Jump to content

Talk:Elvis Presley/Archive 18

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 15Archive 16Archive 17Archive 18Archive 19Archive 20→Archive 25

This is an Archive. Do not edit it. Thank you.


Bade collecting/Nixon

Elvis' extensive collection of police badges definitely deserves a mention in the section about Nixon. That section extensively quotes Guralnick, and yet Guralnick makes the argument in his book that just getting the elite federal narcotics badge was the real reason Elvis sought out a meeting with Nixon in the first place. He specifically ASKED Nixon for the badge; it was his idea. I don't see how you can tell the story about Elvis, Nixon, and the badge without mentioning that fact, and Elvis' almost obsessive hobby with collecting police badges.--24.107.35.146 04:28, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Some things...

Is not Wikipedia supposed to an encyclopedia? Encyclopedias as a rule print facts and figures and do not attempt to make judgments and form biased opinions by quoting, often out of context, only the most slanderous comments from many numerous publications. That is not what an encylcopedia is supposed to be about. It is quite obvious from looking up John Lennon's bio on this very same site that the rules as to what makes up an encyclopedia have been followed with regard to him. Why has no slander been allowed through on his bio while it has been allowed through here on Elvis Presley? That is biased. Albert Goldman stated John Lennon was homosexual. User:Suzulu

There is a substantial Wikipedia article on Goldman's book, The Lives of John Lennon. Onefortyone 13:09, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

The whole article on Elvis Presley has been edited due to slanderous abuse. It is noted that in the bio of John Lennon on this site, passages from Albert Goldman's derogatory biography have not been included. Yet Goldman's derogatory passages about Elvis were printed. Both Goldman's books about Elvis and Lennon have been proven incorrect by the people that knew them. User:Suzulu

You are wrong. While diehard Elvis fans may not like what Professor Goldman has to say, what he says is based on facts - mainly on interviews with primary sources, mostly Elvis's closest associates (bodyguards, handlers, friends and relatives) who lived and worked with him, were with him 24 hours a day, and knew him from childhood. Therefore, his book on Elvis is an important secondary source. Onefortyone 03:30, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

I can't be wrong because people who knew Elvis (with the exception of Dee Presley, who has been called a liar by Elvis' friends and family including Ann-Margret) have never said anything derogatory about Elvis in the years after Goldman published that book. Fans and people who knew both Elvis Presley and John Lennnon have stated that Albert Goldman's two books on those celebrities are wrong. Paul McCartney himself stated that Albert Goldman was a liar regarding John Lennon. Rolling Stone magazine states that 99% of what was said about Elvis in Goldman's book was totally unfounded. Albert Goldman detests rock'n'roll and has stated in interviews and other books about the rock'n'roll phenomenon that he believes rock 'n' roll singers are all latently homosexual and that the music itself is laced with homosexuality. User:Suzulu

As for Goldman's biography on John Lennon, several other sources confirm what is written in the book. For instance, in "The Lives of John Lennon" (2001) Albert Goldman claims that Lennon had homosexual relationships, including one with manager Brian Epstein. By the way, he was not the first author making such a claim. Goldman also claimed that Lennon solicited male prostitutes in Thailand. Roland Reiter's study, Screening the Beatles Myth includes a section entitled, "The Hours and Times: Was John Lennon gay?" See Roland Reiter, Screening the Beatles Myth: Movies, Documentaries, Spoofs and Cartoons (2005), p.183ff. In this book, the author discusses in detail the rumors concerning Lennon's secret homosexual relationship with his manager Epstein which were also the subject of Christopher Munch's movie, The Hours and Times. According to Gyeorgos Ceres Hatonn, "John Lennon was not only a homosexual drug addict--but a member of the Young Communist League of Liverpool, England." See Gyeorgos Ceres Hatonn, Heave-Up: Phase One (1994), p.133. Onefortyone 13:21, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

"...shows on June 19, in Omaha, Nebraska & 21 (in Rapid City, South Dakota) were recorded..."

It needs little editing... like putting "in Omaha, Nebraska" into ( ) or "in Rapid City, South Dakota" out of ( ).

Elvis' health needs more attention. He was very sick person, but here they repeats infinitely "drugs, fat, drugs, fat..." In addition of those which are already mentioned he had diabetes, anemia, problems with liver, high blood pressure, enlarged colon, constipation, Kathy has told about his genetically sick heart, which was twice the size on one side as it was on the other, and so on and so on...

Wikipedia made an attempt to slander Elvis Presley by including sections of Albert Goldman's book. If Albert Goldman is correct then John Lennon's friends family and fans must be reeling to find out from Goldman in "The Lives of John Lennon" that Lennon picked up male prostitutes in Thailand!!? and had an affair with Brian Epstein!

Significantly, Lennon's widow Yoko Ono threatened to sue for libel, claiming Goldman's book made her "briefly consider suicide", but never pursued any legal action. For more details on Goldman's controversial book on Lennon, see the Wikipedia article, The Lives of John Lennon. However, as far as I know, this book does not deal with Elvis Presley. Onefortyone 13:30, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

"Hilbilly" vs "Hillbilly"

Is it "The Hilbilly Cat" or "The Hillbilly Cat" right?

Aron or Aaron?

Sorry I too not wanting to tread on anyones toes (for the person who wrote this about Elvis) but I disagree with the "fact" *Presley's birth certificate uses the spelling Aron, but his estate has designated Aaron as the official spelling of his middle name. It is spelled Aron because of his twin brother that died at birth, Garon, so Elvis would always have a part of his brother with him.* In fact he was actually born Elvis Aaron Presley but he later changed it to be just Elvis Aron, he was initally called Elvis Aaron correct because his twin brother was Jesse Garon but as I have mentioned he later changed this to be the spelling of Aron (just one A).

His grave has the incorrect spelling on it also, as it is spelt Aaron.

Thank You.

FOLLOW UP: This may be true. However, in the documentary produced about his life, THIS IS ELVIS, Aron is the spelling used on Presley's duffel bag in the military sequences. This could only have occurred if he specified the spelling himself. In my opinion, Aron should be the correct spelling.

however. no one cares what his middle name was or what it was spelled like. elvis is alive so why don't you ask him?

--His birth-certificate is "Aron" not "Aaron". He changed it late in life to "Aaron" because it was the biblical spelling rather than the one he was born with--a common early 20th century practice was rhyming names (I have this in my own family), thus "Elvis Aron" and "Jesse Garon".

Everybody seems to be about "half-right" so far. Here's the direct quote on it from the FAQ of elvis's official graceland page.

http://www.elvis.com/elvisology/faq/faq.asp?qid=11 For those that don't read: Intended to be Aron, certificate said Aaron, he wanted it switched to Aaron for biblical purposes, Family respected his wishes for the tombstone.66.119.27.235 18:11, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

66.168.134.159 11:05, 28 April 2007 (UTC)I'm concerned about the first paragraph of the bio which states that Elvis's twin's name was Aaron, which is totally incorrect. The twin's name was Jesse (or Jessie, some conflict there, too) Garon Presley.

Why hasnt been nominated to FA?

I was quite shocked when I discovered that no one has even tried to nominate this article to be a FA (you are supposed to be able to see failed nominations on the TalkPage, right?).

I really don't know much about Elvis except that he sang a lot and women loved him.

But this article has it all, doesn't it? Lot's of info, but still relevant info... references, inline references, interesting info... you name it.

The only thing that I don't like is the heading "Girls! Girls! Girls!". I know that "Girls!" was a great part of Elvis life, but Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. Surely you're not saying we would find such a heading in a true encyclopedia.

"Girls! Girls! Girls!" is the title of an Elvis movie of 1962. It is here used as a heading. Onefortyone 01:04, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

So

  • nominate this article to become a FA, but first
  • change that heading

Just some thoughts (from a newb...).

81.170.138.232 19:11, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

done. Arniep 19:39, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
I'm afraid this article is nowhere near FA quality. The most glaring problems are the Trivia section and the Elvis Cult section. I would clean up those sections and then nominate the article for Good Article status. If it succeeds at attaining good article status, get a Peer Review and then consider nominating the article to be a Featured Article. Kaldari 20:35, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
I would agree on both points. I also think the article is too dependent on quotes which suggests original research and/or POV. The Elvis Cult section is a screed rather than an actual encyclopedic entry. Lochdale 20:57, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
The "Elvis cult" section is well sourced, as all passages are supported by several independent publications. The "Trivia section" is not well sourced and primarily includes fan stuff. Onefortyone 01:04, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
The "Elvis Cult" section is selectively sourced and consists of original research. It is fundamentally unencyclopedic. Lochdale 01:20, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
Personally, I think the article is oversized. People come here to know who the man was, and why he's encyclopedic. Not minute details like the address of Sun Studios, what he did on specific days, and specific fan reactions to minor events. Too much trivial garbage. 66.119.27.235 19:30, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

What happenned to The Elvis Cult section?

It should be its own page. Like Bob Marley.

