View Full Version : Nash & Goldman - same breed?
Why does it appear that authoress Alanna Nash has sold out and can be more or less, give or take a couple of lines of B * * * * * * *, ranked down there alongside the dead Albert Goldman:
http://www.elvisnews.com/Presentation/Functional/Page/news.aspx?command=show&item=7046
0349054
10-27-2005, 07:41 AM
Nash is one of the best Elvis authors out there. Although she does subscribe to a bit of sensationalism in order to sell books. Have you read Revelations or The Colonel by her? Her work is ten time better than Guarnlicks.
orwell1976
11-01-2005, 03:13 AM
I know that my opinion isn't very popular here, but I think Goldman understood Elvis' personality quite good. Elvis wasn't one of the cleverest people around and he never improved his abilities (like taking piano or guitar lessons). Elvis was just lucky to have such a great talent as an entertainer and as a singer. He even looked great and he could act! But he didn't do anything to improve his abilities. And Goldman and Nash are just telling the truth. The only problem is, that Goldman is mean and doesn't like Elvis. But if you read carefully (and if you know, that he mixes up the facts all the way through his books) he discribes Elvis persona quite well. He may be a nasty :cursing: , but he still hits the point.
Hi Orwell,
I can appreciate your opinions in your post. I have read only certain newspaper extracts from Goldman's book when it was first serialised in newspapers when I was a young boy, and then my opinion was that this doesn't really sound like the personality or lifestyle of a human being - more of a fictional animal of some kind...maybe Goldman was describing a great deal of his own traits and 'desires' and painted 'His' Elvis this way, due to lack of respect for his subject and a need to fill in the gaps for lack of knowledge - maybe Goldman was not that clever either.
"Elvis wasn't one of the cleverest people around..." - Orwell, was he one of the 'thickest', or one of the least cleverest people ever in the world for all-time?...I can understand that Elvis grew-up in the depression era and education was not a great priority for a youngster who was living day-to-day in ever so slightly impoverished surroundings, but as a person develops and matures I am certainly a believer in Confidence + Common Sense + The Experience of Life beats any qualifications in my book (unless it's a specified subject that you're studying) - I don't need to go to university to get a degree to learn all about that.
I think Elvis was blessed with a 'big hunka' creative flair that, on several occasions, was beaten to a pulp by a 'bullying business guru' (Colonel Parker). I feel that Elvis eventually developed his guitar-playing (just watch the '68 Comeback & 'That's The Way It Is' Special Edition), but yes he could have been a very good guitar player if he had taken more time to make the most of this ability, in one sense he appeared to have developed his piano playing somewhat more than his guitar playing...then maybe he just didn't have enough time or energy left to put into developing these abilities more, and so his god-given voice and charisma were the two areas of his talent that became one.
As for Goldman and Nash telling the truth, well they weren't around so they didn't know Elvis, and I very much doubt Elvis knew them...maybe Goldman had met Elvis for about 5 or 10 minutes backstage in Vegas (?) but it hardly constitutes a qualification on knowing a person. Goldman and Nash's 'truth' is based on assumptions and interviews with other people who weren't necessarily close friends or employees and probably fell into the Lamar Fike and David Stanley moulds - you know, short of cash because they weren't left anything in Elvis' Will (God Forbid!...LOL). Steve Dunleavy did the same kind of job on the bodyguard book "Elvis - What Happened?", and look how the likes of Sonny West has stated that he couldn't believe how sensationalistic it had turned out...but that's 'ANOTHER STORY'.
Thanks for reading,
NEA.
0349054
11-01-2005, 09:03 AM
Goldman had a pre-conceived idea that Elvis was dumb white Southern trash, and he treats Elvis as such during his book. Your correct that Elvis never sought help - but he was an entertainer, not a musician - besides when you are the greatest selling entertainer on earth - who do you ask for help? Everyone has tried to copy Elvis, he was a revolutionary and had his own style.
Personally I dislike Goldman and his trashy book.
