking was for you, just as they didnt know what long term effects these pills did.

I saw a clip on Michael Jackson this morning, and it said if you take too many 'downers' for such a long period of time, (for insominia for eg) your brain over compensates and becomes hyperactive. Therefore you need more drugs to calm down the brain and its a vicious circle once you have started.

I think we (obviously) judge practices back then by todays standards. I mean, its obvious to us you shouldnt take so many drugs over such a long period, but back then it wasnt such a big deal.


I saw this too, on GMTV, this morning.
There is so much more which is known now, than they did years ago.

[debtdbruno]

Or it is possible that these relatively rare outbursts are only surprising and shocking because of the public image that the world had been fed since the 1950`s.... had Elvis spoken his mind in public all through his career and payed less attention to the squeaky-clean image that Colonel Parker wanted everyone to see then not only would we be less shocked by these moments of anger (drug-fuelled or not) but Elvis` own frustrations and ideas would not have had to have been kept on such a tight rein... and who knows?...maybe he would have learned to stand up for himself a bit more and not just do what he was told.



This is the problem isn't it? The Colonel kept him away from interviews, talk shows etc... He never had the opportunity to speak up about his life, thought, plans, grievencies etc....
Maybe it wasn't the right time to 'express' him self, but it was the only time he had a captive audience to talk/explain things

[8mmlowa]

Yes, but to say it from the stage - his place of work where people paid good money to hear him sing - was unprofessional in the extreme.

He should have kept his complaints private.
no he should not ...especially in vegas he was feeling he was playing for his fans...in was his plattform to comment on this bu.....

as a matter of fact i wish he would have done it more often
+ he was completely right

[8mmlowa]

Okay.

But a poor diet and sleep problems - both of which Elvis had - are not illnesses.

And the effects of amphetamines, speed, upper and downers were known long before August 1977.


insomia is no illneess...oh my god....
you are the one buddy:notworthy

[Getlo]

no he should not ...especially in vegas he was feeling he was playing for his fans...in was his plattform to comment on this

No, it was not.

His platform was the stage on which he was being paid to do his job - ie singing for the fans, and drawing people into the hotel.

The stage is not the place for any singer - let alone the most famous singer in the world - to b*itch and moan about their personal problems.

At that point Elvis started raving, he was failing at his job.


insomia is no illneess...oh my god....

That's right, it isn't. Insomnia is a condition, not an illness. And I speak with complete authority as someone who has had it on and off for years.

"Illness: impairment of normal physiological function affecting part or all of an organism".

[LovePresley]

See,this is EXACTLY what Elvis couldn't stand.He's just a man!He had feelings just like we do!He had everything we have.He couldn't help it sometimes,he was human.So what if he said something like this during a concert?This makes me LOVE him even more,it shows me he's HUMAN!I LOVE that!
Have some respect For Elvis!PLEASE!

[EnigmaticSun]

So what if he said something like this during a concert?

Well some members have brought up some very good points, such as SleepyJack. But then again Getlo is fighting his war on naive Elvis-fans..

Anyway, insomnia may be labeled a condition, not a disease.. just like suffering from stress it may be caused by some external factor and one can't do a d@mn 'bout it...

[Getlo]

But then again Getlo is fighting his war on naive Elvis-fans

One or two of whom have showed up here, evidently. ;)

Elvis was human ... big newsflash. What else could he have been ... a shrub? :rolleyes:


So what if he said something like this during a concert?

It was unprofessional and embarrassing, that's what. As a seasoned veteran of Vegas by then, and as an artist, he of all people should have realsied how inappropriate the outburst was. Like his speaking out of turn about the firing of Mario in '73.

And to discuss these things is in no way disrespectful to Elvis. Thinking of him as some sort if god who is immune to criticism, however, most assuredly is.

[EnigmaticSun]

One or two of whom have showed up here, evidently. ;)

Elvis was human ... big newsflash. What else could he have been ... a shrub? :rolleyes:

In the worst case the guy was perhaps a papaya-picker..

..and I'm d@mn proud to be one or two of whom or whatever-name-you-wanna-call-me! :lol:

[Getlo]

..and I'm d@mn proud to be one or two of whom or whatever-name-you-wanna-call-me! :lol:

I wasn't actually referring to you there ...

[EnigmaticSun]

I wasn't actually referring to you there...

Perhaps so, 'cuz I keep on the sunny side regarding Elvis' career and behavior.

[elvislady]

In hindsite.. do you think elvis had he lived and looked back on this would have regretted his actions?

elvislady :hmm:

[Diane]

He may have grinned and said "oops":)

Diane

[Getlo]

In hindsite.. do you think elvis had he lived and looked back on this would have regretted his actions?

Possibly, had he managed to get sober.

But, in the grand scheme of things, this on-stage rant would have been long forgotten as he reviewed what he'd gotten wrong. Too many other things to worry about.

However, overall, he didn't too too badly ... considering.

[Pacerstar]

In the worst case the guy was perhaps a papaya-picker..

..and I'm d@mn proud to be one or two of whom or whatever-name-you-wanna-call-me! :lol:

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

[Jumpsuit Junkie]

In the grand scheme of 'film stars', 'rock and roll stars' and 'legends' in their own lifetime, Elvis is not known for his bad behaviour or outbursts on stage. In comparison with lesser known stars he was tame. Giving Elvis a bad rap for a few outbursts is disingenuous, his faults were elsewhere and that is what the general public know him for now! Overweight Jump-suited Thankyouverymuch hill billy.

Yes it was unprofessional but some stars have exposed (http://www.washingtonsquares.com/jim.html) themselves to their fans and much worse, to listen to Elvis rant for a couple of minutes is a minor misdemeanour. To me, turning in a bad performance due to being over-medicated is far worse! :hmm:

[Diane]

To me, turning in a bad performance due to being over-medicated is far worse!


Me too but I could understand that he'd taken so much flack from the media from the beginning...BUT, I hated to see him lose control in that way. It was obvious it was the pills talking.

Diane

[Jumpsuit Junkie]

To me, turning in a bad performance due to being over-medicated is far worse!


Me too but I could understand that he'd taken so much flack from the media from the beginning...BUT, I hated to see him lose control in that way. It was obvious it was the pills talking.

Diane

I hate to say it because it sounds so twee, but I would be disappointed if I turned up to a concert which I had paid good money to see, only to have Elvis not delivering. I know there will be those who say you are not a fan etc, etc. By being a fan and paying good money you should expect a good show and no excuses. I realise not every show was going to be the pinnacle of his career but I would settle for a bloody good try.

[Getlo]

I hate to say it because it sounds so twee, but I would be disappointed if I turned up to a concert which I had paid good money to see, only to have Elvis not delivering. I know there will be those who say you are not a fan etc, etc.

And they are the blinkered fans, who thankfully are in the minority.

As much as I love Elvis, had I been given the chance to see him in concert ... and he was drugged out and incoherent ... well, look out! I'd be mightily pissed off, I can tell you.

[debtdbruno]

Isn't this all looking with hindsight? We analyse things now, but the concerts were intended for the audience present, not for a critical listener 30+ years down the line, to pull it to pieces.
Weren't most fans happy and having a great time?

[Getlo]

Isn't this all looking with hindsight?

Not at all.

Had I been at one of the terrible shows - of which there were many - then I would have wanted my money back.

I wouldn't have wanted to see a drugged-out, incoherent Elvis. And, sadly, that's what he was sometimes. Just awful.

Whether you're viewing or listening to a poor Elvis show - back when it occurred or now, many years later - only a blinkered person could say nothing was wrong.

[elvislady]

Not at all.

Had I been at one of the terrible shows - of which there were many - then I would have wanted my money back.

I wouldn't have wanted to see a drugged-out, incoherent Elvis. And, sadly, that's what he was sometimes. Just awful.

Whether you're viewing or listening to a poor Elvis show - back when it occurred or now, many years later - only a blinkered person could say nothing was wrong.



I agree with the last bit of this commen, if you watched it with your own eyes you could not say there was nothing wrong with his performance..when clearly there was..i didnt have the pleasure of seeing any of his shows good or bad so i suppose i cant really comment. but hey!


elvislady :hmm:

[debtdbruno]

I'm not disagreeing with you Getlo, about the pills, but, do you think the audience back then was as aware as we are now, listening to c.d's of his performance?

[Pacerstar]

I'm not disagreeing with you Getlo, about the pills, but, do you think the audience back then was as aware as we are now, listening to c.d's of his performance?

In a word, NO! They hadn't read all the tell-all books and tabloids and they
hadn't been enlightened by all the tabloid type tv shows.

[Jumpsuit Junkie]

In a word, NO! They hadn't read all the tell-all books and tabloids and they
hadn't been enlightened by all the tabloid type tv shows.

You use the word tabloid to describes shows which express an opinion of Elvis which I can only presume you disagree with, so.. Are you saying that 'Elvis By The Presley's is a tabloid show? Priscilla, Elvis' Ex wife has commented on Elvis' excesses on numerous occasions including the drug taking as have other close friends and family!

There have been several reputable authors who have researched and written knowledgeable books on Elvis, are they also tabloid because the discuss a topic which clearly upsets you?

There were reviewers back in the 70's who couldn't help but notice the decline, are they tabloid?

[Pacerstar]

You use the word tabloid to describes shows which express an opinion of Elvis which I can only presume you disagree with, so.. Are you saying that 'Elvis By The Presley's is a tabloid show? Priscilla, Elvis' Ex wife has commented on Elvis' excesses on numerous occasions including the drug taking as have other close friends and family!

There have been several reputable authors who have researched and written knowledgeable books on Elvis, are they also tabloid because the discuss a topic which clearly upsets you?

There were reviewers back in the 70's who couldn't help but notice the decline, are they tabloid?

The type books you referred to, I consider tell-all. When I say Tabloid, that
is what I mean, publications such as National Enquire, Star, etc. I don't mind
a reference to a situation that may or may not be true; but, I do have a
problem with anyone exploiting that situation. I see no need to publicize.
a person's private life to the extent that Elvis' private life has been. I fully
realise that a lot of people fully believe these accounts. I choose not to. Thank you.

[debtdbruno]

You use the word tabloid to describes shows which express an opinion of Elvis which I can only presume you disagree with, so.. Are you saying that 'Elvis By The Presley's is a tabloid show? Priscilla, Elvis' Ex wife has commented on Elvis' excesses on numerous occasions including the drug taking as have other close friends and family!

There have been several reputable authors who have researched and written knowledgeable books on Elvis, are they also tabloid because the discuss a topic which clearly upsets you?

There were reviewers back in the 70's who couldn't help but notice the decline, are they tabloid?

But what about the fans? Did they notice? Were they enjoying themselves?

[KPM]

Okay.

But a poor diet and sleep problems - both of which Elvis had - are not illnesses.

And the effects of amphetamines, speed, upper and downers were known long before August 1977.
You are looking at it from a strict view-you are saying that mental problems which are manifested as sleep disorders, or in over eating are not true medical problems-and we will have to disagree on that. You tell me why Elvis could not sleep-what kept his brain from turning off-something did-it could be trauma from childhood-which kept him unconsciously from sleeping-it could be a lack of sleep inducing hormones produced in the brain.
Poor diet is very often a conditioned response from your childhood-you grow up eating the diet your family can afford-and with poor people it is high fat content. Comfort foods are nothing new to people-some have greater will power than others, some can just say-I can learn to eat healthy and avoid the things which I know are bad for me-others can not. (look at Opray who can afford personal trainers, chefs who make the best low fat food you can eat, and still has a weight problem.
The human body must produce the proper amount of insulin in the pancreas or you get diabetes, it must produce the proper amount of acid for digestion too much and you get an ulcer, it must produce the correct amount of white and red blood cells to maintain the immune system-or you open yourself up to all kinds of disease, your thyroid must not be overactive or underactive.
Sleep is no different-no one chooses to not sleep, or to get a good nights sleep-your body and its complex system of hormones regulates regular sleep activity.
Elvis obviously either needed to explore what in his past kept him from sleeping or had an imbalance in his sleep inducing hormones-which are still today not fully understood. These may not be illnesses in your estimation-but they are to many. Just because you can not put a band aid on some things like an obvious physical injury-does not negate that it is an illness.
I see your side-just see it totally different.