Anyone? I'm all ears........81.170.138.232 21:51, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

See the discussion section above. It was a section that was riddled with POV and original research. Read more like a screed than an encyclopedic entry. Lochdale 22:01, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
I DID read that. But you never wrote that you had it removed! Please describe "Read more like a screed" means so I can try to fix it. I still think removing it was a little bit extreme. It was filled with facts, lots of it. Both about those who liked elvis and those who did not like him. 22:11, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
Lochdale frequently removes paragraphs he doesn't like. This is not acceptable, especially in view of the fact that the material is well sourced. Onefortyone 01:04, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
I think the problem with it is the fact that it is filled with POV and original research. The first issue is whether this needs to be in an encyclopedic entry. It's way too detailed and goes into what can best be described as the margins of Presley-study (if such a think exists). Is that really what an encyclopedia is for? Compare this article to the article on John Lennon for example to see the difference. The idea of an "Elvis Cult" is in and of itself POV. Reliance on papers published by idividuals and selective quotes from those papers skirts too close to POV and original research. For example, even the notion that Pat Boone was more popular than Presley based on some "poll" is fairly ludicrious given the massive disparity in record sales etc. Unless we start looking into a "conspiracy" in the music industy etc. etc. Does an encyclopedia really need to go into that sort of detail? Do we have to post any and every thought any may ever of had on the subject no matter how far-fetched or self-serving? Do various papers on gender-studies really belong in a general article about an entertainer? Nothing everything that mentions Presley's name is germane to the article Lochdale 22:19, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
Oh dear. I hope this won't escelate into a edit war. I have put the cult-section back into the article. But you are right. It has several problems in its current form. But I think we can fix these problems and turn it into a good part of this article. I have now tried to cut the section into several paragraphs instead of one big. Can you please check and see if the "grouping" is good (yes, my English sucks).81.170.138.232 22:29, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Who keeps removing the cult-section?

It should be its own page.

Oh God! Who keeps removing the cult-section? Can the person please atleast mention that she/he is doing it in the TalkPage? I put it back up but now someone has removed it once again. Atleast I STATE why I put it back and what I changed! Thankyou! 81.170.138.232 22:33, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Lochdale's primary aim on Wikipedia is constantly removing paragraphs. See his contribution history from the beginning. The best way is to reinstate all paragraphs he has removed. Onefortyone 01:04, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
Not sure why you aren't seeing my edit summaries as I am noting each time I move it! I think we should use the sandbox to edit this section. Personally, I think the entire section is a mess (and fundamentally unencylopedic) which is why I have removed it. Perhaps we could go through it in the sandbox? Lochdale 22:35, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
Sorry, but I'm a newb. I have no idea what edit summaries are and I really don't know what the sandbox is. I know I probably should have learned a few more things than just how to edit an article before I started to actually editing them. But I guess I wanted to get into the fun too quickly. Can you please just direct me to the edit summaries and the sandbox and I will cooperate! <^_^> 81.170.138.232 22:40, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
Also, have you considered creating an account on Wikipedia? It's easy and it'll give you a username and you can create your own signature. Lochdale 22:36, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
I'm on it (and forgive me for moving your response. I think I just broke some holy wikipedia-rule by doing that)!
Well what do you know. I do have an account! PureRumble 22:43, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
Heh, no worries. I am slowly learning how to use the Wiki-code efficiently (though it has been a slow process for me!). Lochdale 22:47, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Laurens Johannes Griessel Landau

The following article is being considered for deletion (see [1]):

Laurens Johannes Griessel-Landau was the name of a swindler and blackmailer who represented himself to be a medical doctor and skin specialist. At the end of November 1959 he was hired by Elvis Presley to make skin treatments, but in December 1959 he made homosexual passes at the singer and his friends. After Presley's decision to discontinue the treatments, Griessel-Landau claimed to be in the possession of compromising photographs and tape recordings and endeavored to extort money from the star. The case was dealt with strictly confidentially and referred to the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
===Details of the case according to the FBI files===
According to one of the best documented FBI files on Elvis Presley, the popular singer was the victim of Laurens Johannes Griessel-Landau of Johannesburg, South Africa, who was hired on 27 November 1959 by Presley as an alleged doctor specialist in the field of dermatology in Bad Nauheim, Germany, when the star was in the military service. During his skin treatments, which involved Presley's shoulders and face and took place in the singer's quarters, the man had made several homosexual passes at Elvis and his friends. According to the FBI files, Griessel-Landau
is alleged to have admitted to Presley that he is bisexual. His first homosexual experiences took place early in his life in the orphanage in which he was brought up. On 24 December 1959 Presley decided to discontinue the skin treatments. At the time that he told Griessel-Landau of this decision he also thoroughly censured Griessel-Landau for embarrassing him ...
This drove Griessel-Landau into rage and he decided to extort sums of money from the singer or to ruin his career. The case was referred to the FBI. Elvis "was interviewed on 28 December 1959 concerning his complaint that he was the victim of blackmail..." According to the FBI files, Griessel-Landau "threatened to expose Presley by photographs and tape recordings which are alleged to present Presley in compromising situations." An investigation determined that Griessel Landau was not a medical doctor.
===Confidential treatment===
Presley didn't take the matter to court. According to the FBI files,
Information concerning the subject was furnished to this office by the Provost Marshal Division, Hqs., U.S. army, Europe, with the indication that they wished to avoid any publicity in this matter since they did not want to involve Elvis Presley nor put him in an unfavorable light since Presley had been a first-rate soldier and had caused the army no trouble during his term of service.
===Final negotiation===
Because things did not turn out the way he expected, Griessel-Landau endeavored to play the case down in letters he wrote on 27 and 28 December claiming that he sympathized with Elvis and that he had decided not to take action against the singer. The FBI files say that finally,
By negotiation, Presley agreed to pay Griessel-Landau $200.00 for treatments received and also to furnish him with a $315.00 plane fare to London, England. Griessel-Landau agreed to depart to England on 25 December 1959 at 19.30 hours from Frankfurt, Germany. [But] Griessel-Landau did not leave as agreed, rather returned and demanded an additional $250.00, which Presley paid. A day later Griessel-Landau made a telephonic demand for 2,000 £ for the loss of his practice which he closed in Johannesburg, South Africa prior to his departure for Bad Nauheim to treat Presley.
Then the blackmailer
departed Rhein-Main Air Field, Frankfurt, Germany at 16.00 hours, 6 January 1960 on Flight 491, British European Airway for London. ... He is alleged to be seeking entry into the United States. No contact between Presley and Griessel-Landau has been reported since 5 January.
===Further reading===
In his book The FBI Files on Elvis Presley (2001), Thomas Fensch reproduces actual texts from numerous FBI reports dating from 1959 to 1981, which represent a "microcosm [of Presley's] behind-the-scenes life." The author reprints, in the appendix, many original documents as full-page illustrations, showing exactly how the FBI handled such cases. Pages 30-34 deal with Presley being the victim of Griessel-Landau. Among the documents the author provides are copies of the original FBI files concerning the case and letters from Griessel-Landau to Elvis and one of his secretaries.
===External link===

Can this content be merged into the article? Onefortyone 01:22, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Every contributor to the request for deletion (other than you) noted that the article should be deleted. See [here]. The incident takes up one page out of 663 of the FBI files. Tne one page never says that he made passes at Elvis but do note that Landau was most likely metally disturbed. As two seperate editors noted, it's not relevant. Lochdale 01:25, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

You are wrong. Two users said that the article should not be deleted. One user recomended to merge its content into the article. Onefortyone 01:30, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
Comment This is an interesting one. The FBI file has been noted in a number of places, including this article: "Arts: The FBI files," The Independent (London), Dec 13, 2005. I think the wikipedia article is probably excessive, but I don't know that it should be deleted altogther. Uucp 22:26, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
Merge and Redirect This seems to be somewhat noteable, but not deserving of its own article. I say merge the event into the article, but be sure not to make it more than it really is. I don't know if Elvis was gay, bi, or straight... but I'm pretty sure that for any claims about his homosexuality to be notable, it's going to take more than the word of a con artist. Report the incedent, but don't use it make unfounded claims about Elvis' sexuality. AniMate 07:11, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
Another user seems to be a sockpuppet. Onefortyone 01:34, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
Several users and an editor noted that it was not relevant. 1 page out of 663 isn't relevant. This is why the article will be deleted. You seem to be obsessed with the notion of sockpuppets. Lochdale 01:36, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
The original FBI files contain more than a dozen pages dealing with the case, not only one page. All Elvis biographers deal with the case, including Guralnick. So it's relevant. Onefortyone 01:41, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
It should be noted that I created the Laurens Johannes Griessel-Landau article in order to avoid an edit war. As an alternative, I would recommend to include the following paragraph in the FBI files section of the Elvis Presley article:
As Elvis was a very popular star, the FBI had files on him of more than 600 pages.[1] According to Thomas Fensch, the texts from the FBI reports dating from 1959 to 1981 represent a "microcosm [of Presley's] behind-the-scenes life." For instance, the FBI was interested in death threats made against the singer, the likelihood of Elvis being the victim of blackmail and particularly a "major extortion attempt" while he was in the Army in Germany, complaints about his public performances, a paternity suit, the theft by larceny of an executive jet which he owned and the alleged fraud surrounding a 1955 Corvette which he owned, and similar things.
According to one of these accounts, Elvis was the victim of Laurens Johannes Griessel-Landau of Johannesburg, South Africa, who was hired by the singer in Bad Nauheim, Germany, as an alleged specialist in the field of dermatology, but had made homosexual passes at the singer and his friends. When on 24 December 1959 Presley decided to discontinue the skin treatments, Griessel-Landau endeavored to extort sums of money from the singer. According to the FBI files, Griessel-Landau "threatened to expose Presley by photographs and tape recordings which are alleged to present Presley in compromising situations." An investigation determined that Griessel-Landau was not a medical doctor. Finally, "By negotiation, Presley agreed to pay Griessel-Landau $200.00 for treatments received and also to furnish him with a $315.00 plane fare to London, England." After having "demanded an additional $250.00, which Presley paid" and a further "telephonic demand for 2,000 £ for the loss of his practice which he closed in Johannesburg", the blackmailer departed to England.
This is much shorter than the Griessel-Landau article and summarizes the main facts. Onefortyone 01:41, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
That doesnt' solve the problem at all. It still brings undue attention to a minor and rather trivial incident. Why not leave it as it currently stands then provide a link to the actual files themselves? That way readers can go to the actual source itself for additional information. Looking at the FBI memo, it does not say that Landau made passes at Presley. It also says that there were no actual photos, that two women were with Presley during the exam, Landau may have been mentally disturbed etc. etc. Why get into it at all? All over $400? It's a minor issue underserving of specific attention. Footnoting the files is enough. Lochdale 01:47, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