I know that my opinion isn't very popular here, but I think Goldman understood Elvis' personality quite good. Elvis wasn't one of the cleverest people around and he never improved his abilities (like taking piano or guitar lessons). Elvis was just lucky to have such a great talent as an entertainer and as a singer. He even looked great and he could act! But he didn't do anything to improve his abilities. And Goldman and Nash are just telling the truth. The only problem is, that Goldman is mean and doesn't like Elvis. But if you read carefully (and if you know, that he mixes up the facts all the way through his books) he discribes Elvis persona quite well. He may be a nasty :cursing: , but he still hits the point.
I disagree with you , Elvis improved as a singer every year he sang. He never told anyone "I need to be the best guitar player in the world" or "I need to be the best piano player in the world" I have never understood that chain of thinking. If somewhere along the way he had aspired to be those things then I would agree, but he did not. He wanted to sing-he did not go into Sun records and say I want to make an instrumental for my mama. He had about a 3 octave voice at the end of his life-he did not have 3 octaves in 53.
Now he did aspire to be a serious actor and he did improve as an actor(there are about 5 or 6 very great performances he gave over his 33 films) He had a good flair for comedy. But as an actor he should have demanded the roles he wanted, not took what the Col. lined up(especiallyafter 65)
I disagree about Goldman, his main source for the book, Lamar Fike, has had an ax to grind since Elvis died. He was, by many accounts Elvis's main whipping boy and his paybacks have come ever since Elvis died. Goldman hated rock, and how you write" objectively " about rocks greatest single performer and hate rock- is beyond me. If you do not understand what makes rock music, you can not understand the people who make it. He was a hatchet man, and Lamar, who feels so superior that he outlived Elvis(IMO), gave him a hand made hatchet sharpened by his own tongue(also IMO)
Yes, I totally agree with you KPM.
Elvis didn't need to prove himself as a musician - he was a musician for the style that he adopted and produced throughout his Twenty-three year cultural boom.
I don't understand when people like Orwell1976 and the dead Goldman claim that Elvis wasn't clever - who and what defines the term 'clever' anyway...are you clever if you were born in London or studied at Oxford, are you clever if you attend work in New York or Washington...how about are you clever if you holiday in the South of France every year...sorry, Orwell and the dead Goldman, I don't understand...maybe I'm not clever...but, then again...
I would hazard a guess to say that Elvis was very clever in a recording studio and a soundstage plus a live concert stage...maybe Elvis wasn't just as very clever when it came to writing his own material...I think Elvis must have been very clever to write a letter to instigate a meeting with the President at the White House on the same day and then ask The President for extra gifts for his friends and their wives!!
Talent, Charm, Wit - who needs to go to University.
Clever eh?
I think Elvis knew he lacked formal education and thats one of the reasons he read so much and on varied subjects. He liked Monty Python, you have to be a little clever to get their humor. The whole did not learn to play better is not what Elvis was about. First and foremost he was a singer. Dylan said his voice was his instrument. Why people downplay just plain singing is funny to me. Any singer who gets better at singing has to sing as often as a guitar player practices in order toget better. Elvis loved to sing which is why he got better. If he had loved to play, it would have mattered to him-I just don't think it did. If he had not got better as a vocalist and expanded into virtually all kinds of music -that would have mattered to him and us.
joanne
11-02-2005, 07:30 AM
I disagree with you , Elvis improved as a singer every year he sang. He never told anyone "I need to be the best guitar player in the world" or "I need to be the best piano player in the world" I have never understood that chain of thinking. If somewhere along the way he had aspired to be those things then I would agree, but he did not. He wanted to sing-he did not go into Sun records and say I want to make an instrumental for my mama. He had about a 3 octave voice at the end of his life-he did not have 3 octaves in 53.