[KPM]

insomia is no illneess...oh my god....
you are the one buddy:notworthy
Correct!
Chronic insomnia is not an illness-but it is many times a symtom of an illness or disease-mental or physical. It is no less real than the illness or disease itself-which may cause it.

[debtdbruno]

You are looking at it from a strict view-you are saying that mental problems which are manifested as sleep disorders, or in over eating are not true medical problems-and we will have to disagree on that. You tell me why Elvis could not sleep-what kept his brain from turning off-something did-it could be trauma from childhood-which kept him unconsciously from sleeping-it could be a lack of sleep inducing hormones produced in the brain.
Poor diet is very often a conditioned response from your childhood-you grow up eating the diet your family can afford-and with poor people it is high fat content. Comfort foods are nothing new to people-some have greater will power than others, some can just say-I can learn to eat healthy and avoid the things which I know are bad for me-others can not. (look at Opray who can afford personal trainers, chefs who make the best low fat food you can eat, and still has a weight problem.
The human body must produce the proper amount of insulin in the pancreas or you get diabetes, it must produce the proper amount of acid for digestion too much and you get an ulcer, it must produce the correct amount of white and red blood cells to maintain the immune system-or you open yourself up to all kinds of disease, your thyroid must not be overactive or underactive.
Sleep is no different-no one chooses to not sleep, or to get a good nights sleep-your body and its complex system of hormones regulates regular sleep activity.
Elvis obviously either needed to explore what in his past kept him from sleeping or had an imbalance in his sleep inducing hormones-which are still today not fully understood. These may not be illnesses in your estimation-but they are to many. Just because you can not put a band aid on some things like an obvious physical injury-does not negate that it is an illness.
I see your side-just see it totally different.

Excellent points there(y)(y)(y)(y)

[Jumpsuit Junkie]

The type books you referred to, I consider tell-all. When I say Tabloid, that
is what I mean, publications such as National Enquire, Star, etc. I don't mind
a reference to a situation that may or may not be true; but, I do have a
problem with anyone exploiting that situation. I see no need to publicize.
a person's private life to the extent that Elvis' private life has been. I fully
realise that a lot of people fully believe these accounts. I choose not to. Thank you.

If the information is coming from a reliable source then choosing not to believe will have little effect.


[/I][/B]

But what about the fans? Did they notice? Were they enjoying themselves?

It's fair to say that in 1974 they probably were (Click Here (http://www.elvisconcerts.com/reviews/rev740928.htm))

By 1976 however....

[KPM]

If the information is coming from a reliable source then choosing not to believe will have little effect.



It's fair to say that in 1974 they probably were (Click Here (http://www.elvisconcerts.com/reviews/rev740928.htm))

By 1976 however....
To tell the truth I saw him in 1976 and I had no clue he was in such trouble healthwise, drug problems etc......he seemed overweight but he seemed with it and not incoherent or rambling in anyway (which I am thankful for considering some performances I have read about or heard)
I did worry in April or May of 1977 because Rolling Stone had a item it its news section about Elvis recently leaving the stage in concert and coming back saying he had been heard natures call and had to leave to answer it. Also they commented that he had to be helped to stand at one point-and I wondered what the heck is wrong with him. But until all the information came out in the first couple of years after he died most of us did not have a clue to what was going on.

[Pacerstar]

You are looking at it from a strict view-you are saying that mental problems which are manifested as sleep disorders, or in over eating are not true medical problems-and we will have to disagree on that. You tell me why Elvis could not sleep-what kept his brain from turning off-something did-it could be trauma from childhood-which kept him unconsciously from sleeping-it could be a lack of sleep inducing hormones produced in the brain.
Poor diet is very often a conditioned response from your childhood-you grow up eating the diet your family can afford-and with poor people it is high fat content. Comfort foods are nothing new to people-some have greater will power than others, some can just say-I can learn to eat healthy and avoid the things which I know are bad for me-others can not. (look at Opray who can afford personal trainers, chefs who make the best low fat food you can eat, and still has a weight problem.
The human body must produce the proper amount of insulin in the pancreas or you get diabetes, it must produce the proper amount of acid for digestion too much and you get an ulcer, it must produce the correct amount of white and red blood cells to maintain the immune system-or you open yourself up to all kinds of disease, your thyroid must not be overactive or underactive.
Sleep is no different-no one chooses to not sleep, or to get a good nights sleep-your body and its complex system of hormones regulates regular sleep activity.
Elvis obviously either needed to explore what in his past kept him from sleeping or had an imbalance in his sleep inducing hormones-which are still today not fully understood. These may not be illnesses in your estimation-but they are to many. Just because you can not put a band aid on some things like an obvious physical injury-does not negate that it is an illness.
I see your side-just see it totally different.

Good post. I really think, and I don't understand why, but in Elvis' case
some people do not want to find the real causes of his ailments; they just
want to beat the drug horse!:D:D:D:D:D:D

[Pacerstar]

If the information is coming from a reliable source then choosing not to believe will have little effect.



It's fair to say that in 1974 they probably were (Click Here (http://www.elvisconcerts.com/reviews/rev740928.htm))

By 1976 however....

I'm not going to apologize; but, I haven't learned to multiple quote. My issue
is with the first part of your post. I guess it boils down to what we each
consider "reliable source". I admit I have read a few books that I liked; but,
not many. If reliable sources got their imformation from first hand knowledge,
their own first-hand knowledge or from documented public information, then
I would say we could believe what they write. Otherwise, we each have the
opportunity to believe what we want, be it true or be it not.

[Pacerstar]

To tell the truth I saw him in 1976 and I had no clue he was in such trouble healthwise, drug problems etc......he seemed overweight but he seemed with it and not incoherent or rambling in anyway (which I am thankful for considering some performances I have read about or heard)
I did worry in April or May of 1977 because Rolling Stone had a item it its news section about Elvis recently leaving the stage in concert and coming back saying he had been heard natures call and had to leave to answer it. Also they commented that he had to be helped to stand at one point-and I wondered what the heck is wrong with him. But until all the information came out in the first couple of years after he died most of us did not have a clue to what was going on.

I saw him in concert on June 25, 1977, and I had no thought that he was
near death. I had heard rumors of the drugs but that is what they were to me, rumors. When EWH was published, that was when the "drug bomb"
exploded and it has been milked ever since.

[LovePresley]

One or two of whom have showed up here, evidently. ;)

Elvis was human ... big newsflash. What else could he have been ... a shrub? :rolleyes:



It was unprofessional and embarrassing, that's what. As a seasoned veteran of Vegas by then, and as an artist, he of all people should have realsied how inappropriate the outburst was. Like his speaking out of turn about the firing of Mario in '73.

And to discuss these things is in no way disrespectful to Elvis. Thinking of him as some sort if god who is immune to criticism, however, most assuredly is.


I'am certainly not looking at Elvis as some sort of God.I look at him like a human being.I do have respect though,and I can relate to Elvis.I understand exactly what it was like for Elvis.I'am fully aware that Elvis had faults,but I do not like to focus on them.I like to focus on the Sunny Side of everything,which is very hard to do on some of these threads.By not letting Elvis be human,and by critizing every little move like this is definantly disrespectful to Elvis!

[elvislady]

I'am certainly not looking at Elvis as some sort of God.I look at him like a human being.I do have respect though,and I can relate to Elvis.I understand exactly what it was like for Elvis.I'am fully aware that Elvis had faults,but I do not like to focus on them.I like to focus on the Sunny Side of everything,which is very hard to do on some of these threads.By not letting Elvis be human,and by critizing every little move like this is definantly disrespectful to Elvis!

I am 100% everyone on this forum has respect for elvis, this forum is a great way to express our feelings and facts we know about him, if he was here today i am sure he would telll you he did things wrong in his life like we all do at some point in our life, i think you should stay away from these sort of threads if its to upsetting for you to here. just because we are disscusing elvis this way does not make him any less human!

elvislady

[Jumpsuit Junkie]

My issue
is with the first part of your post. I guess it boils down to what we each
consider "reliable source".

There are quite a few reliable sources e.g. Priscilla, Red & Sunny, J.D. Sumner, Diamond Joe, Charlie Hodge.... the list is endless, you can't dispute someone's veracity just because you don't like what they are saying, I agree there will always be a slant towards the person who is telling their version of events but the basics remain the same.



I saw him in concert on June 25, 1977, and I had no thought that he was near death. I had heard rumors of the drugs but that is what they were to me, rumors.

This IMO shows that you were unwilling to see the blatantly obvious, how could you not see the obvious? I simply cannot watch Elvis In Concert without seeing a man who is desperately in need of help, if you couldn't see that, you couldn't have possibly helped him. It is fans like this who kept Elvis on the road when he should have been in hospital .... I'm just lost for words :supriced:


When EWH was published, that was when the "drug bomb" exploded and it has been milked ever since.

The drugs are secondary, the Image, this is the real problem. People who are casual observers to the Elvis phenomenon are imbued with the Image of the fat Jump-suited Elvis via bad impersonators. I rarely ever hear non Elvis fans discuss the drugs, just the weight and Jumpsuits :hmm:

[john carpenter]

You know the other thing that always struck me about this rant is his apparent mistaking of the term "strung out" for simply "high" in the statement, I've never been strung out in my life, except on music. They are closely related but not quite synonymous. The way he worded that always struck me as odd anyway.:P:PMe Too Lonnie. The way he says "Stung out", makes him sound well Strung out!:lmfao:

[Diane]

There are quite a few reliable sources e.g. Priscilla, Red & Sunny, J.D. Sumner, Diamond Joe, Charlie Hodge.... the list is endless, you can't dispute someone's veracity just because you don't like what they are saying, I agree there will always be a slant towards the person who is telling their version of events but the basics remain the same.




This IMO shows that you were unwilling to see the blatantly obvious, how could you not see the obvious? I simply cannot watch Elvis In Concert without seeing a man who is desperately in need of help, if you couldn't see that, you couldn't have possibly helped him. It is fans like this who kept Elvis on the road when he should have been in hospital .... I'm just lost for words :supriced:



The drugs are secondary, the Image, this is the real problem. People who are casual observers to the Elvis phenomenon are imbued with the Image of the fat Jump-suited Elvis via bad impersonators. I rarely ever hear non Elvis fans discuss the drugs, just the weight and Jumpsuits :hmm:

My first clue that there was something terribly wrong with Elvis came from watching Elvis In Concert I attributed it to him being seriously ill, was afraid he would die soon and had no thought of drugs. It wasn't until EWH that I was aware of his problem with the pills and I was shocked and saddened but I got over the shock and was just saddened and still am. It wasn't something I ever thought he would get into but that shows how little I knew at the time.

Diane

[Lonniebealestreet]

Actually, I can see having attended the June 25, 1977 show and not necessarily thinking the man was at death's door.

For one thing, consider that they didn't have the big Jumbotron screens back then which allowed everyone in the stadium a close-up view of his face and captured every movement. From far back you might not even notice the weight being a big issue for him, much less see a face that looked to have aged way too much in the four years since Aloha, or something about his eyes that indicated something may have been amiss.

[No, back then Elvis was allowed to do a lot of things that today he couldn't have gotten away with. In a world of TMZ-type reporting with unreasonable paparazzi and information that moves at the speed of Twitter, satellite TV not being anything to be excited about and most people having photo and often video capabilities on their cell phones, there just wouldn't have been this virtual security blanket around him all the time. Fans would never be shocked at his appearance because they would always know what he looked like, but more importantly the criticism would have been immediate and far-reaching once he had started to let himself slide. On stage, everything would be seen by everybody and offstage, even behind closed doors, his private life might still not be out of the public eye.]

At that Cincinnati show, he appeared less bloated than he had for the shows filmed for the special (especially better than Omaha), and overall he just had a healthier look about him. He still looked overweight but not obese. Had he not been wearing a tight white jumpsuit, his weight would hardly seem that deserving of comment...OK, and if he hadn't been Elvis Presley. But think of the photos and video of him in his jumpsuit earlier that day and the following day -- see my avatar. I'll grant you that Todd Slaughter later said he found his appearance alarming but to me, they don't scream out "I'm dying!"