If there was enough to warrant an actual article it would stand on its own. It can't and it is no more important than the other hundreds of pages of the files. The summary in the article is fine as it currently stands. And if you created the article to avoid an edit war then why did you keep trying to link to the article in the main Presley article? Lochdale 01:51, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Guralnik et al. reference it barely in passing. As an administrator noted to you, just because it is mentioned does not mean it is relevant. If we go on the basis of what is mentioned then we should add thousands of pages to this article. Lochdale 01:55, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

The question is, why are you so keenly interested to delete all references to the case? It is well documented and part of every Elvis biography. Thomas Fensch, author of the book on the FBI files, calls the case a "major extortion attempt." Onefortyone 01:59, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
Mentioned and then promptly ignored. If it were so "major" don't you think that Gurlanik would have spent even an iota of time on it? He didn't because it wasn't relevant. As for Fensch, well the files are very boring (remember, people can read them for themselves) so he had to try and spice up a book he was trying to sell. Think he might have a slight agenda? For a user who sees agenda's and conspiracies everywhere then this should not be a surprise to you. $400 is a major extortion case? Even $2,000 wasn't much back then. So a $400 bill from someone who was most likely mentally deranged is now "major"? It's just not relevant, let it go. Lochdale 02:02, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
Sorry, Lochdale, you are wrong: $200.00 + $315.00 + $250.00 + £2,000 (i.e. USD 765.00 + GBP 2,000). Certainly a lot of money at that time. And you never know what Elvis or the Colonel actually paid. Onefortyone 02:09, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
This is an encyclopedia, not a place for conjecture. They paid him around $400 which is di minimus. As I pointed out to you quite some time ago, $2,500 would buy you a mid-sized American car in 1960. That's the kind of pay-out you would expect for a major case against one of the then biggest stars in the world...a chevy. Lochdale 02:13, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
Did you read what I have written? GBP 2,000, not $2,000. Do you know the difference, especially at that time? Onefortyone 02:19, 22 October 2006 (UTC)


Hey did you know John Lennon picked up male prostitutes ! or had an affair with Brian Epstein according to Albert Goldman in "The Lives of John Lennon". Mr Goldman also did a lovely slaying of Elvis. I hope people are quite aware that not everything that gets published is true!?

Lochdale is still deleting the "Elvis cult" section

I think this is not acceptable. Here is the current version he has removed:

The Elvis cult and its critics

This should be its own web page.

The fans

It has been claimed that there are over 500 US fan clubs and that they exist in every state except three: North Dakota, Idaho and Wyoming. According to the American Demographics magazine, 84% of the US people say that their lives have been touched by Elvis Presley in some way, 70% have watched a movie starring Presley, 44% have danced to one of his songs, 31% have bought an Elvis record, CD or video, 10% have visited Graceland, 9% have bought Elvis memorabilia, 9% have read a book about Presley, and 5% have seen the singer in concert.[2] Not all of these people are Elvis fans. A collection of essays entitled The Adoring Audience: Fan Culture and Popular Media critically examines what distinguishes fans from general audiences and explores the relationship between fans and their adored media products. Part of this volume is the article, "Fandom and Gender" which includes an examination of female fantasies of Presley.[3] To many of his female fans, the songs Presley sang "were secondary to his personality and the way he performed them," evoking the well-known emotional responses.[4] In her autobiographical article, "Sexing Elvis" (1984), Sue Wise even describes "how she came to terms with her lesbianism through a close identification with the feminine side of the King."[5] "Elvis's 'effect' on young girls threatened those men who assumed that young girls needed to be protected both from sex in general and from its expression in questionable characters like Elvis in particular."[6] "Perhaps it is an error of enthusiasm to freight Elvis Presley with too heavy a historical load", as, according to a public opinion poll among high school students in 1957, Pat Boone was "the nearly two-to-one favorite over Elvis Presley among boys and preferred almost three-to-one by girls"; yet, Presley "clearly outshines the other performers in rocknroll's first pantheon."[7]

The ritualization of the Elvis cult

There can be no doubt that it was primarily "the recording industry, which made Elvis Presley a mythical media demigod."[8] On August 16, thousands of die-hard Elvis fans travel to Graceland every year in order to celebrate the anniversary of Presley's death.[9] The ritualization of the Elvis cult is also manifested most prominently through the many live performances by Elvis impersonators.[10] According to Marjorie Garber, "The phenomenon of 'Elvis impersonators,' which began long before the singer's death, is one of the most startling effects of the Elvis cult.[11] What is more, David S. Wall has shown that many authors who are writing books and articles on Presley are part of a "worldwide Elvis industry" which has a tendency towards supporting primarily a favorable view of the star. The content of the majority of these publications can be characterized as based on gossip about gossip, only occasionally providing some new surprising details. There are not many critical, unfavorable publications on Elvis's life. An example is Albert Goldman's controversial biography, Elvis (1981), in which the author unfavorably discusses the star's weight problems, his performing costumes and his sex life. Such books are frequently disparaged and harshly attacked by Elvis fan groups. Professor Wall has pointed out that one of the strategies of the various fan clubs and appreciation societies to which the bulk of Elvis fans belong is " 'community policing' to achieve governance at a distance... These organisations have, through their membership magazines, activities and sales operations, created a powerful moral majority" endeavoring to suppress most critical voices. "With a combined membership of millions, the fans form a formidable constituency of consumer power."[12] According to David Lowenthal, "Everything from Disneyland to the Holocaust Museum, ... from Elvis memorabilia to the Elgin Marbles bears the marks of the cult of heritage."[13] "When it's an exhibition of Elvis memorabilia," even Marilyn Houlberg, professor at the School of the Art Institute of Chicago, "puts on the campy art-world hat and becomes a priestess of the Elvis cult."[14] Paul A. Cantor goes as far as to call the American Presley cult "a postmodern simulacrum of the German Hitler cult."[15] Some fan groups even refuse to accept the fact of the star's death in 1977 (see the "Elvis lives?" section of this article). In his book Elvis after Elvis: The Posthumous Career of a Living Legend (1996), Gilbert Rodman traces in detail Presley's manifestations in contemporary popular and not-so-popular culture. He draws upon the many Elvis "sightings," from Elvis's appearances at the heart of the 1992 presidential campaign to the debate over his worthiness as a subject for a postage stamp, and from Elvis's central role in furious debates about racism and the appropriation of African-American music to the world of Elvis impersonators and the importance of Graceland as a place of pilgrimage for fans and followers. The author further points out that Presley has become inseparable from many of the defining myths of US culture, enmeshed with the American Dream and the very idea of the "United States," caught up in debates about race, gender, and sexuality, and in the wars over what constitutes a national culture. This Presley cult has been much criticized. "As one reader complained: I was really surprised that you used that article about the boring Elvis cult! You would use one on McDonald's?"[16]

Critical voices

Indeed, there are not only positive voices concerning the singer and his life. During the early years of his career, Country blues guitarist Mississippi Slim constantly criticized Elvis.[17] According to Jennifer Harrison, "Elvis faced criticism more often than appreciation" from a small town in South Memphis.[18] "Much criticism has been heaped on Elvis, the Colonel, and others who controlled his creative (or not so creative) output, especially during the Hollywood years."[19] According to Robert A. Segal, Elvis was "a consummate mamma's boy who lived his last twenty years as a recluse in a womblike, infantile world in which all of his wishes were immediately satisfied yet who deemed himself entirely normal, in fact 'all-American.'"[20] When a CBS special on Presley was aired on October 3, 1977, shortly after the singer's death, it "received such harsh criticism that it is hard to imagine what the public response to Elvis's degeneration would have been if he had been alive." This special "only seemed to confirm the rumors of drug abuse."[21] In a recent study on the analogy of trash and rock 'n' roll, professor of English and drummer Steven Hamelman demonstrates that rock 'n' roll productions are often trash, that critics often trash rock 'n' roll productions, and that rock 'n' roll musicians often trash their lives. The author uses the tortured lives and premature deaths of Presley, John Lennon and Kurt Cobain in his section on "waste" in order to underscore the literal and figurative "waste" that, in his opinion, is part of rock 'n' roll.[22] However, one of the most frequent points of criticism is the overweight and androgyny of the late Las Vegas Presley. Time Out says that, "As Elvis got fatter, his shows got glammier."[23] It has been said that the star, when he "returned to Las Vegas, heavier, in pancake makeup, wearing a white jumpsuit with an elaborate jewelled belt and cape, crooning pop songs to a microphone ... had become Liberace. Even his fans were now middle-aged matrons and blue-haired grandmothers, who praised him as a good son who loved his mother; Mother's Day became a special holiday for Elvis's fans."[24] According to several modern gender studies, the singer had, like Liberace, presented "variations of the drag queen figure" in his final stages in Las Vegas, when he excessively used eye shadow, gold lamé suits and jumpsuits.[25] Although described as a male sex symbol, Elvis was "insistently and paradoxically read by the culture as a boy, a eunuch, or a 'woman' – anything but a man," and in his Las Vegas white "Eagle" jumpsuit, designed by costumer Bill Belew, he appeared like "a transvestite successor to Marlene Dietrich."[26] Indeed, Elvis had been "feminized", as Joel Foreman put it.[27] Thus, "Elvis' death did occur at a time when it could only help his reputation. Just before his death, Elvis had been forgotten by society." He was chiefly "referred to as 'overweight and over-the-hill.'"[28]