Now he did aspire to be a serious actor and he did improve as an actor(there are about 5 or 6 very great performances he gave over his 33 films) He had a good flair for comedy. But as an actor he should have demanded the roles he wanted, not took what the Col. lined up(especiallyafter 65)
I disagree about Goldman, his main source for the book, Lamar Fike, has had an ax to grind since Elvis died. He was, by many accounts Elvis's main whipping boy and his paybacks have come ever since Elvis died. Goldman hated rock, and how you write" objectively " about rocks greatest single performer and hate rock- is beyond me. If you do not understand what makes rock music, you can not understand the people who make it. He was a hatchet man, and Lamar, who feels so superior that he outlived Elvis(IMO), gave him a hand made hatchet sharpened by his own tongue(also IMO)I agree he did improve every year he sang and his voice got better and better and thats why the seventies are my favourite period of Elvis`s career. The songs and the voice were the best ever.
He was also a very intelligent and deep man.
Goldman was scum and he set out to destroy Elvis in his book and by all accounts he did the same to John Lennon. He certainly did not understand Elvis`s personality one bit. JD Sumner said that he had twisted his words and made a lie out of them. I cannot comment about Alanna Nash because I haven`t read her books yet.
orwell1976
11-03-2005, 09:25 AM
I never said, that Elvis never improved. He did. But he never improved himself. The improvement just happend to him, because he sang for several years and he tought himself some vocal tricks (or copied them from other singers). But Elvis never tried to learn more then he already knew. He never tried to figure out what his manager was really doing and how other artistst got managed. He never improved as a human being. He was like a big kid in a candy store and got tired of it. His whole life was a little bit too much for his brain. BUT: I am a fan of Elvis, have a lot of records, cds and dvds because I think there couldn't been a better entertainer then Elvis and until now I heard nobody who sang with his emotions, he really felt his music. That man had soul. But he was still some kind of stupid hillbilly (as Goldman put it).
0349054
11-03-2005, 10:31 AM
I never said, that Elvis never improved. He did. But he never improved himself. The improvement just happend to him, because he sang for several years and he tought himself some vocal tricks (or copied them from other singers). But Elvis never tried to learn more then he already knew. He never tried to figure out what his manager was really doing and how other artistst got managed. He never improved as a human being. He was like a big kid in a candy store and got tired of it. His whole life was a little bit too much for his brain. BUT: I am a fan of Elvis, have a lot of records, cds and dvds because I think there couldn't been a better entertainer then Elvis and until now I heard nobody who sang with his emotions, he really felt his music. That man had soul. But he was still some kind of stupid hillbilly (as Goldman put it).
Stupid Hillbilly's as you so aptly put it, don't become the greatest selling artists of all time.
Orwell, you have now answered my question in my second post of this thread.
We all have opinions of some sort - here's mine:
You conform to Goldman's type of bigotry - you are a strange fan, Orwell...very mixed-up.
I would probably hazard a guess to say that Goldman's piece of trash is the only Elvis-related print that you have read or it is possibly the one you have read most times or most of compared to your other Elvis books...And, you probably use it for reference because of this reaction to Goldman's literary tactics...
Disturbingly Interesting.
Where are you from, Orwell?...Do you study?...University?...late-teens or mid-20's?...Apart from Elvis being a "Stupid Hillbilly" (your words), do you know a number of people from the Southern Regions of the USA?...Do you find them offensive?...
I think in order to go where Elvis went in his life, you could not still be the same guy from Tupelo- you would have to progress as a human being. Thats such a strange comment?
Many entertainers have been swindled over the years by managers they trusted! Are they all non progressive humans.
Sean Connery on Johnny Carson explained how he thought he was worth several million dollars in the late 70s only to find out his manager had stolen him blind and was broke. WIllie Nelson was into the IRS for millions in the 80s -because his business manager had filed false Tax returns and assured him all was correct. Jerry Lee Lewis same story. The list could go on and on. Would you feel they should become accountants in order to progress as humans? Maybe just not be so trusting is the proper course.
Goldman did not like Elvis because he did not understand him, and was jealous of his mass appeal. He felt rock was not music by any artist or band. He loved jazz.(funny Elvis hated jazz) He did not understand how someone, that HE considered talentless could get to the top of anything. So the absolutely hate
filled book was his assault not just on Elvis but rock. The slant was not just slight it was 180 degrees.