It's odd but besides the diminished bloat, his hair and makeup and most everything about him looked far better than in the special. He appeared more youthful. It really is mind-boggling what a horrendous job they did of his makeup on those shows.

He seemed more connected, sharp, and his singing was very strong in his last two shows. That's another thing that might make you not notice any possible warning signs, and we've talked about this before: being at an Elvis concert and seeing him -- however good or bad your view may have been, being in that atmosphere of thousands of other screaming fans and feeling the high of the fact that you're at an Elvis concert, you're just not going to pick up on too many of the shortcomings, unless it is truly a bad show. (I will concede that being audience recordings, the tapes of these last two performances maybe seem a tad bit better to me than they actually were -- for some of the very reasons I just named. But all things considered, I still firmly believe they were superior.)

But even if they did, I don't think his fan base back then would have been as inclined as typical fans of other acts perhaps to show their disapproval anyway. I don't think it is because they were conscious "enablers" of Elvis' bad habits but that was just the way they were raised or it was part of their personality for whatever reason.

All this cannot be said for the people close to him though. There was not the same awe factor with them. They saw all the bad shows, witnessed his worst moments off the stage, and most of the time nodded yes, laughed incessantly at his jokes, told him what a great show he had put on, and kept the bad reviews and any negative press coverage from him whenever possible. I am not saying the man himself wasn't responsible for his own demise, but if there are fingers of blame to be pointed at any outside influences, one finger -- perhaps the middle one -- must be reserved for these people.

I am not saying they had it easy and that I can't understand wanting to keep their jobs and remain in that circle, but...come on.

The other thing to point out in defense of the fans though is that the vast majority of them did not follow him around the country on tour or see every show from a Vegas or Tahoe engagement. So some things they saw which may have struck them as less than impressive they could have easily thought were a very chance occurrence. They did not have the ability to recognize a pattern. They did not know that he was basically putting on the same show over and over and over either. They had not heard all the shows we have or seen all the photos that weren't in the magazines or maybe even read about some troubling things which would have predisposed them to looking for such warning signs.

No, overall I don't believe the fans deserve taking much heat for this. It especially doesn't sit well with me to hear some of the guys who were close to him and do deserve it to deflect blame in the fans' direction.

JMHO, friends.

[Pacerstar]

There are quite a few reliable sources e.g. Priscilla, Red & Sunny, J.D. Sumner, Diamond Joe, Charlie Hodge.... the list is endless, you can't dispute someone's veracity just because you don't like what they are saying, I agree there will always be a slant towards the person who is telling their version of events but the basics remain the same.




This IMO shows that you were unwilling to see the blatantly obvious, how could you not see the obvious? I simply cannot watch Elvis In Concert without seeing a man who is desperately in need of help, if you couldn't see that, you couldn't have possibly helped him. It is fans like this who kept Elvis on the road when he should have been in hospital .... I'm just lost for words :supriced:



The drugs are secondary, the Image, this is the real problem. People who are casual observers to the Elvis phenomenon are imbued with the Image of the fat Jump-suited Elvis via bad impersonators. I rarely ever hear non Elvis fans discuss the drugs, just the weight and Jumpsuits :hmm:

I really wish that I could multi-quote, But, I can't; so I hope you will bear
with me. Some of the people you mentioned, I'd count as reliable sources.
Others may very well have been reliable; but, I still say they milked the drugs
to their own advantage. And you are right, I don't want to hear what they
have to say! As for Elvis In Concert, I still watch it and say that I don't
see what others say they see. I see Elvis heavier, older, slowed-down in
his energetic performance; but, I do not see a man that I feel was near
death and "strung-out" on drugs. As for fans like me, keeping Elvis on the
road and not in the hospital where he should have been; you are wrong.
Elvis and Colonel Parker kept Elvis on the road! Had anyone asked me,
"Do you want Elvis on the road when he should be in the hospital?"
I would have said, "By all means, send him to the hospital. Let him regain
his health and I'll see him in concert when he is well." In my case, you are
wrong about the image, too. Maybe, the johhny- come- lately fans see Elvis
as the fat, jumpsuited guy; but, I was around to see Elvis from the beginning:
I saw him as the young dynamic rebel who changed music and brought in
the rock and roll era. I saw him through his movie career, the sleek and
gorgeous star of the silver screean. And I saw him in the seventies, not
as the fat, jump-suited has- been; but as the evolution of the young man
into a mature man; as a rebel into a mainsteam player; as an unapproachable
movie star to someone who felt like a member of my own family and finally,
as a grown-up performer who had matured in body and talent. Would I have
preferred that Elvis stayed always young and beautiful? YES! Did his appearance in his later years make him any less ELVIS? NO! Would I like to
have him alive again appearing as he did in the last years of his life? YOU BET!

[Pacerstar]

Actually, I can see having attended the June 25, 1977 show and not necessarily thinking the man was at death's door.

For one thing, consider that they didn't have the big Jumbotron screens back then which allowed everyone in the stadium a close-up view of his face and captured every movement. From far back you might not even notice the weight being a big issue for him, much less see a face that looked to have aged way too much in the four years since Aloha, or something about his eyes that indicated something may have been amiss.

[No, back then Elvis was allowed to do a lot of things that today he couldn't have gotten away with. In a world of TMZ-type reporting with unreasonable paparazzi and information that moves at the speed of Twitter, satellite TV not being anything to be excited about and most people having photo and often video capabilities on their cell phones, there just wouldn't have been this virtual security blanket around him all the time. Fans would never be shocked at his appearance because they would always know what he looked like, but more importantly the criticism would have been immediate and far-reaching once he had started to let himself slide. On stage, everything would be seen by everybody and offstage, even behind closed doors, his private life might still not be out of the public eye.]

At that Cincinnati show, he appeared less bloated than he had for the shows filmed for the special (especially better than Omaha), and overall he just had a healthier look about him. He still looked overweight but not obese. Had he not been wearing a tight white jumpsuit, his weight would hardly seem that deserving of comment...OK, and if he hadn't been Elvis Presley. But think of the photos and video of him in his jumpsuit earlier that day and the following day -- see my avatar. I'll grant you that Todd Slaughter later said he found his appearance alarming but to me, they don't scream out "I'm dying!"

It's odd but besides the diminished bloat, his hair and makeup and most everything about him looked far better than in the special. He appeared more youthful. It really is mind-boggling what a horrendous job they did of his makeup on those shows.

He seemed more connected, sharp, and his singing was very strong in his last two shows. That's another thing that might make you not notice any possible warning signs, and we've talked about this before: being at an Elvis concert and seeing him -- however good or bad your view may have been, being in that atmosphere of thousands of other screaming fans and feeling the high of the fact that you're at an Elvis concert, you're just not going to pick up on too many of the shortcomings, unless it is truly a bad show. (I will concede that being audience recordings, the tapes of these last two performances maybe seem a tad bit better to me than they actually were -- for some of the very reasons I just named. But all things considered, I still firmly believe they were superior.)

But even if they did, I don't think his fan base back then would have been as inclined as typical fans of other acts perhaps to show their disapproval anyway. I don't think it is because they were conscious "enablers" of Elvis' bad habits but that was just the way they were raised or it was part of their personality for whatever reason.

All this cannot be said for the people close to him though. There was not the same awe factor with them. They saw all the bad shows, witnessed his worst moments off the stage, and most of the time nodded yes, laughed incessantly at his jokes, told him what a great show he had put on, and kept the bad reviews and any negative press coverage from him whenever possible. I am not saying the man himself wasn't responsible for his own demise, but if there are fingers of blame to be pointed at any outside influences, one finger -- perhaps the middle one -- must be reserved for these people.

I am not saying they had it easy and that I can't understand wanting to keep their jobs and remain in that circle, but...come on.

The other thing to point out in defense of the fans though is that the vast majority of them did not follow him around the country on tour or see every show from a Vegas or Tahoe engagement. So some things they saw which may have struck them as less than impressive they could have easily thought were a very chance occurrence. They did not have the ability to recognize a pattern. They did not know that he was basically putting on the same show over and over and over either. They had not heard all the shows we have or seen all the photos that weren't in the magazines or maybe even read about some troubling things which would have predisposed them to looking for such warning signs.

No, overall I don't believe the fans deserve taking much heat for this. It especially doesn't sit well with me to hear some of the guys who were close to him and do deserve it to deflect blame in the fans' direction.

JMHO, friends.

Very good post. I totally agree with you.(y)(y)(y)(y)(y)(y)

[debtdbruno]

Fantastic post Lonnie

[Genie]

Yes, but to say it from the stage - his place of work where people paid good money to hear him sing - was unprofessional in the extreme.

He should have kept his complaints private.



I recall that incident well, and I stood and cheered for his courage and his truthful comments. He was being treated poorly and in public, why not reply in public? I loved this man so much that I feel he had more than a right to speak his mind. So, in reality he could have said anything, and I'd take his side. lol
More power to the man! He was not the coward that some of the MM claimed, Vernon wasn't standing there reading off a letter of an irritated entertainer now was he?
Elvis did it "MY way: errrrr "His Way" it was great!:notworthy

[Getlo]

I'm not disagreeing with you Getlo, about the pills, but, do you think the audience back then was as aware as we are now, listening to c.d's of his performance?

Probably not - the words "drugs" and "Elvis" had not even been properly linked in the same sentence before '77. It was inconceivable that Elvis could have been doing hard drugs, and I think the idea of a softer-drug problem (ie pills) simply never occurred to anyone. There were rumours at the time that he was boozing (from the slurred speech). But overall, I believe most thinking fans knew "something" was wrong, but very few spoke or wrote about it at the time. Which is a pity ... had the rumours (true or not) come around a lot earlier, Elvis might have heard them and done something to save himself.


You tell me why Elvis could not sleep

Let's see. Maybe it was the incredible amount of amphetamines (ie speed) coursing through his veins?! He was never an insomniac before the army (save for some alleged sleepwalking episodes) and it was no wonder he couldn't sleep when he first got into the army: away from home, mother dead, career stalled. But, again, this is stress, not an illness.


Poor diet is very often a conditioned response from your childhood

Fine. But poor diet is a choice, not an illness.


Elvis obviously either needed to explore what in his past kept him from sleeping or had an imbalance in his sleep inducing hormones-which are still today not fully understood.

Either way, not an illness.


I like to focus on the Sunny Side of everything

Which means you're ignoring at least 50% of what the world has to offer.


...which is very hard to do on some of these threads.

If you don't like a thread, don't post on it. And you don't have the right to criticise the rest of us for choosing to participate in a particular thread, either.


By not letting Elvis be human,and by critizing every little move like this is definantly disrespectful to Elvis!

And what does focussing only on the sunny side of things make Elvis then?! Inhuman - above or beyond criticism. Which he is not. Nor should he be.


just because we are disscusing elvis this way does not make him any less human!

Precisely. What fans such as LovePresley fail to see each and every time is that to discuss Elvis' "negatives" in no way means we don't love him. A perfectly simple concept, lost on many.


I recall that incident well, and I stood and cheered for his courage and his truthful comments.

When you say "recall", you mean you were actually there? Or do you "recall" it from listening to the tape of the show when it first surfaced in the 80s?


He was being treated poorly and in public, why not reply in public?

Once again: it was unprofessional and out of his purview as an artist.


So, in reality he could have said anything, and I'd take his side.

And that's the major problem his legacy has today: fans who accept anything from the man, then and now.

[franny]

Actually, I can see having attended the June 25, 1977 show and not necessarily thinking the man was at death's door.

For one thing, consider that they didn't have the big Jumbotron screens back then which allowed everyone in the stadium a close-up view of his face and captured every movement. From far back you might not even notice the weight being a big issue for him, much less see a face that looked to have aged way too much in the four years since Aloha, or something about his eyes that indicated something may have been amiss.

