Elvis loses out on yet another Grammy

[Albert]

Elvis don't need a Grammy. Getting one now is like getting mustard after a dinner. It's just to late and quite meaningless.

He's the one that started it all, the first true worldwide superstar, the Icon of showbusiness. He was the right person at the right time with the right people. If that means that it was too soon to get 6 Grammy awards on one night, so be it. Who doesn't get a Grammy nowadays anyway?

[ThreeCornPatches]

Sadley another reason probably was because paul mcartney was able to reseive the grammy, and elvis didnt thats how it usually goes here in holland to, I admire paul mcCartney, but i think elvis deserved it to, would have been great 35 years after he left us.

[King Of The Whole World]

Elvis don't need a Grammy. Getting one now is like getting mustard after a dinner. It's just to late and quite meaningless.

He's the one that started it all, the first true worldwide superstar, the Icon of showbusiness. He was the right person at the right time with the right people. If that means that it was too soon to get 6 Grammy awards on one night, so be it. Who doesn't get a Grammy nowadays anyway?

I know it seems like there are a ton of useless categories for Grammy’s and other award shows. I think in today’s world everybody has to win something.

Sadley another reason probably was because paul mcartney was able to reseive the grammy, and elvis didnt thats how it usually goes here in holland to, I admire paul mcCartney, but i think elvis deserved it to, would have been great 35 years after he left us.

I think Paul didn't except the award either, so I don’t think that was the reason he won. I think I read he was doing something else and somebody received the award for him.

[debtdbruno]

It grates though......I heard one presenter when talking about Adele.....'even Elvis only got 3 Grammy's in his life'.......Grrrrrrr

He's got to be the most underrated artist ever..............

[Jungleroom76]

Too many excellent points here to highlight, but I LOVE seeing such a spirited discussion on Elvis' Grammy successes and failures!!

I do have to give kudos though to Raised On Rock for all of the research he did with presenting Elvis' nominations, who he lost out to, etc. Very well done my friend!!

TCB!
Mike

[KPM]

It is true that Parker segegated Elvis, there are pro and contras about it. A somekind of resentment towards Elvis from importan power groups in the entertainment industry and the media (or missinterpretations abour who he really was), that are still manifest today, could certainly be included in the contras about that direction Parker choosed.

But also, it is true that Elvis in fact disliked to socialise outside his inner circle, (he don't even liked to attend to the premiers of his own films), and he consider the Hollywood crowd mostly a bunch of phoneys, and he certainly was not at all an *** kisser who played the game once in a while to get something for himself. He always kept to himself as much as posible, and as much we can blame to Parker, about his seclution, on a big 80% Elvis liked it that way, so...

McCartney on the other way has always been the king of politics in the entertainment social world, and he is good at it. Elvis, regardless of Parker directions,, always seemed to just run away and hide from any social duties, except for charities, and even then he managed to go secretly on that if he could.

Anyway, it would have been great if Elvis got the award, but really? Grammys are a bunch of Monkey Bussiness and not about art. Elvis gospels awards came because he was selling gospel music wordwide and as if it was pop music, when gospel music was on a dead end in terms of sales. As I said: Blue Hawaii nominaded? please, it only meant: yes, that shit really made money. The fact that in '59 records like Fool Such as I and Big Hunk A Love where nominated when it was obvious, rock music was not welcome in the hall, Grammys made the statment clear: they are here because those singles out sold basicaly everything, but they won't get the price as... we don't like a hilbilly, over here. When it became obvious that rock music was big money, it was here to stay, and rather performed by brits than by rednecks, it got its own grammys nominations.

The Life Time award meant a little more, but it was still about $$$, it recognized that it was because of Elvis that teenage oriented music and rock and roll became the biggest income in the industry, that he, not as an artist but as a social phenomenon, revolutionized the way music is on the market. And that with his comeback, then they knew you can still milk to death a pop artist beyond 30 years old in that area, as before Elvis a career in rock music ended at 30 years old, now at 35 he was again making big big numbers on many peoples bank acounts world wide.

So again, I don't think Grammys have been unfair to Elvis, they are simply not awarding what we think they do.
If it was about art, historic relevance, quality, we do know "Man With The Big Beat" did was a superior product than "Band on The Run (reissue)". But in terms of $$$ and opening directions to make even more $$$, plus TV ratings, plus Macca playing his cards (and he has the right to, I'm not bashing McCartney I like him), well the Elvis box set pales in that area, so the Grammy goes to...

Maybe ten years from now, when the FTD label ends his road, much more Elvis music gets wisely packed on the Legacy Label, and so on, he might get, and he surely deserves it as nobody matches him in thar area, the: Afterlive Time Achievment Grammy Award, as nobody else has gave so much money to the industry being dead.