Also the assertion that improvement just happened in his singing by learning a few vocal tricks is absurd. I do not know if you have ever sang for a living or hobby. I have in the 70s with a typical garage band and I can tell you to learn a song well it takes a lot of work and effort and practice. To expand your voice to greater depth and technique is not something that just happens.
The fact that you feel he did not grow the way"you wanted or Goldman wanted"
does not mean he did not have growth as a person and artist.
HE could not meet Presidents, and heads of countrys over the years and be the hillbilly you suggest. He dealt with directors, fellow actors, media people over the years and not many considered him still" just a hillbilly" Could he have done more to progress sure-so could I-so could you- so could everybody. I do think he liked to be a big kid, somebody once said never lose the child in you, because if you do life becomes boring. Amen.
joanne
11-03-2005, 06:13 PM
I never said, that Elvis never improved. He did. But he never improved himself. The improvement just happend to him, because he sang for several years and he tought himself some vocal tricks (or copied them from other singers). But Elvis never tried to learn more then he already knew. He never tried to figure out what his manager was really doing and how other artistst got managed. He never improved as a human being. He was like a big kid in a candy store and got tired of it. His whole life was a little bit too much for his brain. BUT: I am a fan of Elvis, have a lot of records, cds and dvds because I think there couldn't been a better entertainer then Elvis and until now I heard nobody who sang with his emotions, he really felt his music. That man had soul. But he was still some kind of stupid hillbilly (as Goldman put it).Copied from other singers are you for real?
To say that Elvis never improved as a human being is very disrepectful and you are not a fan to call him a stupid hillbilly. He was that stupid he invented Rock N Roll.
orwell1976
11-04-2005, 05:33 AM
The "Stupid Hillbilly" thing means the image of people living in the southern regions of the usa, not the real people. And to me Elvis' personality came close to that image. But as I said before, I admire Elvis' ability to perform a song and to entertain the crowd. That has nothing to do with the abilities of his brain. I am a fan of his music, not of his thoughts and opinions. Elvis was dumb enough to let everybody take advantage of him. He got fooled all through his life. But this has nothing to do with his voice and his style of singing. And that's what you hear on his records. They sold (and still sell) in large numbers. So you see, even a complete ***** can sell tons and tons of records. At least, when Mr. Parker is around.
orwell1976
11-04-2005, 05:35 AM
Copied from other singers are you for real?
To say that Elvis never improved as a human being is very disrepectful and you are not a fan to call him a stupid hillbilly. He was that stupid he invented Rock N Roll.
Elvis did copy from other singers, but he did it perfectly. And Elvis did not invent Rock'n Roll! He "just" sang it that great.
joanne
11-04-2005, 07:08 AM
Elvis did copy from other singers, but he did it perfectly. And Elvis did not invent Rock'n Roll! He "just" sang it that great.Go back to the history books son. How old are you?
0349054
11-04-2005, 08:31 AM
The "Stupid Hillbilly" thing means the image of people living in the southern regions of the usa, not the real people. And to me Elvis' personality came close to that image. But as I said before, I admire Elvis' ability to perform a song and to entertain the crowd. That has nothing to do with the abilities of his brain. I am a fan of his music, not of his thoughts and opinions. Elvis was dumb enough to let everybody take advantage of him. He got fooled all through his life. But this has nothing to do with his voice and his style of singing. And that's what you hear on his records. They sold (and still sell) in large numbers. So you see, even a complete ***** can sell tons and tons of records. At least, when Mr. Parker is around.
Your entitled to your opinion. As you never met Elvis and seem to not know much about his intellectual capabilities I would think it quite naive for you to make such bold statements. I can only presume you enjoyed Alberts book on John Lennon as well?
Just out of curiosity what other Elvis books have you read and do you form opinions on peoples intelligence level from authors who didn't know the person at hand?