I hope that the other users will discuss these paragraphs. Lochdale refuses to discuss the content, he only deletes the whole section, although another editor was of the opinion that there is "a lot of great information" in it and IP 81.170.138.232 tried to reinstate it several times. I would say that Lochdale's behavior isn't acceptable. Onefortyone 02:25, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
Why not submit this to mediation or arbitration then? The entire section is clearly not encyclopedic (though I am not sure you even know what that means anymore). The entire section is POV and original research. Further, given your history of misrepresenting sources it behooves us to stick to well-known sources. Lochdale 02:35, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
This may indeed be a good idea. As I have cited my sources, among them mainstream biographies, books on the rock 'n' roll era and university studies, my contributions to the Wikipedia article are not POV and certainly not original research, as you falsely claim. But your deleting tactics are POV. You have not yet provided a single source which contradicts the contributions. By the way, your behavior is very similar to that of Ted Wilkes who has been banned for one year because the arbitration case was re-opened. Onefortyone 02:47, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
PLEASE consider paragraph breaks in these sections. They are basically unreadable. You need to put in paragraph breaks. Moncrief 11:12, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
Done. See [2]. I hope the paragraph breaks are now satisfactory to all. Onefortyone 13:37, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

I agree that this 'criticism' section of the article is also just voicing opinions of people who just don't like Presley plain and simple. It is not relevant knowlege to be included in an encyclopedia. Regarding the jumpsuit and glitter era: just about every rock singer was doing the same thing in the 70s - remember Donny Osmond, David Cassidy, Sly Stone (see Woodstock movie) Most of those singers are not remembered in the way that Elvis is.

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Elvis

This case is now closed and the results have been published at the link above.

For the Arbitration committee. Cowman109Talk 20:41, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Added some references but I screwed up once again...

OK! Now I have added some references to sources where it previously said "citation needed". I screwed up in one way but lets talk about that later. First of all, I want some people to check my references, AFTER reading what I have to say about them.

First of all, the "retrieved"-part of a references should state which date it was when I (the person who found the source) found it, right?

I have added references to two facts

  • He continued to perform before sell-out audiences around the U.S. until his death in 1977
Three references has been added, leading to three articles about three different concerts during 1977. Only one of them mention that there were no more tickets left, but all of them mention BIG numbers when they talk about how many there were among the crowd.
  • Later that year in Charlotte, North Carolina, Presley was quoted as saying: "The colored folks been singing it and playing it just like I’m doin' now, man, for more years than I know. They played it like that in their shanties and in their juke joints and nobody paid it no mind 'til I goosed it up. I got it from them. Down in Tupelo, Mississippi, I used to hear old Arthur Crudup bang his box the way I do now and I said if I ever got to a place I could feel all old Arthur felt, I’d be a music man like nobody ever saw."
A reference has been added to an article on TIMEs online website. The problem? It doesnt state that he said that in Charlotte, North Carolina. I found another article that said that the quote comes from "Carolina Journal" or something like that. But that doesnt mean that he said it in North Carolina and it certainly says nothing at all about Charlotte. Also, I didn't like the site where I found that article. It just didn't make any good impression. Should the "Charlotte-Carolina" thing be removed? It's not important where he said (as long he did it standing with his two feet on earth), only the fact that he DID say it is important, right?

How I screwed up? Well when I made this edit, I forgot the edit summary. I also forgot to mark the edit with an m (minor edit). Is it possible to fix this?

PLEASE CHECK THE OUTLOOK/FORM OF THE REFERENCES IN THE NOTE-SECTION!!!

Waiting for some feedback!

Edit: I always forget about this: PureRumble 13:52, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Are all these quotes from fan sites? The best way is to cite from some published books on Elvis or the rock 'n' roll era. Onefortyone 14:03, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
I dont know if you really can say elvisconcerts.com is a fan-site. It is a comprehensive database over all the tours and concerts that Elvis has performed in. However, those three references that I added lead to COPIES of newspaper-articles, that have been stored at elvisconcerts.com. What I'm trying to say is that elvisconcerts.com have not written them, they have just copied these articles and inserted them into this "database". That is OK, isn't it? I mean, sure we could speculate about if those are true articles or maybe some guy at elvisconcerts.com have written them. But if we reason like that, then can't we question just about everything? Just my thoughts. But now that you know this, if you still find it completely unaccaptable then tell me so I can try to find the real articles. PureRumble 14:09, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
If the source is given it may be O.K. to cite this material. Onefortyone 14:13, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

More references, More newbie questions... more pain!

OK! Here comes a summary of every reference I have inserted so far (except those that I have already mentioned above):

  • The Jimmy Carter quote about the death of Elvis.
Whoa! This one was bad. It skipped a part of the quote without making the [...]-mark!!! I found that part of the quote useful and I have inserted it. The source is [3]. It seems to be VERY reliable. But one problem! The source does not state when that quote was published. Please take a look at the reference-part in the notes-section. Is it OK that the only date that I have written is when the reference was retrieved?
  • The BBC top 100 english language singers list. Elvis was second.
The source is good here too. It is from bbc news website. One problem, the author of the article has not been stated. Please take a look at the reference in the notes-section. Is it OK that there is no "by"-part in the reference?

Feedback Please! I also want to know if it is safe and OK to delete the "Charlotte, North Carolina"-thing that I wrote about here above? It's not important that he said it in Charlotte, and we only have a source that backs up the fact that he said that quote, not where he said it. PureRumble 15:05, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Doesn't this part already cite its source?

This paragraph of the article is followed by a "citation needed"-mark

Peter Guralnick's book, Careless Love: The Unmaking of Elvis Presley (1999), "drug use was heavily implicated in this unanticipated death of a middle-aged man with no known history of heart disease...no one ruled out the possibility of anaphylactic shock brought on by the codeine pills he had gotten from his dentist, to which he was known to have had a mild allergy of long standing...There was little disagreement in fact between the two principal laboratory reports and analyses filed two months later, with each stating a strong belief that the primary cause of death was polypharmacy, and the BioScience Laboratories report...indicating the detection of fourteen drugs in Elvis' system, ten in significant quantity."

But I don't understand. Doesn't it already give us a reference? "Peter Guralnick's book, Careless Love: The Unmaking of Elvis Presley (1999)"? PureRumble 15:59, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

If you are not gonna give me response on this one then I'm gonna do what I think is the right thing; I'll remove the "citation needed

Scapecape: hearsay. This is not factual, just a mere opinion. It was known that Elvis suffered from high bloodpressure, fluid retention, liver problems and other diseases which effect the heart. The fact that Elvis had 14 different medicines in his body at his time of death is at most an indication, since all medicines were prescribed and within therapeutic levels!

Taking 14 different drugs at once was illegal and they were all prescribed illegally by his quack surgeon "Dr Nick", who was later struck off. A definite suicide because Presley was going blind, was obese, mentally ill, faced bankruptcy and feraed he had bone cancer.

I'm changing the "Girls! Girls! Girls!"-heading to "The women in his life"

So let's see... it's clearly not a encyclopedic-heading. The section is about the women that Elvis was involved with. And the fact that there is a movie/book/song/whatever with the title "Girls! Girls! Girls!" Just makes it all worse! Not a single word in that section mentions ANYTHING about this movie/book/song/whatever "Girls! Girls! Girls!". So tell me, why should the heading be "Girls! Girls! Girls!"? PureRumble 18:58, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Uh, because it's an Elvis-related title, and is thematic to an article about him? By this same reasoning, why is Alan Clayson's George Harrison biography titled The Quiet One, since Harrison obviously didn't spend his whole life in silence, or Lou Reed's anthology of writings titled Between Thought and Expression, since he didn't express everything he's ever thought? Zephyrad 07:41, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
Yes, but those are biographies and anthologies and they are supposed to be interesting to read and maybe even a bit entertaining. An encyclopedia is used to gather knowledge, and because of that it should be easy to find knowledge. If you got a heading with the same name as a movie, then what do you expect of that section? I know this case in particular is a special one, but general rules should be followed. That's what I think. PureRumble 18:49, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
I disagree; you're misinterpreting my use of those examples, and a casual look at Elvis's movie credits will make the title make sense – if someone doesn't know about the movie already. Zephyrad 05:02, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

It is implied in this section of the article that Elvis wasn't into sex, as if to say that there is something queer with that. A man doesn't have to be having sex constantly to prove he's heterosexual. All it meant was, and this fact is also pointed out in Suzanne Finstead's book, that Elvis was merely sensitive in a time when most men were not, was a romantic (and also he was afraid of getting girls pregnant).--Suzulu 06:21, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Trivia section

There is a substantial difference between making a collection of trivia instead of a proper page, and including a trivia section at the end of a page. The call was to integrate the trivia into the page, NOT to remove it altogether. UberCryxic does not appear to understand the difference, and if he doesn't want a trivia section (which is included at the end of COUNTLESS Wikipedia pages), then I suggest he either integrate the trivia himself before simply cutting it out... or let him go through every page on Wikipedia with such a section, try deleting all those trivia sections, then try to argue his point. Zephyrad 07:33, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

When was he born?