That certainly is true after the early 60s-after the Parker rules had become "the Norm" but take the early years of Hollywood, Elvis may not have wanted to sit with Hal Wallis and eat a formal dinner-but he did like other stars and he felt comfortable with meeting and socializing with them....Sammy Davis, Natalee Wood, Dolores Hart, Nick Addams, are some of the stars who he did feel good around-
but my point goes to the crux of Elvis being segregated by Parkers idea of managing Elvis......if you keep a flower, or tree, in a box-it never blooms it never grows.....same with people..........how could Elvis become accustomed to other people, other talent, other ideas if the box is always closed and kept closed.
IMO we see the result from how Elvis never totally grew beyond the 20 year old he was in 1955-except his frustrations grew, his lack of desire to create grew......... every year he was boxed.
Now we all know how Elvis shined when he was given the chance to collaborate with really talented people he met every expectation they had and more...but that interaction was the spark-the chance to listen to someone outside that Parker drawn box......people who said with no reservations or preconditions........."Lets try this.....lets change the format......lets take this beyond what is expected or planned"
Everytime he was given this chance-he succeeded and had confidence to push beyone the norm........and by the same token everytime he was boxed for extended periods he became more resigned and bored with the idea:
"this is how it is, this is the norm," and growth stopped...sometimes actually slipped backward.
I know Elvis should have seen this himself, I know Elvis should have demanded more freedom, more sayso but he always first and foremost was the entertainer-and he relied on Parker to guide the career...
I am certain everytime Parker spoke to Elvis about the reasoning behind the direction of the career (segregation)-it sounded as logical and sensible as ice cream on Apple Pie......and Elvis ate it up.
I tell you the more I read each year about Parkers life....the more I see how he was as manipulative and controling as any person I have read about.
Eddy Arnold, Hank Snow, Tommy Sands all had trouble with Parker and his manipulations.
Sands says his mom did not trust Parker he wanted control over virtually every aspect of Sands life (personal and public) and she put her foot down before Parker could get too much legal control over Sands career.
Snow was cheated by a smiling Parker after Parker had agreed to give Snow some percentage of the management contract over Elvis (which Snow helped lay groundwork for), Snow kept waiting to see income rolling in from that contract and finally confronted Parker who smiled and showed him the contract which Elvis and parents had signed with nothing about Snows involvement in it.
Arnold fired Parker after somehow discovering that all moneys due him were not coming into his accounts and he felt Parker was not honestly managing him.
Bob Neal was pushed and pressured by Parker until he finally was systematically forced out.
Elvis should have fired him in 1965-but Parker had control and had laid the groundwork to keep Elvis where he wanted him.
That is my honest conclusion.

[KPM]

Here is an excellent article about Col. Parker and his dark side which permeated his entire public life
it gives observations by people closely associated with Parker and Elvis which paint a very telling portrait of Parker and how he operated....from his hidden real identity to the conclusion by the probate judge handling Elvis's estate that he had worked in a self serving way in his management of Elvis and had not always acted in a manner to benefit his client:
http://www.elvisinfonet.com/spotligh...nelparker.html

[Raised on Rock]

That certainly is true after the early 60s-after the Parker rules had become "the Norm" but take the early years of Hollywood, Elvis may not have wanted to sit with Hal Wallis and eat a formal dinner-but he did like other stars and he felt comfortable with meeting and socializing with them....Sammy Davis, Natalee Wood, Dolores Hart, Nick Addams, are some of the stars who he did feel good around-
but my point goes to the crux of Elvis being segregated by Parkers idea of managing Elvis......if you keep a flower, or tree, in a box-it never blooms it never grows.....same with people..........how could Elvis become accustomed to other people, other talent, other ideas if the box is always closed and kept closed.
IMO we see the result from how Elvis never totally grew beyond the 20 year old he was in 1955-except his frustrations grew, his lack of desire to create grew......... every year he was boxed.
Now we all know how Elvis shined when he was given the chance to collaborate with really talented people he met every expectation they had and more...but that interaction was the spark-the chance to listen to someone outside that Parker drawn box......people who said with no reservations or preconditions........."Lets try this.....lets change the format......lets take this beyond what is expected or planned"
Everytime he was given this chance-he succeeded and had confidence to push beyone the norm........and by the same token everytime he was boxed for extended periods he became more resigned and bored with the idea:
"this is how it is, this is the norm," and growth stopped...sometimes actually slipped backward.
I know Elvis should have seen this himself, I know Elvis should have demanded more freedom, more sayso but he always first and foremost was the entertainer-and he relied on Parker to guide the career...
I am certain everytime Parker spoke to Elvis about the reasoning behind the direction of the career (segregation)-it sounded as logical and sensible as ice cream on Apple Pie......and Elvis ate it up.
I tell you the more I read each year about Parkers life....the more I see how he was as manipulative and controling as any person I have read about.
Eddy Arnold, Hank Snow, Tommy Sands all had trouble with Parker and his manipulations.
Sands says his mom did not trust Parker he wanted control over virtually every aspect of Sands life (personal and public) and she put her foot down before Parker could get too much legal control over Sands career.
Snow was cheated by a smiling Parker after Parker had agreed to give Snow some percentage of the management contract over Elvis (which Snow helped lay groundwork for), Snow kept waiting to see income rolling in from that contract and finally confronted Parker who smiled and showed him the contract which Elvis and parents had signed with nothing about Snows involvement in it.
Arnold fired Parker after somehow discovering that all moneys due him were not coming into his accounts and he felt Parker was not honestly managing him.
Bob Neal was pushed and pressured by Parker until he finally was systematically forced out.
Elvis should have fired him in 1965-but Parker had control and had laid the groundwork to keep Elvis where he wanted him.
That is my honest conclusion.