I can tell you one thing Elvis had in abundance... respect.
joanne
11-04-2005, 11:41 AM
You have not answered how old you are because I have a feeling you are very young.
joanne
11-04-2005, 11:42 AM
The "Stupid Hillbilly" thing means the image of people living in the southern regions of the usa, not the real people. And to me Elvis' personality came close to that image. But as I said before, I admire Elvis' ability to perform a song and to entertain the crowd. That has nothing to do with the abilities of his brain. I am a fan of his music, not of his thoughts and opinions. Elvis was dumb enough to let everybody take advantage of him. He got fooled all through his life. But this has nothing to do with his voice and his style of singing. And that's what you hear on his records. They sold (and still sell) in large numbers. So you see, even a complete ***** can sell tons and tons of records. At least, when Mr. Parker is around.So are you saying Elvis is a complete *****?
The "Stupid Hillbilly" thing means the image of people living in the southern regions of the usa, not the real people. And to me Elvis' personality came close to that image. But as I said before, I admire Elvis' ability to perform a song and to entertain the crowd. That has nothing to do with the abilities of his brain. I am a fan of his music, not of his thoughts and opinions. Elvis was dumb enough to let everybody take advantage of him. He got fooled all through his life. But this has nothing to do with his voice and his style of singing. And that's what you hear on his records. They sold (and still sell) in large numbers. So you see, even a complete ***** can sell tons and tons of records. At least, when Mr. Parker is around.
I am beginning to suspect you are not an Elvis fan at all. To call anyone a complete ***** is a pretty broad statement. You seem to have a dim view of people whom you obviously know little about. Your choice of adjectives for people of the south is right out of a bad white trash novel. You are stereotyping Elvis as did Goldman. You are doing what many do, you are saying I have a special ability to climb into the head and brain of someone I never met, and I can tell you EXACTLY his level of understanding and logic. Its funny but you must be psychic. You are 17.
You also seem to subscribe to the Goldman theory of the lowest descriptive process. Instead of saying Elvis, in some ways, did not mature in certain aspects of life and career you call him a complete *****. He was not a man from the south-but a stupid hillbilly.
The Beatles were swindled into selling their own songs, most of there best material in the 60s. They were also taken advantage of with their Apple company by numerous inventors, artists, and business men. ***** low class Liverpoolians,
is how you would probably describe them. Micheal Jackson now owns a huge portion of the Beatles catalogue. I would say they were taken advantage of.
I am wondering if your real name is Scott. I met a young man in a Beatles chat site who hated Elvis and said he was going to go to an Elvis site and aggravate them. Your "stupid hillbilly" was a comment he made there. He was not liked even by the Beatle fans because of his lack of mannners.
joanne
11-04-2005, 12:46 PM
I am beginning to suspect you are not an Elvis fan at all. To call anyone a complete ***** is a pretty broad statement. You seem to have a dim view of people whom you obviously know little about. Your choice of adjectives for people of the south is right out of a bad white trash novel. You are stereotyping Elvis as did Goldman. You are doing what many do, you are saying I have a special ability to climb into the head and brain of someone I never met, and I can tell you EXACTLY his level of understanding and logic. Its funny but you must be psychic. You are 17.
You also seem to subscribe to the Goldman theory of the lowest descriptive process. Instead of saying Elvis, in some ways, did not mature in certain aspects of life and career you call him a complete *****. He was not a man from the south-but a stupid hillbilly.
The Beatles were swindled into selling their own songs, most of there best material in the 60s. They were also taken advantage of with their Apple company by numerous inventors, artists, and business men. ***** low class Liverpoolians,
is how you would probably describe them. Micheal Jackson now owns a huge portion of the Beatles catalogue. I would say they were taken advantage of.
I am wondering if your real name is Scott. I met a young man in a Beatles chat site who hated Elvis and said he was going to go to an Elvis site and aggravate them. Your "stupid hillbilly" was a comment he made there. He was not liked even by the Beatle fans because of his lack of mannners.Well said.
Come back lad when you`ve grown up you`re the *****.
Guys,
Let me just refer to my last post on this thread were I stated that this bigot's views as "Interestingly Disturbing", just let me re-phrase that to "Uninterestingly Disturbed" because this guy's on the wind-up...probably did the same kind of thing or doing the same kind of thing through University.