[No, back then Elvis was allowed to do a lot of things that today he couldn't have gotten away with. In a world of TMZ-type reporting with unreasonable paparazzi and information that moves at the speed of Twitter, satellite TV not being anything to be excited about and most people having photo and often video capabilities on their cell phones, there just wouldn't have been this virtual security blanket around him all the time. Fans would never be shocked at his appearance because they would always know what he looked like, but more importantly the criticism would have been immediate and far-reaching once he had started to let himself slide. On stage, everything would be seen by everybody and offstage, even behind closed doors, his private life might still not be out of the public eye.]

At that Cincinnati show, he appeared less bloated than he had for the shows filmed for the special (especially better than Omaha), and overall he just had a healthier look about him. He still looked overweight but not obese. Had he not been wearing a tight white jumpsuit, his weight would hardly seem that deserving of comment...OK, and if he hadn't been Elvis Presley. But think of the photos and video of him in his jumpsuit earlier that day and the following day -- see my avatar. I'll grant you that Todd Slaughter later said he found his appearance alarming but to me, they don't scream out "I'm dying!"

It's odd but besides the diminished bloat, his hair and makeup and most everything about him looked far better than in the special. He appeared more youthful. It really is mind-boggling what a horrendous job they did of his makeup on those shows.

He seemed more connected, sharp, and his singing was very strong in his last two shows. That's another thing that might make you not notice any possible warning signs, and we've talked about this before: being at an Elvis concert and seeing him -- however good or bad your view may have been, being in that atmosphere of thousands of other screaming fans and feeling the high of the fact that you're at an Elvis concert, you're just not going to pick up on too many of the shortcomings, unless it is truly a bad show. (I will concede that being audience recordings, the tapes of these last two performances maybe seem a tad bit better to me than they actually were -- for some of the very reasons I just named. But all things considered, I still firmly believe they were superior.)

But even if they did, I don't think his fan base back then would have been as inclined as typical fans of other acts perhaps to show their disapproval anyway. I don't think it is because they were conscious "enablers" of Elvis' bad habits but that was just the way they were raised or it was part of their personality for whatever reason.

All this cannot be said for the people close to him though. There was not the same awe factor with them. They saw all the bad shows, witnessed his worst moments off the stage, and most of the time nodded yes, laughed incessantly at his jokes, told him what a great show he had put on, and kept the bad reviews and any negative press coverage from him whenever possible. I am not saying the man himself wasn't responsible for his own demise, but if there are fingers of blame to be pointed at any outside influences, one finger -- perhaps the middle one -- must be reserved for these people.

I am not saying they had it easy and that I can't understand wanting to keep their jobs and remain in that circle, but...come on.

The other thing to point out in defense of the fans though is that the vast majority of them did not follow him around the country on tour or see every show from a Vegas or Tahoe engagement. So some things they saw which may have struck them as less than impressive they could have easily thought were a very chance occurrence. They did not have the ability to recognize a pattern. They did not know that he was basically putting on the same show over and over and over either. They had not heard all the shows we have or seen all the photos that weren't in the magazines or maybe even read about some troubling things which would have predisposed them to looking for such warning signs.

No, overall I don't believe the fans deserve taking much heat for this. It especially doesn't sit well with me to hear some of the guys who were close to him and do deserve it to deflect blame in the fans' direction.

JMHO, friends.

Great post, Bobby. :notworthy (y)

franny

[Jumpsuit Junkie]

Hi Bobby, I read you post, phew to be honest I agree with 90%, there is however the question of the other 10% :lol:

I agree that there is quite a distance in a stadium, and in the heat of the moment you could conceivably get caught up and not notice a faultering legend. On the other hand around this period the press had run stories about poor shows, pictures from concerts had been published, it would be hard not to have heard some rumblings as a fan?

Another thing to ponder is the difference in the style of the shows from 1973 - 1977, granted if you were a one timer it would be hard to measure the difference and given the benefit of hindsight that we have today but surely seeing Elvis on 25th June 1977 alarm bells must have been ringing. There is a comment, can't quite member who said it, that when they saw Elvis in 'Elvis In Concert' they knew he didn't have long to live!

I realise that technology leaves the stars of today with nowhere to hide, but Elvis was a first of his kind, there are literally millions of photo's of Elvis all over the world, the prevalence of colour photo's exploded in the 70's surely they could see a change in Elvis that was more that just an ageing star? There are shots of Elvis from 1976 where he simply looks shocking, there are photo's from Hollywood Fl in February 1977 that demand that questions be asked.

I still stand by the comment that the acceptance of the fans of sub par performances was a factor which kept Elvis on the path of self destruction, had the fans talked with their feet, history would have been different. The signs/clues were there for everyone to see should they truly wanted to look beyond the façade.

Perhaps I am being too entrenched in my view :hmm:

Where we do agree 100% is with those who were around Elvis, they certainly washed their hands in muddy water!

[jak]

"I still stand by the comment that the acceptance of the fans of sub par performances was a factor which kept Elvis on the path of self destruction, had the fans talked with their feet, history would have been different. The signs/clues were there for everyone to see should they truly wanted to look beyond the façade"

This is exactly right.Elvis was never given a wake up call.His friends and family couldnt get to him anymore at this point.Playing to 4000 people in a 12ooo seat arena might have helped.Dont kid yourselves about Elvis.He had a huge ego.I dont think seeing a half empty arena would have set well with him.It may have been the push he needed to try and get back on course.
Im going to repeat myself here.The night of Elvis' outburst was not him trying to maintain his credibility.It was Elvis undermining it.That episode is just a drug induced tirade.He was in a weird mood.Elvis would never had embarrassed himself like that if he knew what he was doing.Most fans back then could not see the handwriting on the wall.No matter how obvious.Elvis' worsening condition was obvious but it was just swept under the rug.

[Pacerstar]

Hi Bobby, I read you post, phew to be honest I agree with 90%, there is however the question of the other 10% :lol:

I agree that there is quite a distance in a stadium, and in the heat of the moment you could conceivably get caught up and not notice a faultering legend. On the other hand around this period the press had run stories about poor shows, pictures from concerts had been published, it would be hard not to have heard some rumblings as a fan?

Another thing to ponder is the difference in the style of the shows from 1973 - 1977, granted if you were a one timer it would be hard to measure the difference and given the benefit of hindsight that we have today but surely seeing Elvis on 25th June 1977 alarm bells must have been ringing. There is a comment, can't quite member who said it, that when they saw Elvis in 'Elvis In Concert' they knew he didn't have long to live!

I realise that technology leaves the stars of today with nowhere to hide, but Elvis was a first of his kind, there are literally millions of photo's of Elvis all over the world, the prevalence of colour photo's exploded in the 70's surely they could see a change in Elvis that was more that just an ageing star? There are shots of Elvis from 1976 where he simply looks shocking, there are photo's from Hollywood Fl in February 1977 that demand that questions be asked.

I still stand by the comment that the acceptance of the fans of sub par performances was a factor which kept Elvis on the path of self destruction, had the fans talked with their feet, history would have been different. The signs/clues were there for everyone to see should they truly wanted to look beyond the façade.

Perhaps I am being too entrenched in my view :hmm:

Where we do agree 100% is with those who were around Elvis, they certainly washed their hands in muddy water!

Good post, Jumpsuit Junkie. Looking backward, which is all we can do now,
maybe, we should have noticed; but, truth is we didn't. As far as the fans
walking out on Elvis, I don't know if that would have had the desired effect
or not. Perhaps the fans' loyalty to him kept him going as long as it did. Maybe
if his fans had turned on him, too, he would have been gone much sooner.
Could have happened, couldn't it?:hmm::hmm::hmm:

[Lonniebealestreet]

Thanks for the responses to my post. :)

Matt, I guess I'm not entirely qualified to address a couple of the points you make...maybe someone can better speak to this.

I know the "fat and forty" stories were definitely making the rounds and people did go to his shows wondering how big he was going to be. I also know there indeed were negative reviews published in local newspapers after Elvis had played certain towns and given a bad show.

My impression though is that on a national and international scale, these latter type of reports just weren't circulated that well. Of course, comparing this to how it happens today, there is no comparison. Perhaps these stories were out there but it required considerable effort for most people to get to them?

You mentioned the publishing of current concert photos. It seems like a number of the magazine articles I've seen from the seventies seem to have used photos of him that are several years old -- not unlike his album covers. Probably the ones wanting to focus on his weight did use more current ones...Were there a lot of recent pics out there too?

Regardless, I guess the fans can be blamed somewhat for accepting Elvis in any condition -- I really think the mystique and the legend and the concert experience are the main driving factors there -- but they would probably be at the bottom of my blame totem pole.

[Diane]

I guess I don't understand either how anyone could have watched Elvis In Concert and not felt like I did that there was something terribly wrong with him and feel that fear that he wouldn't be around much longer.

I've always loved him dearly but I don't believe in blind love. When I found out in EWH that he was addicted to pills I was very disappointed and hurt. I got over it but it did change things for me, not that I loved him any less but I did lose something there that I can't put into words.

Diane

[Lonniebealestreet]

But at the point that the EIC special aired, he was already gone so at that point it was impossible for anyone to not see it for what it was. Of course watching the shows unedited is a whole other matter.

And all that would have been a lot different than experiencing those shows in person. More trouble was apparent from those concerts than the aforementioned Cincy show though.

[KPM]

Probably not - the words "drugs" and "Elvis" had not even been properly linked in the same sentence before '77. It was inconceivable that Elvis could have been doing hard drugs, and I think the idea of a softer-drug problem (ie pills) simply never occurred to anyone. There were rumours at the time that he was boozing (from the slurred speech). But overall, I believe most thinking fans knew "something" was wrong, but very few spoke or wrote about it at the time. Which is a pity ... had the rumours (true or not) come around a lot earlier, Elvis might have heard them and done something to save himself.



Let's see. Maybe it was the incredible amount of amphetamines (ie speed) coursing through his veins?! He was never an insomniac before the army (save for some alleged sleepwalking episodes) and it was no wonder he couldn't sleep when he first got into the army: away from home, mother dead, career stalled. But, again, this is stress, not an illness.



Fine. But poor diet is a choice, not an illness.



Either way, not an illness.



Which means you're ignoring at least 50% of what the world has to offer.



If you don't like a thread, don't post on it. And you don't have the right to criticise the rest of us for choosing to participate in a particular thread, either.



And what does focussing only on the sunny side of things make Elvis then?! Inhuman - above or beyond criticism. Which he is not. Nor should he be.



Precisely. What fans such as LovePresley fail to see each and every time is that to discuss Elvis' "negatives" in no way means we don't love him. A perfectly simple concept, lost on many.



When you say "recall", you mean you were actually there? Or do you "recall" it from listening to the tape of the show when it first surfaced in the 80s?



Once again: it was unprofessional and out of his purview as an artist.



And that's the major problem his legacy has today: fans who accept anything from the man, then and now.
Insomnia was a problem my friend according to many including Billy Smith long before the Army. You call it alleged sleep walking-yet Billy has said Elvis did indeed have episodes of this and sleep problems.....long before the Army.
Elvis himself says in an interview on tape from the 50s-I get 3-4 hours a night-I can't sleep anymore......I mean to me that seems pretty convincing.
As I said, you and I see this subject totally different- of what is an illness mental or physical and what is just someone purposely choosing to hurt themselves by their actions.
Because you can not find the strict obvious physical reason for a manifistation of illness/disease (such as cleft pallets which people are born with and are readily seen-but not a ganglionic fold of the colon which is hidden....but when seen under x-ray any doctor knows its a birth defect)
You seem to dismiss the idea of childhood traumas-or hormone problems as true illnesss-Sorry I just do not agree
Lack of proper hormone production is a physical defect- hormones of all kinds are essential to all physical processes in the human body fact-including sleep regulation.
If the hormones are not produced in proper quantities-it messes up your life-mental and physical.
Having lived the life I have-with the family history I have- is proof of how you can be affected by childhood trauma and genetic hormone imbalance-both which have had an affect on my life and family history going back a 100 years. You may not believe it -but its true.
Since I am a member of the human race-I have to assume similar things affect others in a similar way. :blush:

[KPM]

Why my attitude on Elvis's and some of the problems which apparently plagued him.
What perspective do I see these from? Why do I insist genetics and upbringing are a huge factor in adult life?