The bio block with his picture says 1933. The body text says 1935....

http://www.elvis.com/elvisology/bio/elvis_overview.asp And I say VANDALISM ;-)
I'll change it. PureRumble 21:44, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Kurt Cobain dethrones Elvis as top-earning dead celebrity

http://www.usatoday.com/money/2006-10-24-cobain-over-elvis_x.htm?csp=34


Priscilla on Gladys

Priscilla Presley describes her as "a surreptitious drinker and alcoholic." When she was angry, "she cussed like a sailor".

Given that Elvis didn't meet Priscilla until after his mother died, this sounds like a very questionable quote to put in without context. Is this confirmed by actual eyewitnesses or in Elaine Dundy's book? ~ trialsanderrors 20:21, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Scapecape: this is a highly unlikely quote since Gladys was dead before Elvis met Priscilla. Source and quote?

The quote is from Priscilla Presley's book, Elvis and Me, p.172. As young Priscilla lived together with Elvis's father Vernon and his new wife Dee Presley at Graceland for a long period of time, she certainly would have heard a lot about Gladys's behavior. Here is Elaine Dundy on Gladys's alcoholism:
If Elvis had cast his mind back to his seventeenth year, he might have recognized in Gladys symptoms similar to the ones he was seeing now in her extreme mood changes. He might have recognized them, coming home after his evening pleasures, in the sometimes giddy, giggly, excited Gladys... Certainly for over two years now, Elvis had seen enough of drinking and drunken behavior from various fellow musicians during his tours to recognize the signs.
See Elaine Dundy, Elvis and Gladys, p.266. Onefortyone 21:32, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Gladys did drink a little in the end... or something... BUT... I think it is not worth to mention here! Why? Because it gives the wrong comprehension. Dumb reader reads it and thinks that Gladys was some kind of... of... whatever... but no... Gladys was very loving mother and nice human cooking cookies for neighbor kids and everything... He drank, but I'm sure he wasn't alcoholic!

Grammatical changes.

This is my first post, and I'm kind of new at this, so sorry if I bungle things up. Anyway, I was reading the first section of this entry, and this part was really grating to me (cuz I guess I'm a grammar Nazi) ---

His death was premature at 42, despite alarming concerns about his health. When he died on August 16, 1977, it was a huge shock to his fans. However, it soon became clear that a combination of over-work, obesity, depression, bad diet and severe abuse of prescription drugs, accelerated his premature departure. However, much confusion, conflict, contradictions and general controversy still surrounds his death. Regardless, his popularity as a singer has survived his death.

There is repetition, and a misuse of the word "despite." My recommendation would be to change it to the following:

He died a premature death at the age of 42 on August 16, 1977. His death was a huge shock to his fans, but there were alarming concerns over his health -- in particular, his combination of over-work, obesity, depression, bad diet and severe abuse of prescription drugs. Despite the conspiracy theories and general controversy that still surround his death, his popularity as a singer has survived him.

--This1kid 05:01, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

His death wasn't premature as he overdosed on 14 different drugs, a probable suicide.

Scapecape: hearsay. there is no evidence substantiating an OD or suicide. There is evidence however pointing at a POSSIBLE polyfarmic death. Whether or not dies from an OD does not mean a death is not premature!

Suzy Floyd: Factual evidence ie. death certificate proves that Elvis Presley died of Heart Failure.

Presley was going blind, faced bankruptcy and feared he had bone cancer. His death from OD on 14 different drugs was almost certainly a suicide, Eddie Murphy bought his suicide note at auction. If somebody abuses 10,000 drugs in eight months they are going to die. Presley may only have been 42, but he had the body of a 70-year-old man. His death was NOT premature.

Comments in Boston

The article needs to be amended because nobody can ever prove Presley did not mnake those remarks, just as his critics cannot prove he said them. All we know is that he wasn't in Boston that year.

Helpful notice from Iowa

Elvis' middle name is spelled "Aaron" not "Aron" -November 10, 2006 -Emily Hicks, New London, Iowa (moose_in_a_sweatervest@hotmail.com)

No it isn't.
Apparently it differs - on his original birth records it was listed as Aron, but in state records it was spelled Aaron. [4] Ministry of Silly Walks 23:27, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Scapecape: Elvis Aron Presley was his name of birth. Elvis Aaron Presley his name of death.

Not really... "Elvis Aron Presley" was his name of birth and death, but NOW his name is "Elvis Aaron Presley". The name was modified AFTER his death.

So much crap

Theres so much crap in certain sections. Theres practically whole interviews in some sections and several untrue accusations. Most of the sections projects Elvis in a bad light, mind you, some parts are not facts but seem as a biased rant of a bitter person.

How do you know they're untrue?

Because anybody who knows a fig about Elvis can quickly pick out everything written by user onefortyone. Also--using Dee Stanley or Albert Goldman as sources is pretty laughable. Also--the racist comment attributed to a non-existent Boston interview that never happened (Elvis didn't even go to Boston that year) has been proven false, and Elvis' interactions and camaraderie with African Americans has been well-documented. Jet magazine even interviewed Elvis himself about the false accusation.

That's right! There IS much of crap and the article DOES put Elvis in bad light...
So much for the opinions of some Elvis fans who endeavor to suppress any critical voice from the article. However, Wikipedia is not a fan site. Onefortyone 03:10, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Scapecape. Indeed this Wikipedia article is full of it. Too bad. Missed opportunity for Wikipedia to show itself.

Albert Goldman wrote a book about John Lennon which also stated Lennon had homosexual tendencies and the book was blasted by those who knew Lennon as being totally false. It is noted, quite conspicuously, that the bio on John Lennon on this very same site, does not include the slanderous passages from Albert Goldman's book. Therefore these comments about Elvis have been deleted.

Professor Goldman's book on Lennon was mainly criticized by Lennon fans. Some quotes from his Lennon book may well be included in the Lennon article, as it is a published source. As for his Elvis book, it is a very critical study on Elvis and it is true that Elvis fans hate his book. On the other hand, there are several positive commentaries concerning this book. For instance, Jonathan Yardley of the Washington Post called it a "nasty book, written in spectacularly execrable prose, but the view of Presley that it expressed dovetailed in many instances with my own, and in spite of itself I found things in it to admire." Other Elvis biographers have used the book. Goldman happens to be a thorough researcher and has written many good books on popular culture. The man is an academic with more than a little brainpower. And however much he may have disliked his subject, Elvis, there is no doubt that he was an expert on the man. Therefore, his book on Elvis is certainly an important source, although it was not written to feed the appetites of Elvis fans. .Onefortyone 03:10, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Again if you care to turn over to John Lennon's bio on this very same site: there are no derogatory passages quoted from Albert Goldman's book on John Lennon in the Lennon article on this Wikipedia site. Albert Goldman's book on Lennon was denounced not only by fans but also by Paul McCartney himself. Contributors are deliberately trying to slander Elvis in the article on Elvis Presley. Encyclopiedias should not be biased. John Lennon's article is favourable while Elvis Presley's is not. Why is that when there has been unfavourable books printed out Lennon as well as Presley. Why quote those books for Elvis and not Lennon? Because the contributor are biased? Wikipedia is showing itself to be extremley unprofessional. 

~~Suzulu~~

Dee Presley was a person who was motivated by money to write her book as Elvis left no provision for her in his Will. Those who knew Elvis stated Dee Presley's book was lies. ~~Suzulu~~

Elvis's stepmother Dee Presley lived with Elvis and his father for a period of time at Graceland. She certainly knows what was was going on behind closed doors. However, no details from her book are quoted in the Wikipedia article. Onefortyone 03:10, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

You would think all people tell the truth? Just to inform you not all people do. Everyone else who knew and were close to Elvis have never said anything derogotory about him. Ann-Margret herself said Dee Stanley Presley's stories were lies. I referred previously to her as some quotes from her book were included in this discussion page; I see they have been removed.

Any Beatles fans here - do you love John Lennon?Do you also think Mr Albert Goldman is a thorough knowledgeable reasearcher? Well then you must have been delighted to read Mr Goldman's book "The Lives of John Lennon" where it is stated that John picked up male prostitutes in Thailand! AND had an affair with Brian Epstein. A thorough knowledgeable researcher ? John Paul George and Ringo lovers must have delighted in Mr Goldman's tales in "Elvis" but their faces would be in mud after Mr Goldman's slaying of Lennon.--Suzulu 03:27, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Could people please sign their comments here. Keep it about the article and personal feeling and opinions out. --Xiahou 22:07, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Youtube

There is al lot of material on him on Youtube. I miss his music and performances in the article. When did he perform and what are his albums. search for Elvis Presley on Youtube--Freek Verkerk 22:50, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Vocal range

Elvis Presley is very clearly a tenor that liked to use his lower range as he got older. Please check out the last four notes he sings on "It's Now Or Never". This songs melody is taken from the famous tenor song "O Sole Mio" which is often performed by world renouned tenors such as Enrico Caruso and Luciano Pavarotti. A baritone would struggle to sing this melody smoothly. Also, in his Sun Recordings he uses more of his upper range. I will update with the exact chest voice notes Elvis has hit.