He has no respect for Elvis, with Elvis being born a Southerner.
Yes, this guy's a T W * T.
Infact, I would say it's probably "THE SON OF GOLDMAN"!!!!!!!!!!!...Yes, it's Alby Junior!
Can you imagine that guys?!
Guys,
Sorry I typed a * between the T W T on that last post there...it should be the letter 'A'.
Cheers,
NEA.
Elvis did copy from other singers, but he did it perfectly. And Elvis did not invent Rock'n Roll! He "just" sang it that great.
Elvis began to record in 53 and had been working on his singing style for 3 or 4 years before that.Thats All Right out in 54. Chuck Berry first hit in 55. Little Richard-55 Bo Diddily-55. He had never heard of them until 55. Jerry Lee Lewis out in 56. He met Jerrry Lee AFTER he had left Sun to RCA.
Elvis never claimed to have invented rock, but he was the one who sold it. He was the one who made it world wide. He had many influences Dean Martin, Eddy Arnold, Bing Crosby, Mario Lanza, Ernest Tubb, BB King, Rufus Thomas, Roy Hamilton, The Blackwood Brothers, The Statesman Quartet, Hovie Lister. Now out of this group-name the rock-in-roll singer Elvis copied???? None are rock singers, because there was no rock! Middle of the road-Deano! Country- Eddy Arnold!
Rufus Thomas, Roy Hamilton-R&B! Blackwoods Brothers-Gospel! Now add all these up and shake your hips-Rock-n-Roll!!!!!
Now let me also say that everyone of the above named artists also had influences on there styles, no artist who creates is not without a starting point and a reason for wanting to do what they do. Any artist today even has there influences which helped develope their style. But the big bang is ELVIS!!! Fact
orwell1976
11-05-2005, 04:13 AM
Your entitled to your opinion. As you never met Elvis and seem to not know much about his intellectual capabilities I would think it quite naive for you to make such bold statements. I can only presume you enjoyed Alberts book on John Lennon as well?
Just out of curiosity what other Elvis books have you read and do you form opinions on peoples intelligence level from authors who didn't know the person at hand?
I can tell you one thing Elvis had in abundance... respect.
Interesting, when did you meet the king to know how perfect he was?
joanne
11-05-2005, 05:31 AM
I think the best thing is for everyone to ignore this stupid hillbilly.
0349054
11-05-2005, 09:54 AM
Interesting, when did you meet the king to know how perfect he was?
It was just after you met him and decided he was a stupid hillbilly.
LOL...Nice One, 0349054!!
Orwell is "17"and seems to have an uncanny ability at unraveling lifes mysteries. (wink-wink)
joanne
11-05-2005, 05:29 PM
It was just after you met him and decided he was a stupid hillbilly.GREAT ANSWER!
orwell1976
11-06-2005, 08:45 AM
Go back to the history books son. How old are you?
I'm just too clever to think someone was perfect just because I like his music. You just read the wrong books, mother!
0349054
11-06-2005, 10:43 AM
No one said Elvis was perfect. But since your so clever, what other works of literary genius have you studied then apart from Goldmans trash?
NEA & joanne - Thanks, but im tiring of this thread now, how about ye?
joanne
11-06-2005, 01:06 PM
I feel the same I prefer intelligent conversation. :D
joanne
11-06-2005, 01:07 PM
Just ignore him and he might crawl back under his rock.
0349054
11-07-2005, 08:43 AM
Probabaly curled up in bed with Alberts other books now!
Guys,
This is getting a bit boring yes, I agree - I don't think Orville...er...sorry, Orwell, is clever at all - he doesn't appear to have any smart 'student-type' answers for himself! And, how can 0349054 be his Mother?!
He probably gets his rocks off to his dead Father's books!
Oh, I know, I'm so childish sometimes - hush my mouth...LOL
End of.
joanne
11-07-2005, 10:49 AM
Guys,
This is getting a bit boring yes, I agree - I don't think Orville...er...sorry, Orwell, is clever at all - he doesn't appear to have any smart 'student-type' answers for himself! And, how can 0349054 be his Mother?!