Lets see where do I start:
-when I see films which have nooses, hangings, suicides, or attempted suicides-my hands sweat, my temperature goes up I feel flushed and my breathing and pulse rate increase-very stressful for me and legitimate physical symptoms- which I do not choose to have occur
When I am inclosed in small places, closets, elevators, etc....again all these changes in my physical well being-occur and I do not choose to have them.
When I have the nightmares which still haunt me 50 years after seeing my father hanging from a rope at the age of 4-I wake up in a cold wet sweat and can not go back to sleep....I swear I do not choose to do so.
I have had problems sleeping my whole life-and it goes back to the few minutes of my young life seeing my father swinging on a rope-I do not choose to have problems sleeping.
When I feel inferior in a room of people I do not know, who I feel are better than I am, who I feel are tougher and stronger mentally and physically stronger than I am, who I feel are secretly feeling sorrow and pity for me, and when these feelings overwhelm me and cause me to leave without any real contact with them......................I....do .....not choose to feel that way-it happens.
I am well aware of the things which torment me-and have had therapy to help me understand them-but its not like the movies there is not always this moment where it all disappears and Eureka cured!!!! The negative consequences of past actions in my childhood-Which I had no control over-still occur.
I did not choose (and no one else ever born has the luxury of choosing) the genetic code which governs to a great extent your mental and physical health.
If possible I would be 6 ft 2 with black hair, a weight lifters build, and would
be Gods gift to everyone.
If I could choose to not have a brain hormone imbalance, which necessitates me to take anti-depression medication-I would. I can not. If I just choose to stop taking this medication in a matter of weeks my whole way of thinking would change to an even deeper darker way-which would not be good for me nor anyone I am involved with-so I choose to continue listening to the doctor who has prescribed it who knows the problems and consequences of not taking them.
I'm sure many of the members here have medical problems and phobias which they have never been given a vote on.They did not choose to have them nor the consequences of them.
That is no cop out, no justification of bad behavoir-it is pointing out that you are governed by many things in life-and 2 of the most important are your upbringing, and your genetic code.
You choose neither-and they have consequences on your adult life.
Sorry for the length-this is a subject I have had EXTENSIVE life experience with and it is one I feel very passionate about. Just MO from the life I have lived-I do not expect all to see it from this point.

[elvislady]

Why my attitude on Elvis's and some of the problems which apparently plagued him.
What perspective do I see these from? Why do I insist genetics and upbringing are a huge factor in adult life?

Lets see where do I start:
-when I see films which have nooses, hangings, suicides, or attempted suicides-my hands sweat, my temperature goes up I feel flushed and my breathing and pulse rate increase-very stressful for me and legitimate physical symptoms- which I do not choose to have occur
When I am inclosed in small places, closets, elevators, etc....again all these changes in my physical well being-occur and I do not choose to have them.
When I have the nightmares which still haunt me 50 years after seeing my father hanging from a rope at the age of 4-I wake up in a cold wet sweat and can not go back to sleep....I swear I do not choose to do so.
I have had problems sleeping my whole life-and it goes back to the few minutes of my young life seeing my father swinging on a rope-I do not choose to have problems sleeping.
When I feel inferior in a room of people I do not know, who I feel are better than I am, who I feel are tougher and stronger mentally and physically stronger than I am, who I feel are secretly feeling sorrow and pity for me, and when these feelings overwhelm me and cause me to leave without any real contact with them......................I....do .....not choose to feel that way-it happens.
I am well aware of the things which torment me-and have had therapy to help me understand them-but its not like the movies there is not always this moment where it all disappears and Eureka cured!!!! The negative consequences of past actions in my childhood-Which I had no control over-still occur.
I did not choose (and no one else ever born has the luxury of choosing) the genetic code which governs to a great extent your mental and physical health.
If possible I would be 6 ft 2 with black hair, a weight lifters build, and would
be Gods gift to everyone.
If I could choose to not have a brain hormone imbalance, which necessitates me to take anti-depression medication-I would. I can not. If I just choose to stop taking this medication in a matter of weeks my whole way of thinking would change to an even deeper darker way-which would not be good for me nor anyone I am involved with-so I choose to continue listening to the doctor who has prescribed it who knows the problems and consequences of not taking them.
I'm sure many of the members here have medical problems and phobias which they have never been given a vote on they did not choose to have them nor the consequences of them. That is no cop out, no justification of bad behavoir-it is pointing out that you are governed by many things in life-and 2 of the most important are your upbringing, and your genetic code.
You choose neither-and they have consequences on your adult life.
Sorry for the length-this is a subject I have had EXTENSIVE life experience with and it is one I feel very passionate about. Just MO from the life I have lived-I do not expect all to see it from this point.

wow is all i can say!

elvislady

[Genie]

I recall that incident well, and I stood and cheered for his courage and his truthful comments. He was being treated poorly and in public, why not reply in public? I loved this man so much that I feel he had more than a right to speak his mind. So, in reality he could have said anything, and I'd take his side. lol
More power to the man! He was not the coward that some of the MM claimed, Vernon wasn't standing there reading off a letter of an irritated entertainer now was he?
Elvis did it "MY way: errrrr "His Way" it was great!:notworthy
Yes Getlo I was present when this happened. People (some) were not even listening to him, those were odd balls of a sort and trouble makers. I may be thinking of the Vegas incident, but yes I also have this on tape.
When I was there, people were talking to each other laughing, and Elvis was trying to sing, so how disrespectful!
He had enough. Those particular people obviously came with intent to slander and cause a lot of trouble and hurt. Elvis was professional, but when someone gets in your face up close and personal, I think most of us would wonder what we were doing there at all!
So he told them what he thought.
I don't have the mentality to say everything that Elvis did or didn't do was fine. I am saying in this case, he was justified in his anger. He was not God, or a saint, nor are any of us probably.

[Genie]

I saw the handwriting on the wall long before his last concert, it showed up fairly frequently in Vegas. He hated the Vegas shows. I imagine he had to honor them because Col. Parker demanded this and that, and he had a signed contract to do so.
Once I was there, people were eating and drinking and not even listening to Elvis, let alone look the man in the face, a few rumbled out slurs, he got mad. I can't blame him for those times.
Nowdays "Druggies" are heroine, coke, meth, and nothing with an RX. In those days, Elvis thought if you were not on street drugs like a simple stoned bum, you had an RX for the medication you took, that you were alright. I thought the same thing myself and I was in the medical field.
However, his last concert, yes, was as though he were dying right in front of our eyes, it was painful, especially when he sang, "OH MY GOD! how great thou art..and the leaving the stage with an unusual goodbye. I believe we all sensed it was almost over.

[Genie]

My deepest and sincere wishes for your heart to heal. That is something that lasts a lifetime, I am so sorry this happened to you. God bless you.

[Genie]

I see it just as clear as a bell. My heart goes out to you. My daughter, my baby girl dying in the car crash which only I survived, but was seriously injured for life, does not set well with me either. I have taken anti depressants for years, it helps, the time that has passed has helped. Giving love to others, is a release.
But I have flash backs and those are horrible. Each time I wake in the hospital, with another surgery, it all comes back. Recently they tried for the last time to get through the severely scared inner tissue, reach the liver and insert a shunt. Three times this failed. But I always think I am there and just lost my baby girl.
I understand how it can be, and I wish you well. I am very merciful, as tragedy strikes us, we become that way to survive ourself, and those around us.

[KPM]

Other than things I mentioned -I am a normal person.;)
My wife and I have been married 36 years as of this last Monday, I have 3 great adult kids, I work and play hard.
I have had some rough, rough times and problems which are directly connected to things I did not ask for in my life-thats my point in bringing up these things.

[Genie]

I have to agree with you... we don't know what all caused Elvis or anyone else to become who they were, for good or fo bad. But we did and do love him.

[Genie]

I'd like to place here a quote by none other than George Carlin..... it applied and is on topic if we see the irony in it with Elvis, and other famous people and his fans on this sight as well. It touched me deeply..I hope it is alright?

A Message by George Carlin:

The paradox of our time in history is that we have taller buildings but shorter tempers, wider Freeways , but narrower viewpoints.. We spend more, but have less, we buy more, but enjoy less. We have bigger houses and smaller families, more conveniences, but less time. We have more degrees but less sense, more knowledge, but less judgment, more experts, yet more problems, more medicine, but less wellness.

We drink too much, smoke too much, spend too recklessly, laugh too little, drive too fast, get too angry, stay up too late, get up too tired, read too little, watch TV too much, and pray too seldom.

We have multiplied our possessions, but reduced our values. We talk too much, love too seldom, and hate too often.

We've learned how to make a living, but not a life. We've added years to life not life to years. We've been all the way to the moon and back, but have trouble ! crossing the street to meet a new neighbor. We conquered outer space but not inner space. We've done larger things, but not better things.

We've cleaned up the air, but polluted the soul. We've conquered the atom, but not our prejudice. We write more, but learn less. We plan more, but accomplish less. We've learned to rush, but not to wait. We build more computers to hold more information, to produce more copies than ever, but we communicate less and less.

These are the times of fast foods and slow digestion, big men and small character, steep profits and shallow relationships. These are the days of two incomes but more divorce, fancier houses, but broken homes. These are days of quick trips, disposable diapers, throwaway morality, one night stands, overweight bodies, and pills that do everything from cheer, to quiet, to kill. It is a time when there is much in the showroom window and nothing in the stockroom. A time when technology can bring this letter to you, and a time when you can choose either to share this insight, or to just hit delete...

Remember; spend some time with your loved ones, because they are not going to be around forever.

Remember, say a kind word to someone who looks up to you in awe, because that little person soon will grow up and leave your side.

Remember, to give a warm hug to the one next to you, because that is the only treasure you can give with your heart and it doesn't cost a cent.

Remember, to say, "I love you" to your partner and your loved ones, but most of all mean it. A kiss and an embrace will mend hurt when it comes from deep inside of you.

Remember to hold hands and cherish the moment for someday that person will not be there again.

Give time to love, give time to speak! And give time to share the precious thoughts in your mind.

AND ALWAYS REMEMBER:

Life is not measured by the number of breaths we take, but by the moments that take our breath away.



George Carlin

And with love to you all, ~Genie

[The King's Queen]

Actually, I can see having attended the June 25, 1977 show and not necessarily thinking the man was at death's door.

For one thing, consider that they didn't have the big Jumbotron screens back then which allowed everyone in the stadium a close-up view of his face and captured every movement. From far back you might not even notice the weight being a big issue for him, much less see a face that looked to have aged way too much in the four years since Aloha, or something about his eyes that indicated something may have been amiss.

[No, back then Elvis was allowed to do a lot of things that today he couldn't have gotten away with. In a world of TMZ-type reporting with unreasonable paparazzi and information that moves at the speed of Twitter, satellite TV not being anything to be excited about and most people having photo and often video capabilities on their cell phones, there just wouldn't have been this virtual security blanket around him all the time. Fans would never be shocked at his appearance because they would always know what he looked like, but more importantly the criticism would have been immediate and far-reaching once he had started to let himself slide. On stage, everything would be seen by everybody and offstage, even behind closed doors, his private life might still not be out of the public eye.]

At that Cincinnati show, he appeared less bloated than he had for the shows filmed for the special (especially better than Omaha), and overall he just had a healthier look about him. He still looked overweight but not obese. Had he not been wearing a tight white jumpsuit, his weight would hardly seem that deserving of comment...OK, and if he hadn't been Elvis Presley. But think of the photos and video of him in his jumpsuit earlier that day and the following day -- see my avatar. I'll grant you that Todd Slaughter later said he found his appearance alarming but to me, they don't scream out "I'm dying!"

It's odd but besides the diminished bloat, his hair and makeup and most everything about him looked far better than in the special. He appeared more youthful. It really is mind-boggling what a horrendous job they did of his makeup on those shows.

He seemed more connected, sharp, and his singing was very strong in his last two shows. That's another thing that might make you not notice any possible warning signs, and we've talked about this before: being at an Elvis concert and seeing him -- however good or bad your view may have been, being in that atmosphere of thousands of other screaming fans and feeling the high of the fact that you're at an Elvis concert, you're just not going to pick up on too many of the shortcomings, unless it is truly a bad show. (I will concede that being audience recordings, the tapes of these last two performances maybe seem a tad bit better to me than they actually were -- for some of the very reasons I just named. But all things considered, I still firmly believe they were superior.)