I do not believe that Elvis ever recorded a high B, and the quote from the professor is dubious and needs citation. Elvis' vocal gift was not his vocal range but rather the quality of his performances, both vocal and otherwise. -- Ssilvers 23:57, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Here is one of the best analyses of Elvis's voice:
Henry Pleasants, "Elvis Presley." In Simon Frith, ed., Popular Music: Critical Concepts in Media and Cultural Studies. Volume 3: Popular Music Analysis (Routledge, 2004)
The author writes (p.260):
Elvis has been described variously as a baritone and a tenor. An extraordinary compass and a very wide range of vocal color have something to do with his divergence of opinion. The voice covers about two octaves and a third, from the baritone's low G to the tenor's high B, with an upward extension in falsetto to at least a D flat. His best octave is in the middle, from about D flat to D flat, granting an extra full step either up or down. In this area, when he bears down with his breath on the cords, the voice has a fine, big, dark baritone quality. When he eases off, as he often does in ballads, he achieves a light, mellow, seductive sound reminiscent of Bing Crosby, if rather breathier, with a wide vibrato that he may have got from Billy Eckstine. Elvis' vibrato, however, is faster and less conspicuous. Call him a high baritone. The voice has always been weak at the bottom, variable and unpredictable. At the top it is often brilliant. His upward passage would seem to lie in the area of E flat, E and F. On E and F particularly, there is almost always the telltale evidence of strain common to singers who have not mastered the transition from one register to another. On his very first records he made distressing sounds on these pitches. They were open, callow, sometimes nasal, and utterly unrelated to the round baritone timbre of the middle voice. As early as 1959, he seems to have gained some measure of control, or accommodation. ... From there on up, what Elvis does with his voice depends upon what he is singing. He has always been able to duplicate the open, hoarse, ecstatic, screaming, shouting, wailing, reckless sound of the black rhythm-and-blues and gospel singers. But he has not been confined to that one type of vocal production. In ballads and country songs he belts out full-voiced high Gs and As that an opera baritone might envy. While he has not learned to sing comfortably and predictably in the 'passage,' he learned early how to focus his voice when he got above it.
Henry Pleasants (1910-2000), the author of this fine essay on Elvis's voice, was the longtime London music critic for the International Herald Tribune and certainly an expert on the human voice. He studied voice, piano and composition at the Curtis Institute of Music and received an honorary doctorate from Curtis in 1977. For 29 years, Pleasants lectured and conducted seminars on singing at the American Institute of Musical Studies in Graz, Austria. He is best known for his 1955 book The Agony of Modern Music, a polemical attack on the direction taken by much of 20th-century serious music, and an argument in favor of jazz and other vernacular styles as the true music of the time, both as entertainment and as art. He developed this theme in other books, for instance, Death of a Music?: The Decline of the European Tradition and the Rise of Jazz (1961) and Serious Music — and All That Jazz! (1969). But his first and major enthusiasm was the human voice. His book The Great Singers (1966) became a standard reference work. Other books on singers and singing were The Great American Popular Singers, Opera in Crisis, and The Great Tenor Tragedy: The Last Days of Adolphe Nourrit. Onefortyone 21:53, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Elvis: The Early Years

Can anyone please tell me if it was lindsay lohan who played priscilla in the mini-series. Its been annoying me for a while. thanks! (FearSneachta 10:04, 21 November 2006 (UTC))

The cast of the Elvis mini series on CBS featured Jonathan Rhys Meyers as Elvis, Camryn Manheim as his mother Gladys, Robert Patrick as his father Vernon, Randy Quaid as Colonel Tom Parker, Rose McGowan as Ann-Margret, and Antonia Bernath as Priscilla Presley. Onefortyone 18:21, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Filmography

A separate section needs to be dedicated to a filmography. Or perhaps a separate article on it would be necessary. Ekantik 05:50, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

The Elvis 8-track tape that K plays in the Lincoln Tunnel Scene in "Men In Black"

What album is that? It sounds pretty good. 147.145.40.43 23:54, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

It's actually Elvis' version of Promised Land by Chuck Berry. Jason 00:20, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Introduction

This article's introduction is hard to read. Can we not have simple declarative sentences without clogging the introduction with details?--Filll 14:40, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Backing groups

This article needs some information about his being backed up by The Jordanaires, and after 1970, The Imperials. 76.211.18.221 03:29, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Don't forget to mention The Sweet Inspirations, Kathy Westmoreland, J.D. Sumner and the Stamps Quartet, James Burton, Ronnie Tutt, Glen D. Hardin, Jerry Scheff, Voice, Sherill Nielsen, Charlie Hodge, Joe Guercio's Orchestra, etc... all of which were parts of Elvis' '70s live shows.

'68 Comeback Special and The final years

I have rewritten parts of the special to tie in with my substantial revision and expansion of the separate article on the Special Rikstar 22:39, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

The discussion/archive pages are quite irritating and depressing to read in places. In the absence of any criticism (so far) of my '68 Special article, I find myself actually thinking about making major, much needed revisions to this article, in this case condensing it and possibly creating extra links. However I am put off by the thought of the time it will take, and the inevitable co-editing that will come from those who have already made this article sub-standard. I think Mr. Presley deserves better... Rikstar 09:32, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Have started clean up of The final years. Using past tense, making less subjective Rikstar 15:34, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

stop it idiots

Someone is messing with the article. Adding stupid one line new topics and has removed the picture. I will not have someone messing with Mr. Presley. Stop this shit damnit. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Da Main Event (talk • contribs) 11:30, 13 December 2006 (UTC).


Sorry mate, "Mr Presley" left the building 30 years ago when the obese blind racist drug addict overdosed on the can.

All Albums on the Discography pages now created

All of the albums from the list have been created as of today! I'm not an Elvis expert, so I'm calling on the Elvisphiles to fill in the blanks - I have marked them as stubs.SkierRMH 08:35, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

West End of London, Musical "Elvis"

This needs a mention. Circa 1966? - Kittybrewster 12:53, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

I saw Jack Good's "Elvis" in 1979. Various actors/singers took part, including P.J. Proby and Shakin' Stevens. In the '80's, a play about Elvis ran for a while - "Are You Lonesome Tonight?" - starring Martin Shaw Rikstar 17:04, 17 December 2006 (UTC)


Vandalised Copy has been protected

There is a sentence that reads "This man is a pathetic individual who was addicted to pornography", and now only very few people can remove it. Please do so.

Vandalism/Craziness Everywhere

This article is a mess. I'll just point out one example that might otherwise escape notice, because it has a pair of cites next to it: it claims he's an eighth degree black belt in Kenpo. That's a completely ludicrous rank; unless he found a total McDojo, it can't be correct. It was my understanding that he was perhaps a first or second degree. Someone can train with dedication their whole adult life and never make it to eighth dan. --GenkiNeko 19:02, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Something of note about Elvis' accomplishments...

Something I have not seen mentioned or addressed in the articles I've read about Elvis -- was that he did it all without EVER touring outside of the United States...!! Apparently he wanted to and had offers and backing to do so, but the Colonel (Parker) disagreed with the notion and would not allow it. I recall seeing this on a PBS special about Elvis.

He was stationed in Germany during his hitch in the Army, which may have included some travel to other European countries; his movies were sometimes set outside the US - but did he ever work, travel or vacation abroad, or was he too busy here in the US?

Input please...


Dirty Dan the Man 18:40, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Colonel Parker, who controlled Presley's life and career, would not allow him to tour outside the US because he (Parker) did not have a passport. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Harvey1972 (talk • contribs) 01:20, 30 December 2006 (UTC).


That Elvis never toured or travelled outside the US because Parker didn't have a passport and was technically an illegal immigrant etc. is a complete myth (NOT A MYTH!). Come on, he was elvis's manager for god sakes, regardless of that if he had wanted a green card the government would just have given him one anyway. Especially given the fact that Elvis loved touring, Parker was a minor problem - the real reason Elvis didn't tour internationally was that he simply couldn't, as we all know even as early as 1970 elvis already had a huge drug habit -uppers, downers and later narcotics (powerful painkillers). He would obviously have had major problems taking the quantities of drugs he needed and used across borders through customs, although in fairness, these had always been legally prescribed to him in the US though. His own people have said this.

Ah las, all those asian and european chicks he missed out on.

Andreas Cornelius van Kuijk a.k.a. Colonel Tom Parker was an illegal Dutch immigrant, who was so protective of his identity as an illegal (having possibly done something in Holland that made him leave--there is much conjecture about this including having been booted from the Dutch Army for being mentally unstable)... Regardless, Colonel Parker's secret was kept from even Elvis, himself. Nobody in Elvis' close circle knew until Elvis' death. The satellite Aloha concert is thought to have been the Colonel's answer to Elvis' growing enthusiasm for a foreign tour--something he had first mentioned in 1960 and mentioned often during the '70s as something he wished to do.

Elvis famously made a visit to Paris, France and I believe the transatlantic ship stopped in England. He lived in Bad Nauheim, Germany from the end of 1958 'til early 1960, while in the U.S. Army during the Cold War.


Scapecape: Elvis did perform outside the USA. In Canada to be precise. 2 April. Toronto, Can. Maple Leaf Gardens (2 shows) 3 April. Ottawa, Can. Auditorium (2 shows) This was in 1957.

Besides, Aloha was not constructed by Tom Parker, but rather an idea of RCA. His drug abuse is something that a lot of people don't want to understand appearently, because as such it was not a problem. Elvis used legit medication. One can also get addicted to those, tho. What could be a problem is that his entourage did use illegal substances and subsequently could have caused big problems for Elvis.