He probably gets his rocks off to his dead Father's books!
Oh, I know, I'm so childish sometimes - hush my mouth...LOL
End of.You make me laugh!:D
I think he was referring to me as mother because I called him son. :D
He could be Orville the duck thinking about it.
I WISH I COULD FLY... :D
Hey Jo,
You could be right - Orville the duck he is...he quacks on about a load of nonsense which possibly stems from the fact that he is green with envy about Elvis and the way of Southern hospitality.
Jeez, that son of yours, Jo...that son of yours...LOL
NEA.
Cryogenic
11-07-2005, 03:38 PM
Back to the original question...
Nash and Goldman - same breed? YES.
Although I've not read either "Elvis" by Goldman or "The Colonel" by Nash, I have read various extracts and much discourse ABOUT them both. I can only reach one conclusion: at best, both authors are disingenous; at worst, they come from the gutter. In some ways, Goldman may be more tolerable simply because his vitriol is constant and overt; there's no doubt he hated the people he wrote about. By contrast, Nash dressed her writing on the Colonel up as honest journalism. In both cases, their two books were essentially billed as firsts of their kind; the "definitive" word on Elvis and The Colonel. It's enough to make you hurl.
Nash might have been able to keep up the image of sincere journalist - but now she's exposed her true colours and ruined her credibility. The claims in this Playboy article are spurious and insulting; they lack any sense of taste, tact or truth. I ask you: If Guralnick was the one peddling this crap, would you continue to see him the same way? I certainly wouldn't. Well done, Nash: you're officially a pariah, a liar, a shark, a snake, a *****, a bum. You can NEVER AGAIN be trusted in the Elvis World. Be gone!
P.S. Anyone that thinks Elvis was a "dumb hillbilly" needs to seriously re-consider their fandom and the way they express opinions and use epithets on the Internet.
0349054
11-07-2005, 04:56 PM
Back to the original question...
Nash and Goldman - same breed? YES.
Although I've not read either "Elvis" by Goldman or "The Colonel" by Nash, I have read various extracts and much discourse ABOUT them both. I can only reach one conclusion: at best, both authors are disingenous; at worst, they come from the gutter. In some ways, Goldman may be more tolerable simply because his vitriol is constant and overt; there's no doubt he hated the people he wrote about. By contrast, Nash dressed her writing on the Colonel up as honest journalism. In both cases, their two books were essentially billed as firsts of their kind; the "definitive" word on Elvis and The Colonel. It's enough to make you hurl.
Nash might have been able to keep up the image of sincere journalist - but now she's exposed her true colours and ruined her credibility. The claims in this Playboy article are spurious and insulting; they lack any sense of taste, tact or truth. I ask you: If Guralnick was the one peddling this crap, would you continue to see him the same way? I certainly wouldn't. Well done, Nash: you're officially a pariah, a liar, a shark, a snake, a *****, a bum. You can NEVER AGAIN be trusted in the Elvis World. Be gone!
P.S. Anyone that thinks Elvis was a "dumb hillbilly" needs to seriously re-consider their fandom and the way they express opinions and use epithets on the Internet.
I like Nash as an author. The Colonel Book is probabaly the best researched Elvis book written in a long long time. Don't trust Guarnlick, he's in bed with EPE. Goldman is just pure trash. But Cryo, you should read The Colonel and Revelations - 2 of the best Elvis books in my opinion.
Well Guys,
Just to summarize my thread - Nash has sold out, Orville's a T W * T, and Joanne's had a good laugh.
And, for those fans that were smiling on that fateful day just over a decade ago - Goldman is still dead.
Jeez, I need to get this computer keyboard fixed - whenever I try to type an 'A' I keep getting this asterix!
NEA.
orwell1976
11-08-2005, 05:03 AM
....you're so funny....
:lmfao:
joanne
11-08-2005, 08:50 AM
....you're so funny....
:lmfao:quack quack :D
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.0 Copyright © 2013 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.