Agree on all you points! I'm not saying Parker was 100%, he was genious until '61, then he simply lost the plot. The mid 60's where a transition perdiod between the old hollywood ways, and the modern hollywood enterprises we know today (same for the music industry), it was obvious that Parker ideas suddenly became old hat by '65, ironically, Elvis and Parkers ideas back in the 50's paved the way for that transition. What Elvis needed was another manager, that as back as in '63 when Elvis clearly saw something was not going as he wished.

Yes everytime new blood was involved and making Parker ideas aside, people like Jerry Leiber & Mike Stoller in the 50's, Steve Binder, Chips Moman in the 60's, Marty Pasetta in 70's, even Felton Jarvis during the '66-'71 nashville period(before Jarvis himself also got stucked by Parkers politics), Elvis not only bringing out the best in himself but even in his personal life, gettin out of destructive habits and all. But Parker had to put and end to that each and everytime as there was danger Elvis realized he could do way better with someone else.

Probably the worst deal was the way he cut out Jerry Leiber and Mike Stoller as they not only went from writing music for Elvis to even produce Elvis records, but further, Elvis was so happy with their ideas that he started to ask for a lot of career advice from them, more than to Parker, they even started pitching ideas for Elvis acting career and Elvis just loved it! (the first part of '57, before they came to the scene, Elvis was a bit unhappy with the movies and the songs where given to him, kind of missing the good old days) so before Jerry and Mike got deeper in Elvis head, Parker simply cut them away, no matter how Elvis tried to bring them back during the early 60's, they simply refused to came back, as far as in '57 the story of Elvis frustrations was written. YES PARKER PUT ELVIS ON A BOX UNTIL HE DIED OF CREATIVE ASFIXIA. Yes Elvis not showing up to movie premiers, social events like the Grammys, 70's TV talking shows had also a lot to do with that for sure, and it is sickening, BUT not completely, there still was a little bit of wise in not to overexpose Elvis you had to admit, but, because of that also mixing with Parker need to control Elvis so he wont loose the goldmine, the cool and misterious Elvis image, went totally howard hughes, and that was not cool.

Yes I know Elvis was more open and social during the 50's, but he was a kid in a new land, then aside of Parker hands, and as his fame became too much for him, he kind of liked to remain among his close ones. Anyway, in latter days he hide from social events, but he did actually socialice with a lot of people privately and in his own territory, he hanged around with people like James Brown, Tom Jones, even Led Zepellin joined the Elvis party more than one time, recently we learned that even Alice Cooper got a taste of one of Elvis boots in a Karate demostration. Lots of people went to say hi backstage and hanged around a bit, George Harrison included, even Elton John in one of those backstage meetings ofered to write a song just for Elvis. I guess back in the 50's as a naive kid he thought everybody could be his friend and did take them home. By the 70's he kind of separated the all week going party in his vegas suit, from his private life in Graceland or LA. And yes he also knew, unfortunately, that he had to say no to a lot of things as he (and that its awful) had well learned to always answer: well I don't know if Col. Parker would allow that.

[Raised on Rock]

Here is an excellent article about Col. Parker and his dark side which permeated his entire public life
it gives observations by people closely associated with Parker and Elvis which paint a very telling portrait of Parker and how he operated....from his hidden real identity to the conclusion by the probate judge handling Elvis's estate that he had worked in a self serving way in his management of Elvis and had not always acted in a manner to benefit his client:
http://www.elvisinfonet.com/spotligh...nelparker.html

Yes, I think this line hits the issue: There was no way for Elvis to know that after this fifties phase he had actually outgrown his manager.

[Kajo]

No comment.It makes me just sick!

[Erhan]

Mr. Marty Lacker said that They ask colonel could Elvis sing a song for Grammy show Colonel ask them money for it (something like that)