And yes, Tom Parker was an illegal alien. Not myth but fact.

The "Colonel" controlled Presley's life and career, and it was because of him that Presley starred in 31 crap movies which only proved he had no acting ability whatsoever. The real reason he did not tour outside America is because he was a drug addict who only became famous because he stole black music. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by HarveyCarter (talk • contribs) 18:40, 1 February 2007 (UTC).


As his friends testify, Elvis's drug usage was a big problem, and the drugs were really heavy duty, at least in the later years, even though "legally" obtained.

In regards to the above paragraphs and travel, in many if not in most countries of the world, the drugs which Elvis was using, like uppers (Dexedrine), liquid cocaine and narcotics (pethedine, morphine etc.), are legal but cannot just be obtained by a prescription from a General Practicioner!!! They are strictly controlled and there usually has to be an authority issued from the Health Department or hospital, like for people suffering from cancer and other prolonged serious illness. Even in various western countries some of this stuff is illegal, period. (Downers are easy to get from a GP though).

If he had wanted to go on a long worldwind tour, then at various Customs in foreign countries, he would have had big headaches - he could not have given a medically legitimate reason as to why he regularly needed and was in posession of these (very large numbers) of dangerous drugs, even if they had been (mass) prescribed to him back in the US. Not to mention that a few of these drugs could well have been illegal in some of the countries he visited. He would of had to get his people to go on the black market for the stuff - not very practical, and risky. Unlike in the US where he always had some quack GP hand out drugs to him like candy.

And yes, I know that it was a fact, not myth that Parker was an illegal alien, but that wasn't the point I was making!!


If you think these points are trivial, consider that if one suffers badly from alcoholism, they tend to set up their lives so as to avoid any situation, for example such as travelling to see relatives for a lengthy period, where they will not be able to drink freely without drawing attention or shame, or to other places for some period of time, where booze simply will not be available.

Father

Is there an article about Elvis' father?--Vayaka 14:55, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Vernon was only an unemployable welfare addict. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by HarveyCarter (talk • contribs) 18:38, 1 February 2007 (UTC).


Every single thing this Harvey Carter has put here about Elvis is total nonsense and outright hateful fiction. Why is it here? In fact much of what is here about Elvis is based on unproven allegations or is simply total lies and hateful BS. Most of the whole page on Elvis should be erased!

The lies about his sexual preferences, (which were "straight" according to every close and credible person who ever knew him) the false BS regarding his musical influences,(which were many and from which he created his own style and sound) his alleged disdain for and comments about blacks shining his shoes, it's total BS! Elvis had MANY black friends including Muhammed Ali, James Brown, Jackie Wlson, Little Richard, Joe Hunter, Fats Domino, BB King, the list is long, and none of them ever even had a hint that Elvis was "racist" against blacks! It's BS! This place is disgraceful.


Wikiencyclopedia seems to be full of contributors who are trying to imply that most celebrities are gay based on pure heresay. Also it seems that when it is implied regarding certain celebrities it is implied in a derogatory sense; whereas for certain celebrities it is implied favourably. I think this whole place is run by a gay community determined to "out" every celebrity there is whether that person is straight or gay. I agree with comments made in the previous paragraphs by an unnamed contributor: all factual evidence proves Elvis was straight and not a racist. Everything else implied is sheer gossip/heresay and there is no excuse for this type of gutter press. This is supposed to be an encyclopedia.--Suzulu 06:27, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Presley was indeed a homosexual who had sex with Nick Adams and his own mother. He only became famous by stealing black music. JHe was the most racist man who ever lived. No wonder MJ hated him. (Chunda18 11:37, 11 May 2007 (UTC))

Inaccurate Statement Regarding Ed Sullivan Compliment

The following pharagraph is not correct:

On his third and final appearance (January 6, 1957) on ) on the The Ed Sullivan Show, Sullivan was so impressed by Presley that he pointed to him and told the audience "This is a real decent, fine boy. We've never had a pleasanter experience on our show with a big name than we've had with you ... You're thoroughly all right." Presley remains the only one on Sullivan's show to have received such a warm and personal accolade. However, it has also been said that Presley's manager orchestrated the compliment in exchange for permitting Presley to appear, after Sullivan had earlier publicly stated his refusal to allow Presley on his program.

I have a copy of the "The Four Complete Historic Ed Sullivan Shows Featuring The Beatles..." and I recall the Sullivan could not heap enough of these similar praises towars the Beatles at the conclusion of their February 23, 1964 appearance on the Ed Sullivan Show --- the line in bold should probably be removed.

Elvis Presley's (Many) Girlfriends

Say baby, that is one big hunk o' pharagraph; it is just too much...>b>don't be cruel, how about maybe subtitling --- or at least enbolding their names --- of these former Presley girlfriends.

You all should also be aware that the Tennessee Arts Commission and the Office of the [Tennessee] First Lady have released a dvd of the Tennessee Governor's Mansion (a fundraiser for the renovation of the Tennessee Governor's Mansion that has some signficant footage of a youthful EP in Nashville speaking before the Tennessee General Assembly, visiting the Governor's Mansion, and an interview with a daughter of former Governor Ellington who stated that she and Elvis had dated for "a year and a half".

Repetition in the Political Beliefs Section

Well, the Junkyard Dog can't edit this, so he's just going to say it here. There's repetition of a quote by Jimmy C in the Political Beliefs section. someone should take care of it.

Bill Dakota on Elvis's bisexuality

I'm not sure how reliable this source is, but William Dakota (*1938) claims to have worked as Nick Adams's secretary for some time. As his writings indicate, he seems to have had intimate knowledge about a lot of people in Hollywood, among them Elvis. Curiously, some time ago, this author also visited Wikipedia. See [5], [6]. Here are some interesting excerpts from his article, "Elvis was bisexual":

  • Both Nick and Elvis were bisexual, although both enjoyed men as companions and lovers than women. Elvis was always with the so called Memphis Mafia, more than women. I recall many times that Elvis paid Nick's airfare to Memphis, whenever he visited Graceland. One day they had a falling out and Nick spent the day at the front gate with Elvis's uncle Vester Presley. On several occasions I would be with Nick when he picked up his airline tickets.
  • Elvis took Nick with him on his first cross-country tour. Nick used to warm up audiences by doing impressions of actors. Natalie Wood also went along on the tour, (perhaps as a cover). She liked Elvis but was bored with his life style.
  • One time I walked up to Nick's apartment, (actually the downstairs of a home), in the hills above Ciro's and the Hyatt Hotel on the Sunset strip. I walked around to the side of the house, wanting to surprise and scare Nick by yelling at him. But, when I got near the garage, I heard Bob Conrad talking out loud to Nick and he was telling Nick how sore he was. Conrad was in the bathroom and the window was open with a screen in it. I assumed that they had sex, from their conversation.
  • Nick and Jimmy were hustling money and one time was overheard arguing over who would wear the one, good pair of Levis to hustle in. Nick and Jimmy, while hustling men, became conditioned to this kind of sex and liked it.
  • Elvis was a bit jealous of the attention Nick had been giving to Conrad. (So, was I). Conrad became a constant companion of Nick, riding around in Nick's '57 Thunderbird, eating in restaurants and having their picture taken together. Later, Conrad would also become a close friend to Elvis. A companion of Elvis's (when this article was first written), told me that all of those so called cousins that surrounded and traveled with him, weren't all cousins. Some were alleged to have taken turns sleeping with him. And when someone, in print, alleged that Nick slept in bed with Elvis at Graceland, it was said to the press or the writer, that Elvis had a cot brought into the bedroom and that Nick slept on that. Elvis's bed was big enough for a "dozen people."
  • Elvis was into oral sex and enjoyed getting a blow-job more than intercourse, said Dennis Miller, a former friend and companion.
  • Elvis couldn't (obviously) afford the publicity or to be exposed as being bisexual. His career would have been over.
  • It can only be assumed that the Colonel knew of the relationship between Nick and Elvis because it had been known all around Hollywood about Nick's gay side. (And remember that this story is not a new story. It was published in the Hollywood "Confidential" Star magazine, while he and the Colonel were still alive.
  • Although Nick had a gay side, he was often photographed with young starlets and often with Natalie Wood. He probably even had sex with a few of them. No, I wasn't under Elvis's bed when they had sex and I didn't even see them having sex, and even though Nick dabbled in homosexuality, he never made any advances toward me and he wasn't my type either. We were just good friends. He would often ask me what the gossip was on the Boulevard, and I would tell him, what he already knew, about Tab Hunter, Rock Hudson, George Nader, Rory Calhoun and a few other celebrities. I think he was curious to see if he was being talked about.
  • Recent memorial programs, show many photos that had been taken of Nick, with Elvis and a group of Elvis's friends at Graceland.
  • There were other guys who have had homosexual relations with Elvis. One other gay guy used to hang around the Paramount studio gate, and all of a sudden he had a small part in an Elvis film.
  • Anyone attacking Elvis is highly criticized by his fans. Rona Barrett did it and was swamped with hate mail. Red West's book on Elvis was equally attacked. It was printed after Elvis died, but Elvis had read parts of it while he was still alive and although he hated being exposed, he never attempted to sue anyone. He just hated anything negative being written about him. People in Memphis have always been protective of Elvis and his memory and they even covered up the cause of his death. They won't release the actual autopsy, although they did release a portion stating he had colon problems. Facts are, he died of a drug overdose and had abused drugs for years. But, he is some sort of hero and legend...

