Instead of making it easy to get new creative input into Elvis's career through business deals-Parker worked at keeping those possibilites to a minimum. If he felt this was protecting Elvis-he was 100% wrong IMO It did nothing but show Elvis every time he wanted to do something-there would be some sort of tension and a level of disagreement with Parker.
Straight acting jobs-Parker against them. Songs from outside Elvis and the Col. publishing companys-Parkers was a major roadblock. When a great recording session happened in 67 with Jerry Reed involved-a major argument breaks out as the squeeze was tried on Reed for a piece of his song. The session was ruined on a creative level because of the bad taste the blow-up left in everyones mouth.
68 Special would have been 20 Christmas songs if Steve Bender had not been a strong force who helped Elvis see what the special could be as opposed to what Parker wanted. Parker once again added the tension by not immediatly going along with the new plan-no new song for the end. But the sense Bender made to Elvis gave him the confidence to say,
"No Col. this is what I want to do"
Parker could not have liked ELvis listening to someone else-because that is a threat to Parkers power.
People like Bender are the ones Parker wanted to keep Elvis from being involved with. IMO
What if Bender had suggested to Elvis
"listen Parker is behind the times in his managing of your career. You are being wasted, you need a total new direction in your management to allow creative people -at whatever cost to interact with you"
That IMO is why Parker did not want creative, intelligent people too close to Elvis.
Elvis was his own man-but he did need to be spurred, to gain confidence in new directions, new creative efforts-Parker did not work to nurture that idea- he hindered that idea.IMO
That's what I am thinking as well. Here's a short interview with Ed Bonja
talking about Parker. Although Bonja speaks pro-Parker, I think we can
perfectly see how manipulating Parker was.