But even if they did, I don't think his fan base back then would have been as inclined as typical fans of other acts perhaps to show their disapproval anyway. I don't think it is because they were conscious "enablers" of Elvis' bad habits but that was just the way they were raised or it was part of their personality for whatever reason.

All this cannot be said for the people close to him though. There was not the same awe factor with them. They saw all the bad shows, witnessed his worst moments off the stage, and most of the time nodded yes, laughed incessantly at his jokes, told him what a great show he had put on, and kept the bad reviews and any negative press coverage from him whenever possible. I am not saying the man himself wasn't responsible for his own demise, but if there are fingers of blame to be pointed at any outside influences, one finger -- perhaps the middle one -- must be reserved for these people.

I am not saying they had it easy and that I can't understand wanting to keep their jobs and remain in that circle, but...come on.

The other thing to point out in defense of the fans though is that the vast majority of them did not follow him around the country on tour or see every show from a Vegas or Tahoe engagement. So some things they saw which may have struck them as less than impressive they could have easily thought were a very chance occurrence. They did not have the ability to recognize a pattern. They did not know that he was basically putting on the same show over and over and over either. They had not heard all the shows we have or seen all the photos that weren't in the magazines or maybe even read about some troubling things which would have predisposed them to looking for such warning signs.

No, overall I don't believe the fans deserve taking much heat for this. It especially doesn't sit well with me to hear some of the guys who were close to him and do deserve it to deflect blame in the fans' direction.

JMHO, friends.

SUPERB POST BOBBY.....WOOOOHOOOO!!!!:notworthy:notworthy(y)

[Genie]

In reply to Getlo:
No in reality I would take his side because he was speaking his mind and the audience deserved to hear it.. he also was poor growing up, it must be great to suddenly afford anything you want, just to eat..even if it is poor nutrition by some standards.
Many famous, talented people have sleep disorders. Seems the smarter you are, the more talented and or famous, the less you sleep well.
I think it is because one's brain is in over drive trying to find a cure for a disease, writing a new novel, performing a better song, playing a better role in a movie..I don't sleep well when my animals are ill. Many nights I am dog(pardon the pun) tired, tonight I fed a baby skunk who had been injured, he could not make it to the food dish, he was not able to spray, he didn't bite..so I fed him, and gave him water...I wont sleep tonight because I know he will die, because of some human cruilty or accident. I will have to put him down. Skunks live to be over 20, he is just a baby. : ( So I'm very tired.

[Getlo]

No in reality I would take his side because he was speaking his mind and the audience deserved to hear it..

The audience deserved to hear Elvis stop singing and vent his spleen from the stage?



he also was poor growing up.

So?


Many famous, talented people have sleep disorders.

And?

Fact: Elvis, as a professional, should have kept his mouth shut in public and vented to the appropriate people. The audience - the paying audience - should not have been those people.

[Brian]

Fact: Elvis, as a professional, should have kept his mouth shut in public and vented to the appropriate people. The audience - the paying audience - should not have been those people.

Elvis probably got to thinking that his fans would believe the tabloids that he was a cocaine addict so he spoke out against the rumors on stage.
Since Elvis didn't do interviews like other stars did speaking at the concert was the only way for him to communicate with his fans.

problem was he decided to try and squash these rumors on a night when he was stoned so it only added more rumors and speculation in the tabloids and he should've kept his comments about the rumors as brief as possible then got back to singing for his fans.
I don't like it when entertainers on stage go on a long monolouge about their personal life or political views but if they keep the comments brief it doesn't really bother me.

[elvislady]

Many famous, talented people have sleep disorders. Seems the smarter you are, the more talented and or famous, the less you sleep well.



B/S

elvislady

[Jumpsuit Junkie]

Many famous, talented people have sleep disorders. Seems the smarter you are, the more talented and or famous, the less you sleep well.



B/S

elvislady

Short but succinct response! (y)

[Jumpsuit Junkie]

Thanks for the responses to my post. :)

Matt, I guess I'm not entirely qualified to address a couple of the points you make...maybe someone can better speak to this.

I know the "fat and forty" stories were definitely making the rounds and people did go to his shows wondering how big he was going to be. I also know there indeed were negative reviews published in local newspapers after Elvis had played certain towns and given a bad show.

My impression though is that on a national and international scale, these latter type of reports just weren't circulated that well. Of course, comparing this to how it happens today, there is no comparison. Perhaps these stories were out there but it required considerable effort for most people to get to them?

You mentioned the publishing of current concert photos. It seems like a number of the magazine articles I've seen from the seventies seem to have used photos of him that are several years old -- not unlike his album covers. Probably the ones wanting to focus on his weight did use more current ones...Were there a lot of recent pics out there too?

Regardless, I guess the fans can be blamed somewhat for accepting Elvis in any condition -- I really think the mystique and the legend and the concert experience are the main driving factors there -- but they would probably be at the bottom of my blame totem pole.

I certainly take on board your comments as they point out factors I don't always see. I suppose the thorn in the paw for me is that there are those who would quite willingly have Elvis wheeled onto the stage and grunt a few lines of 'Hound Dog' and say that he was just having an off day!

Whatever our opinions are, we cannot undo the past and sometimes I get a little arsey and everyone gets it :blush:

[debtdbruno]

Elvis probably got to thinking that his fans would believe the tabloids that he was a cocaine addict so he spoke out against the rumors on stage.
Since Elvis didn't do interviews like other stars did speaking at the concert was the only way for him to communicate with his fans.

problem was he decided to try and squash these rumors on a night when he was stoned so it only added more rumors and speculation in the tabloids and he should've kept his comments about the rumors as brief as possible then got back to singing for his fans.
I don't like it when entertainers on stage go on a long monolouge about their personal life or political views but if they keep the comments brief it doesn't really bother me.


That's the point I made earlier, he didn't have opportunities to vent his anger, he didn't do interviews, tv shows. What was he supposed to do? He was human!!!!! He had a right to correct the tabloids about cocaine use. As Brian has said it's unfortunate he was taking something, which made him rabbit on a bit too long, instead of keeping it short and sweet

[May]

Why did Elvis not do interviews? Was it like a set decision the Colonel or he made?

[debtdbruno]

It's always been said the Colonel liked to keep him unattainable. Mystique!!!

[KPM]

It's always been said the Colonel liked to keep him unattainable. Mystique!!!
Well he certainly managed that;)

[sasha]

No in reality I would take his side because he was speaking his mind and the audience deserved to hear it.. he also was poor growing up, it must be great to suddenly afford anything you want, just to eat..even if it is poor nutrition by some standards.
Many famous, talented people have sleep disorders. Seems the smarter you are, the more talented and or famous, the less you sleep well.


Well said, Genie.
Unfortunately, there are many out here to appear to live to sit in judgment of everyone except themselves. Do they have trouble sleeping? :hmm: Doubtful.

I've never seen the purpose in kicking someone when they're down.
Especially when they can't speak for themselves nor do we know what's going on in their lives.

My congrats to you and KPM for over coming the adversities in your lives.
Life's not always easy.Most of us just try to do the best we can .
Our time on earth is short. Best to experience all the love we can.

[GIORGIA]

Can we PLEASE stop with the Elvis stoned crap?
Elvis was NEVER stoned!First of all,Elvis took medication becouse HE NEEDED IT!There's a BIG difference between taking medication,and being stoned..

That comes as such a shock to some people:supriced:
Second of all,you can not be stoned and put on a show.If your stoned,there is NO possible way he could put on a show..If your stoned,your totally out of it..
Obviously,some people around here have either no respect,don't know or care to know,and are talking before they know the facts!
I Think the same thing!
Totally Agree with you!

[Genie]

Thank you so much sweet one.
You are very right, not many people understand unless they walked in our shoes. Which is something Elvis said himself...as he read off that famous poem during a concert. (hugs and love to you)

[GIORGIA]

See,this is EXACTLY what Elvis couldn't stand.He's just a man!He had feelings just like we do!He had everything we have.He couldn't help it sometimes,he was human.So what if he said something like this during a concert?This makes me LOVE him even more,it shows me he's HUMAN!I LOVE that!
Have some respect For Elvis!PLEASE!
As I said before I Think The Same thing!
I LOVE HIM EVEN MORE TOO!

[GIORGIA]

I'am certainly not looking at Elvis as some sort of God.I look at him like a human being.I do have respect though,and I can relate to Elvis.I understand exactly what it was like for Elvis.I'am fully aware that Elvis had faults,but I do not like to focus on them.I like to focus on the Sunny Side of everything,which is very hard to do on some of these threads.By not letting Elvis be human,and by critizing every little move like this is definantly disrespectful to Elvis!
I agree with you!
And I think the same thing too!
But I Agree also with Elvislady,because if we talking in some thread about these things,don't mean that not
We LOVE and RESPECT EQUALLY OUR LOVE ELVIS!
WE LOVE AND RESPECT OUR LOVE ELVIS!
Because WE ARE HERE!
And EVERYDAY We Express OUR LOVE FOR OUR LOVE ELVIS!

[Pacerstar]

Well said, Genie.
Unfortunately, there are many out here to appear to live to sit in judgment of everyone except themselves. Do they have trouble sleeping? :hmm: Doubtful.

I've never seen the purpose in kicking someone when they're down.
Especially when they can't speak for themselves nor do we know what's going on in their lives.

My congrats to you and KPM for over coming the adversities in your lives.
Life's not always easy.Most of us just try to do the best we can .
Our time on earth is short. Best to experience all the love we can.

Wonderful post.(y)(y)(y)(y)(y)(y)

[Genie]

I understood years ago through the grapevine, that Elvis would talk to anyone anytime, as long as he didn't get trampled.. lol but Col Parker said, time is "MONEY" No freebee's for the pessants...unreal. But that was my understanding.

[Genie]

Short but succinct response! (y)

Were you and Elvis Lady referring to my post?
It might have been nice to be treated equal like other poster's.. I am guessing B/S is not an insult? Thank you.:hmm:

[8mmlowa]

elvis did not have just slepping problems and had a condition ...
he had insomia ...
there is no treatment even today which can heal that ...
today they a some kind of therapies which should help a little bit...but still no real help on this ...
today the doctors worldwide give the patient the same treatment as in the 70s ....and elvis got the same treatment millions of other people get and got these days....

[Getlo]

He had a right to correct the tabloids about cocaine use.

Not.

From.

The.

Stage.

[EnigmaticSun]

not from the stage

So you mean this constitutional right just broke up, disappeared into thin air, vanished from the face of the earth as soon as he walked up the stage?

Well I don't mind him calling some sunsa*****es just that..

[Jumpsuit Junkie]

So you mean this constitutional right just broke up, disappeared into thin air, vanished from the face of the earth as soon as he walked up the stage?

Well I don't mind him calling some sunsa*****es just that..

It's not about constitutional rights, it's about professionalism.

[EnigmaticSun]

It's not about constitutional rights, it's about professionalism.

Well he knew what he was doing.. And nobody could fire the king - not in Vegas. I bet he knew that!

[Getlo]

It's not about constitutional rights, it's about professionalism.

Correct. Constitutional right, indeed! :rolleyes:


And nobody could fire the king - not in Vegas. I bet he knew that!

Quite wrong. Elvis was working under a contract, and had he broke that contract via an infraction, he would have been gone.

As it was, the incident didn't break the contract rules per se.

[EnigmaticSun]

Correct. Constitutional right, indeed! :rolleyes:

So I take it performing meant fans could legally burn his house and steal his car. That's all settled..

Well, whatever his lack of professionalism was supposed to mean, it was not enough to be fired. So it was okay then.

[elvislady]

Were you and Elvis Lady referring to my post?
It might have been nice to be treated equal like other poster's.. I am guessing B/S is not an insult? Thank you.:hmm:

You guess wrong! i think you know what this means genie..
elvislady:hmm::hmm:

[Jumpsuit Junkie]

So I take it performing meant fans could legally burn his house and steal his car. That's all settled..

Not sure you fully grasp what constitutional rights are? See HERE (http://www.loc.gov/rr/program/bib/ourdocs/Constitution.html)
Why on earth would the fans want to burn his house or steal his car. They were the ones who had to put up with the tirade. The fans didn't start the rumours. It would be wise if you read the thread from the very beginning to fully understand what conversation is taking place :blink:


Well, whatever his lack of professionalism was supposed to mean, it was not enough to be fired. So it was okay then.

No it was not okay, it was unprofessional, just because you can get away with doing something does NOT mean it should be done. This is the worst logic I have read so far...

[EnigmaticSun]

Just because you can get away with doing something does NOT mean it should be done. This is the worst logic I have read so far...

I thought that was the usual ethical procedure.. ;)

I did read enough of the thread to know it concerned his professionalism. Still he made the choice to lash out and if they didn't like it, they should have fired him. And they didn't - and if someone else wanted to do it, why didn't they?

I had probably mistaken you guys for thinking that being on stage implied Elvis had no freedom of speech or whatever-name-you-wanna-call-it.

Well, thank you for the constitution, but I found it hard to dig in.

[Jumpsuit Junkie]

I thought that was the usual ethical procedure.. ;)

You thought wrong then. It would be wrong to assume that was what Elvis would do. Elvis obviously found it difficult on this occasion to bottle up his feelings, I doubt ethical (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/ethical) consideration were even considered.


I did read enough of the thread to know it concerned his professionalism. Still he made the choice to lash out and if they didn't like it, they should have fired him. And they didn't - and if someone else wanted to do it, why didn't they?

I guess they could have fired Elvis, I doubt they would due to the fact he generated large quantities of cash for them. Elvis didn't behave like this in every show, so my guess is they would have spoken to the Colonel and he in turn would have approached Elvis. By the time 1976 rolled along I'm pretty sure the behaviour displayed was a factor in why Elvis didn't play Vegas in 1977.


I had probably mistaken you guys for thinking that being on stage implied Elvis had no freedom of speech or whatever-name-you-wanna-call-it.

Elvis' freedom of speech is not in question here, Elvis is not being censored for using explicit language, he should have shown professionalism (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/professionalism). Elvis was a professional singer and his fans and general population came to a show to be entertained. Fans do NOT expect Elvis to launch into a tirade, whether they agree with his sentiments or not!


Well, thank you for the constitution, but I found it hard to dig in.

Elvis' constitutional rights were not infringed in any way and nor would I suggest that they should be. When Elvis was asked a political question at the MSG press conference he replied with 'I'm just an entertainer' implying he didn't want to express his views in a public environment. So something changed in this show..

[EnigmaticSun]

Elvis' constitutional rights were not infringed in any way and nor would I suggest that they should be. When Elvis was asked a political question at the MSG press conference he replied with 'I'm just an entertainer' implying he didn't want to express his views in a public environment. So something changed in this show..

I did not assume that (such ethical consideration) was what Elvis would have done. This was meant more general - it is what made the western hemisphere as strong, healthy and corruption-free as it is now!

Yes I'm familiar with Elvis' comment during that press conference. I thought it had more to do with the war in Vietnam rather than his personal issues. Whether we agree with him or not, it is not going to change the course of history. I do agree he appeared more relaxed in '72!

Some things have occurred that could be considered infringement of the law or his constitutional rights - his youth and childhood were supposed to represent equality and prosperity for all? The way his manager exploited him like a milkcow? The way the media treated him during his lifetime and even today? Why does his ex-wife carry his family name?

All in all questions kept coming up like bubbles in a case of club soda. As far as this thread is concerned: to make him start a tirade like that, someone would have had to do harm to his integrity, there's no doubt.

Don't say I'm wrong for the sake of saying I'm wrong.. :lol:

[Junebug]

I guess they could have fired Elvis, I doubt they would due to the fact he generated large quantities of cash for them. Elvis didn't behave like this in every show, so my guess is they would have spoken to the Colonel and he in turn would have approached Elvis. By the time 1976 rolled along I'm pretty sure the behaviour displayed was a factor in why Elvis didn't play Vegas in 1977.

Elvis' freedom of speech is not in question here, Elvis is not being censored for using explicit language, he should have shown professionalism (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/professionalism). Elvis was a professional singer and his fans and general population came to a show to be entertained. Fans do NOT expect Elvis to launch into a tirade, whether they agree with his sentiments or not!




No, Elvis did not appear "like this" - the tirade - in every show.

But if "professionalism" is the issue, didn't he appear unprofessional many times before and after this specific show/tirade??? :blink:

Does appearing under the influence constitute unprofessionalism?

Or does it only matter when the signs of it are extreme?

You know, a slur or two here or there is nothing to get upset about.

I'm not agreeing or disagreeing on anything here.

I'm just finding it interesting that many seem to be bothered by this BIG display of 'unprofessionalism' without mention or dismay of the root cause of it all.


:king:

[KPM]

I think this issue has many threads and I have commented on them over the years besides this one.
Elvis seldom (if ever) before this went into such tirades in his career-and lets face it he was the target of some pretty wild attacks and comments in the press not to mention the religious leaders in the 50s (satans spawn, sent to play the devils music etc.....)
He usually bit his tongue or said something like,
"those people have a job to do"
And I would say many of these attacks, false stories, accusations were unfair-just done to sell magazines or papers so he did show a good level of professionalism thru most his career IMO
I agree it was unprofessional to more or less stop your show to rant on some wrong in the press (or perceived wrong)-but he was not the first in any profession to lose his cool and blow off steam. If he had not been on so many prescription meds which were as bad and had made this rant-today we would not be discussing it-but he was. That is the Catch 22 to the discussion.

Sinatra made a habit of speaking his mind from the stage and in some ways he paid the price also. Streisand has gone into tirades (usually political) and seems to get away with it perhaps because her crowds share her views.
If I could actually say I have never been in that situation I would be lying-but I usually got called to the carpet for it-unless it was obvious I was pushed to an unreasonable limit by a customer (and it happens)
Just my 2 cents. (adjusted for inflation that is a lot more today than long ago)

[Merry]

I'm just finding it interesting that many seem to be bothered by this BIG display of 'unprofessionalism' without mention or dismay of the root cause of it all.


:king:


Beautifully stated. (y)





All in all questions kept coming up like bubbles in a case of club soda. As far as this thread is concerned: to make him start a tirade like that, someone would have had to do harm to his integrity, there's no doubt.

:lol:

Another succinct and true statement (y) :hug: :D


I think this issue has many threads and I have commented on them over the years besides this one.
Elvis seldom (if ever) before this went into such tirades in his career-and lets face it he was the target of some pretty wild attacks and comments in the press not to mention the religious leaders in the 50s (satans spawn, sent to play the devils music etc.....)
He usually bit his tongue or said something like,
"those people have a job to do"
And I would say many of these attacks, false stories, accusations were unfair-just done to sell magazines or papers so he did show a good level of professionalism thru most his career IMO
I agree it was unprofessional to more or less stop your show to rant on some wrong in the press (or perceived wrong)-but he was not the first in any profession to lose his cool and blow off steam. If he had not been on so many prescription meds which were as bad and had made this rant-today we would not be discussing it-but he was. That is the Catch 22 to the discussion.

Sinatra made a habit of speaking his mind from the stage and in some ways he paid the price also. Streisand has gone into tirades (usually political) and seems to get away with it perhaps because her crowds share her views.
If I could actually say I have never been in that situation I would be lying-but I usually got called to the carpet for it-unless it was obvious I was pushed to an unreasonable limit by a customer (and it happens)
Just my 2 cents. (adjusted for inflation that is a lot more today than long ago)


Trifecta! :D:D:D(y)

[Jumpsuit Junkie]

I did not assume that (such ethical consideration) was what Elvis would have done. This was meant more general - it is what made the western hemisphere as strong, healthy and corruption-free as it is now!

Yes I'm familiar with Elvis' comment during that press conference. I thought it had more to do with the war in Vietnam rather than his personal issues. Whether we agree with him or not, it is not going to change the course of history. I do agree he appeared more relaxed in '72!

Some things have occurred that could be considered infringement of the law or his constitutional rights - his youth and childhood were supposed to represent equality and prosperity for all? The way his manager exploited him like a milkcow? The way the media treated him during his lifetime and even today? Why does his ex-wife carry his family name?

All in all questions kept coming up like bubbles in a case of club soda. As far as this thread is concerned: to make him start a tirade like that, someone would have had to do harm to his integrity, there's no doubt.

Don't say I'm wrong for the sake of saying I'm wrong.. :lol:

I wont say your wrong if I agree with you! The above is the most coherent you have been in this thread so far. However, it doesn't matter one jot if someone has questioned Elvis' personal integrity, he should have kept it under wraps and chosen whom he would direct his frustrations.

[Jumpsuit Junkie]

No, Elvis did not appear "like this" - the tirade - in every show.

No he didn't (y)


But if "professionalism" is the issue, didn't he appear unprofessional many times before and after this specific show/tirade??? :blink:

I suppose there are occasions when this happened, but these were infrequent, although there are enough stories to question the prescribed drug problem


Does appearing under the influence constitute unprofessionalism?

Absolutely!


Or does it only matter when the signs of it are extreme?

I suppose if the show is a good one without outward signs of abuse you could say that was OK, but as you said above, when it is extreme then questions should but asked.


You know, a slur or two here or there is nothing to get upset about.

Unfortunately a slur here and there is a sign that something is almost certainly wrong.


I'm just finding it interesting that many seem to be bothered by this BIG display of 'unprofessionalism' without mention or dismay of the root cause of it all.

the main issue within this thread has primarily been about whether it is unprofessional to have an outburst in front of an audience? The question of the route cause i.e. The bellhops spreading the vicious rumour of Elvis' drug taking has more than adequately been covered, or are you meaning the drug intake itself?

[Junebug]

No he didn't (y)



I suppose there are occasions when this happened, but these were infrequent, although there are enough stories to question the prescribed drug problem



Absolutely!



I suppose if the show is a good one without outward signs of abuse you could say that was OK, but as you said above, when it is extreme then questions should but asked.



Unfortunately a slur here and there is a sign that something is almost certainly wrong.



the main issue within this thread has primarily been about whether it is unprofessional to have an outburst in front of an audience? The question of the route cause i.e. The bellhops spreading the vicious rumour of Elvis' drug taking has more than adequately been covered, or are you meaning the drug intake itself?

:D:D:D

I'm not trying to be difficult - let me see if I can we can go further here....

The question is:

If we are operating under the premise that appearing on stage 'under the influence' is "absolutely" unprofessional, what is the reason we are only outraged by this unprofessional tirade and no other stage appearances???

(My comment about the 'slurs' was meant to be sarcastic. You got my point about the behavior though! Other signs something was wrong.)

In a way, I kind of wish Elvis would have had more tirades on stage. Maybe it would have been the catalyst to open dialogue around the professional and personal issues that were taking a toll on him. Maybe his unguarded and impromptu speeches would have allowed different people and insights into the situation. Maybe he would have found different avenues of support that would encourage his growth.

I think in this particular 1974 instance, it was another missed opportunity in not recognizing Elvis' behavior for what it really was instead of just shutting it down and sweeping it under the rug.


Sigh........

:mail:

[EnigmaticSun]

The above is the most coherent you have been in this thread so far.

I may not be coherent at times, but in this case it's not to be explained by drug abuse. However I don't agree an occasional slur would indicate something's wrong, as some may simply have a speaking problem. :mail:

[Jumpsuit Junkie]

:D:D:D

I'm not trying to be difficult - let me see if I can we can go further here....

The question is:

If we are operating under the premise that appearing on stage 'under the influence' is "absolutely" unprofessional, what is the reason we are only outraged by this unprofessional tirade and no other stage appearances???

There are other threads which cover other aspects of Elvis' stage career, this threads happens to cover this specific instance, I'm certain that when later years rolled along and Elvis had over medicated the fans and audience made it clear how they felt :hmm:


(My comment about the 'slurs' was meant to be sarcastic. You got my point about the behavior though! Other signs something was wrong.)

I got that, I merely commented further that this seemed to me slurring of speech was an indicator that something was wrong, e.g. Drugs, illness or a combination of the two.


I think in this particular 1974 instance, it was another missed opportunity in not recognizing Elvis' behavior for what it really was instead of just shutting it down and sweeping it under the rug.

As i said earlier, Elvis didn't make a habit of going on stage and venting so this instance would have been taken as a one off. I believe the people around him were already concerned due to the medication issues already.



I may not be coherent at times, but in this case it's not to be explained by drug abuse. However I don't agree an occasional slur would indicate something's wrong, as some may simply have a speaking problem. :mail:

Back to incoherent! Elvis had a Southern Drawl but he could be understood perfectly 95% of the time. We have no reason to believe that Elvis had a speech impediment so something would have to take place for Elvis to slur his words, like drugs or alcohol. As we know Elvis didn't drink alcohol so it would suggest there was another reason :hmm:

[EnigmaticSun]

Back to incoherent! Elvis had a Southern Drawl but he could be understood perfectly 95% of the time. We have no reason to believe that Elvis had a speech impediment so something would have to take place for Elvis to slur his words, like drugs or alcohol. As we know Elvis didn't drink alcohol so it would suggest there was another reason :hmm:

Trying to be coherent here, I suppose that the more members agree with you, the more coherent they become? Yes I bet his prescription medication played a role in his speech problem - I had assumed "a slur or two" didn't bother, I didn't mean to point at aslurorsomeotherspeakingproblemfromstartofinish. I have to be attentive articulating words as well, but I'm not a junkie and it would be unfair to consider everyone with such an occasional error as such.

[Jumpsuit Junkie]

Trying to be coherent here, I suppose that the more members agree with you, the more coherent they become?

This is not the case at all, what I am saying is that if you put forward a valid case even if I don't agree with it I will acknowledge a good retort! When something comes out of left field, then I cannot get my head round it. For instance if I suddenly said the reason Elvis slurred his words was because he walked with a limp you could not help but be surprised and confused :blink:


Yes I bet his prescription medication played a role in his speech problem - I had assumed "a slur or two" didn't bother, I didn't mean to point at aslurorsomeotherspeakingproblemfromstartofinish. I have to be attentive articulating words as well, but I'm not a junkie and it would be unfair to consider everyone with such an occasional error as such.

I'm obviously struggling to get my point across here, people who slur their words usually do so because there is a catalyst e.g. alcohol or medication. If you are suffering from a stroke it would be a semi-permanent condition. People don't slur randomly and then stop!

P.S. I am not calling you a Junkie :blink:

[EnigmaticSun]

People don't slur randomly and then stop!

P.S. I am not calling you a Junkie

Well I hope this case is valid. Yes I do slur words now and then - not to an extreme extent - but in my case it is to be explained by not paying enough attention to it, or by being simultaneously involved in multi-tasking all at the same time (you see my sentences appear to be weird even if I'm clean). If you know how to work with it, you can develop a nice comedy series such as Fawlty Towers with great dialogues.

I'm sorry should I have given the impression of accusing you of accusing me of being a junkie. We don't accuse each other here, we might disagree just a bit or disagree entirely, but we don't mind that and as long as we have our health, what else matters? (y)

[jak]

"I'm obviously struggling to get my point across here, people who slur their words usually do so because there is a catalyst e.g. alcohol or medication. If you are suffering from a stroke it would be a semi-permanent condition. People don't slur randomly and then stop! "

You are making a good point.All we have to do is listen to the audio we have to track Elvis' decline and worsening problems.His speech changed dramatically the last couple of years.In 1975 he still sounded ok.This is also the last year that his concerts maintained a decent level of quality.The slurred speech of 76 and 77 is just proof how hard a time it was for him to function at times.He was stuggiling to remain coherent.

[Jumpsuit Junkie]

You are making a good point.All we have to do is listen to the audio we have to track Elvis' decline and worsening problems.His speech changed dramatically the last couple of years.In 1975 he still sounded ok.This is also the last year that his concerts maintained a decent level of quality.The slurred speech of 76 and 77 is just proof how hard a time it was for him to function at times.He was stuggiling to remain coherent.

Hallelujah, sometimes I think I must be going nuts and then someone throws me a lifeline back to sanity :blush:

[elvislady]

"I'm obviously struggling to get my point across here, people who slur their words usually do so because there is a catalyst e.g. alcohol or medication. If you are suffering from a stroke it would be a semi-permanent condition. People don't slur randomly and then stop! "

You are making a good point.All we have to do is listen to the audio we have to track Elvis' decline and worsening problems.His speech changed dramatically the last couple of years.In 1975 he still sounded ok.This is also the last year that his concerts maintained a decent level of quality.The slurred speech of 76 and 77 is just proof how hard a time it was for him to function at times.He was stuggiling to remain coherent.

(y)(y)(y)(y)(y)
elvislady

[Diane]

"I'm obviously struggling to get my point across here, people who slur their words usually do so because there is a catalyst e.g. alcohol or medication. If you are suffering from a stroke it would be a semi-permanent condition. People don't slur randomly and then stop! "

You are making a good point.All we have to do is listen to the audio we have to track Elvis' decline and worsening problems.His speech changed dramatically the last couple of years.In 1975 he still sounded ok.This is also the last year that his concerts maintained a decent level of quality.The slurred speech of 76 and 77 is just proof how hard a time it was for him to function at times.He was stuggiling to remain coherent.

Very well said.....(y)(y)(y)

Diane

[Pacerstar]

Trying to be coherent here, I suppose that the more members agree with you, the more coherent they become? Yes I bet his prescription medication played a role in his speech problem - I had assumed "a slur or two" didn't bother, I didn't mean to point at aslurorsomeotherspeakingproblemfromstartofinish. I have to be attentive articulating words as well, but I'm not a junkie and it would be unfair to consider everyone with such an occasional error as such.

Agree. And, as I recall, it was not always easy to understand Elvis from the
beginning. I, myself, could not understand some of the words in some of the
very first records that he recorded. And Elvis was always accused of mumbling when he talked. Just my two cents!:D:D:D

[Junebug]

There are other threads which cover other aspects of Elvis' stage career, this threads happens to cover this specific instance, I'm certain that when later years rolled along and Elvis had over medicated the fans and audience made it clear how they felt :hmm:



I got that, I merely commented further that this seemed to me slurring of speech was an indicator that something was wrong, e.g. Drugs, illness or a combination of the two.



As i said earlier, Elvis didn't make a habit of going on stage and venting so this instance would have been taken as a one off. I believe the people around him were already concerned due to the medication issues already.




Back to incoherent! Elvis had a Southern Drawl but he could be understood perfectly 95% of the time. We have no reason to believe that Elvis had a speech impediment so something would have to take place for Elvis to slur his words, like drugs or alcohol. As we know Elvis didn't drink alcohol so it would suggest there was another reason :hmm:

I'm really sorry but I am not connecting with you nor do I understand your responses.

Yes, other threads cover other aspects but this one does as well too. For instance, take JAK's recent post. :blink: And maybe even some of yours.

Ok - we agree slurring was an indication something was not right with Elvis.

I disagree - Elvis did make it a habit of venting on stage. It just so happens most of the time it was a 'covert' vent - as in, he was under the influence!!! I contend the concern should have been there no matter the manner of expression - they all lead to the same thing! He was struggling period - in front of the fans and away from the fans!

And as I said earlier, I wish he would have had more displays of outward venting in public venues. Maybe it would have opened the door and allowed others to penetrate the walls some put around Elvis. Maybe some others would have recognized and noticed the situation for what it really was and found ways to move Elvis into a more positive environment.

Let's remember comments on this thread are a reflection of varied thoughts and perspectives.


:king:

[May]

Let's remember comments on this thread are a reflection of varied thoughts and perspectives.


:king:

Good point Junebug. And it goes for all posts and threads. (y)

[Sweet_One_E.]

it was not a nice thing to do but it happens often with performers, not just Elvis. they are human.

[Jumpsuit Junkie]

I'm really sorry but I am not connecting with you nor do I understand your responses.

I'm sorry you don't understand, I have tried to break it down in simple terms.


Yes, other threads cover other aspects but this one does as well too. For instance, take JAK's recent post. :blink: And maybe even some of yours.

So you understand the response Jak made to my post even the section he included of mine :blink:


Ok - we agree slurring was an indication something was not right with Elvis.

Hallelujah, so you do understand (y)


I disagree - Elvis did make it a habit of venting on stage. It just so happens most of the time it was a 'covert' vent - as in, he was under the influence!!! I contend the concern should have been there no matter the manner of expression - they all lead to the same thing! He was struggling period - in front of the fans and away from the fans!

Now this is where I don't understand, the section in red makes NO sense at all, let me get this straight.. Elvis was silently venting whilst stoned?
I have a lot of FTD's and other live recording and Elvis didn't vent vocally that much, ... perhaps I missed all the silent venting :hmm:


Let's remember comments on this thread are a reflection of varied thoughts and perspectives.

I have no problem with varied comments as long as they make sense, as I said earlier when people bring in things from left field like 'Silent Venting' obviously I struggle because 'Silent Venting' is a new concept to me just like 'Constitutional rights' are infringed because Elvis should not of vented in public when they have paid good money to see him. There should be logic involved in a debate.

Sadly I must leave this thread as it seems too lack a coherent basis from which sound debate can flourish.

[elvislady]

Thanks for your in put in my thread jj (y)(y)

elvislady:D

[Junebug]

I'm sorry you don't understand, I have tried to break it down in simple terms.



So you understand the response Jak made to my post even the section he included of mine :blink:



Hallelujah, so you do understand (y)



Now this is where I don't understand, the section in red makes NO sense at all, let me get this straight.. Elvis was silently venting whilst stoned?
I have a lot of FTD's and other live recording and Elvis didn't vent vocally that much, ... perhaps I missed all the silent venting :hmm:



I have no problem with varied comments as long as they make sense, as I said earlier when people bring in things from left field like 'Silent Venting' obviously I struggle because 'Silent Venting' is a new concept to me just like 'Constitutional rights' are infringed because Elvis should not of vented in public when they have paid good money to see him. There should be logic involved in a debate.

Sadly I must leave this thread as it seems too lack a coherent basis from which sound debate can flourish.


Let me put it in simple terms for you:


Venting is a way of dealing with pent-up emotions and feelings.

Being under the influence is another way to deal with the same.

One is overt, the other is covert.

Both are a means for relief.

Both derive from the same issue.

That simple.


To me, saying the explosion is not ok but the implosions are ok is akin to Parker's statement of the "only thing that matters is that Elvis is on that stage tonight!"

My opinion and my views.


Judgemental and condescending statements can also inhibit sound debate.

I think my issue with this is I would not have expected such from a TCB-World Moderator.

Live and learn, I suppose.......


:king:

[Jumpsuit Junkie]

Let me put it in simple terms for you:


Venting is a way of dealing with pent-up emotions and feelings.

Being under the influence is another way to deal with the same.

One is overt, the other is covert.

Both are a means for relief.

Both derive from the same issue.

That simple.


To me, saying the explosion is not ok but the implosions are ok is akin to Parker's statement of the "only thing that matters is that Elvis is on that stage tonight!"

My opinion and my views.


Judgemental and condescending statements can also inhibit sound debate.

I think my issue with this is I would not have expected such from a TCB-World Moderator.

Live and learn, I suppose.......


:king:

I suppose condensation is a two way deal, I thank you for your condensation in this post and the others above! Just because I am a moderator does not mean I don't have a valid point of view.

[Merry]

:king:




You are very insightful, Junebug. (y)

[Jumpsuit Junkie]

You are very insightful, Junebug. (y)

Which bit Kim :hmm:

[Merry]

Which bit Kim :hmm:



Hi Matt :D

Junebug's general grasp of possible feelings and situations, since she has been posting. I feel that Junebug expresses how Elvis may have felt, very well. Wish I could do the same. :)

I enjoy reading June's posts, I said so to her yesterday. (y)

Me :D

[franny]

It might also bring to attention if there are medical people here.... "T.I.A.'s"

What does T.I.A. stand for? :hmm:

I know what M.I.A. stands for :lol:

franny