If Dakota is right, these quotes strongly suggest that Elvis and his best friend Nick Adams were indeed bisexual. See Bill Dakota, "Elvis was bisexual" Onefortyone 01:31, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

There is nothing credible about Bill Dakota. He was never a real friend of Elvis nor part of his close posse, and Elvis was a private person who did not have people he didn't know lurking around. There is no "factual" evidence that Elvis Presley was ever anything other than "heterosexual" nor ever engaged in anything other than heterosexual sex. Every credible person who was close to or ever truly knew Elvis throughout his life said he was without question "heterosexual" and deplored homosexual activity.

Bill Dakota was the secretary of Elvis's best friend Nick Adams. Therefore, he certainly must have had intimate knowledge about a lot of people around Elvis. According to Colonel Parker's assistant Byron Raphael and Elvis biographer Alanna Nash, actress Natalie Wood made a snide remark to Elvis's male friends from the Memphis Mafia that she "was not the only one to think Elvis and the guys might be homosexual, especially since Elvis often wore pancake makeup and mascara offstage to accentuate his brooding intensity ..." Byron Raphael and Alanna Nash also say that "tongues wagged" that Elvis and Nick Adams "were getting it on." This is fully in line with Bill Dakota's account. Onefortyone 01:28, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Bill Dakota is another hack like Dee Stanley, who Elvis openly never excepted as his stepmother and she was trying to make a buck off his name with a book full of lies after his death, and Albert Goldman was even worse. Goldman clearly had nothing but disdain for Elvis as his entire book showed, and he also hated John Lennon whom he wrote a similar hit piece on after Lennon's death. He is simply not credible nor are his opinions or claims in his book which some are here on Elvis' page. Nothing more than hit pieces.

It is true that Professor Goldman wrote a very critical study on Elvis and that Elvis fans hate his book. On the other hand, there are also positive commentaries concerning this book. For instance, Jonathan Yardley of the Washington Post called it a "nasty book, written in spectacularly execrable prose, but the view of Presley that it expressed dovetailed in many instances with my own, and in spite of itself I found things in it to admire." Onefortyone 01:28, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

.[66] In his book, Elvis, Albert Goldman writes that, after his return to America, Presley "was a changed man. ... His first TV appearances, particularly his queer showing on Frank Sinatra Welcome Home Party for Elvis Presley, testify to the change in the man that underlay the change in the image. ... After the Army, Elvis appeared very delicate and vulnerable, as if he were recovering from major surgery. He wringed his hands as he talked. He became extremely wary. With his preposterous Little Richard conk, his limp wrist, girlish grin and wobbly knees, which now turned out, instead of in, he looked outrageously gay."

The quote above from Goldman's book should NOT be included in Elvis' bio page and I would like for it to be removed. This is not only just Goldman's OPINION, but an opinion from a guy who had intense disdain for Presley and whose entire book demonstrated this! The entire book was condemned as trash by Elvis' friends in and out of the entertainment business, his Memphis Mafia group, his family, fans and critics. The way that Goldman quote is placed in Elvis' page it appears as if it's a credible statement that Elvis was "gay" and looked gay, and this was just one idiot hater's opinion, not a "fact"! Elvis slept with hundreds of women and there has never been even as much as a "picture" to even suggest he was ever with a man sexually in any way. It's a LIE! Remove it, please!

I do not think that the Goldman quote should be removed from the article, as it is from a published Elvis biography and vividly describes that Elvis, after the return from his military service, "was a changed man." Onefortyone 01:28, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Not only did Presley have sex with Nick Adams, he also had an obsession with James Dean. No wonder Marlon hated him.

Length

Why isn't this article tagged for length? Quadzilla99 08:46, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Elvis's health problems (ones not mentioned in article)

Elvis had other health problems not mentioned in the article and they should be added:

Some sources say that Elvis had diabetes, which he hid from the public, including http://www.sfu.ca/aq/archives/may2003/diabetes.html

On Youtube, "The Last 24 Hours" can be seen. In it, Larry Geller states that elvis had high blood sugar, which would indicate diabetes.

He had an enlarged colon as well as hypertension (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/style/longterm/elvis/epobit.htm)

Also, he had an enlarged heart (http://www.elvis.com.au/presley/marian_cocke_remembers_elvis_presley.shtml).


Also, Kathy Westmoreland, one of his girlfriends has some other suggestions, although I am uncertain of the legitimacy of them. They include anemia, three previous heart attacks, as well as cancer (which is referred to already in the article). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.38.127.81 (talk) 04:14, 26 February 2007 (UTC).

Kathy and some of them have told he had cancer and Elvis believed he had cancer and some doctors (including dr Nick) thought he may had cancer, but probably he didn't had it... They just thought he may had, because there were many predications... but there was something else...
But yes, he did have diabetes for sure and those other things mentioned. And those things has to be included! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 62.65.214.9 (talk) 16:40, 3 April 2007 (UTC).

The Tupelo-Gainesville Outbreak

... A very young Elvis Presley and his mother were two of the survivors.

Is that real? -- Toytoy 05:14, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

I guess it is... at least I've heard it before... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 62.65.214.9 (talk) 17:24, 3 April 2007 (UTC).

Shooting Televisions

There is no mention of this rather interesting tidbit. --Vranak 06:42, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Spelling Error

Under "Elvis as a victim of Blackmail", there is the phrase, "...are of the opinion that he had molestated the star himself." As far as I know "molestated" is not a word and should be "molested". As a new user I cannot edit this article, so either someone else can change it or I will in a few days--if I remember to do so. Qgroff 16:53, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

I fixed it. Maria202 17:47, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

The introduction needs work

Long and lame —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Q8-falcon (talk • contribs) 13:13, 13 March 2007 (UTC).


your right it needs more information on his family and his history.

Minor Redundancy?

In the beginning of the article it says "... American singer, musician ..." Wouldn't this be considered redundant? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.118.97.76 (talk) 20:52, 18 March 2007 (UTC).

Sinatra or the rest of the Rat Pack weren't musicians. Neither was James Brown, Wilson Pickett, Tiffany, nor Madonna. There's still hope for Michael Jackson, though.

Elvis > All

Elvis and Monty Python

supposedly was a big fan, per AOL..or were they his?

Elvis was a big Monty Python fan : that was said in Sammy Davis Jnr biography and also by several of his friends in some video specials on Presley.--Suzulu 06:23, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Race Music

With all due respect to Rolling Stone, the term "race music", which was a term that was preferred by the black community at one time, was replaced by the term rhythm and blues in 1948. Using the term "race music" when talking about Elvis in 1954 and 1955 is misleading. It's about 6 years out of date to have anything to do with Elvis. I understand that this is a direct quote, but it should be qualified or eliminated. Steve Pastor 17:40, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

"Overnight, it seemed, 'race music', as the music industry had labeled the work of black artists, became a thing of the past, as did the pejorative 'hillbilly' music." Um, well, see above comment. A further inaccuracy in this direct quote has to do with the term hillbilly. You may have heard of rockabilly. Apparently whoever wrote this hasn't. Steve Pastor 14:38, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

UK public domain

Would I be right in saying that some of his songs may be in the public domain in the UK as it's only 50 years over here before copyright expires on recorded works? I suppose US copyright law prevents us from adding the whole tracks to the article? What if we were to host the tracks on a UK server? Supposed 05:19, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Carol Tator, Winston Matthis, Frances Henry, Challenging Racism in the Arts (University of Toronto Press, 1998), p.134.

Here is Amazon.com's description of the book "Beginning with the Royal Ontario Museum's Into the Heart of Africa exhibition, and following through with discussions of Show Boat, Miss Saigon, the exhibition of the Barnes Collection at the Art Gallery of Ontario, the 'Writing Thru Race' conference in Vancouver, and the ill-fated attempts to acquire a licence for a black/dance radio station in Toronto, the authors examine manifestations of racism in Canada's cultural production over the last decade." [7] It is not a book about Elvis, and it is obvious that the authors did not do their homework on "Hound Dog". Furthermore, is is simply not true that Little Richard had been forgotten. Steve Pastor 21:44, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

American Idol duet with Celine Dion

I'm surprised it's not been mentioned anywhere here or on the article. I'm not going to bother putting it in because I wouldn't know where to start, but perhaps someone who would know can do it?
NewYork1956 20:16, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Missmatched Sources and Original Research

I've noticed something troubling in the relationship section. Most of the statements don't match the sources cited, or worse are interpretations of them (ie. Original Research), not to mention that there is a great deal of selective quoting with the apparent purpose of creating a new narrative aimed at labeling Presley a homosexual or bisexual who didn't sleep with women much or if at all. This deception doesn't really worry me that much, as no ones going to believe such rubbish anyway (accusing John Holmes of being a virgin would be a similar situation), but we might as well stick to something more accurate. Two of the most reliable primary sources available, Lamar Fike (one of elvis' closest and oldest friends) and David Stanley (Elvis' step brother), both of whom were around Elvis for most of life - and near the end of his life up to 24hrs a day (This is detailed in the book: The Elvis Encyclopedia by David Stanley), state numerous times that Elvis was a frequent womanizer who slept with many women (even during his marriage to Priscilla). They make zero mention of any homosexual relationships or of any incestrous relationships and that have been proposed in hearsay and secondary sources. Also, need I mention that that both these rumours surfaced years after Elvis had died? (hint, hint, exploitation anyone?).

You are wrong. The many paragraphs you have deleted are well-sourced and certainly not original research, as all the sources (Elvis biographies, university studies, books published by people who knew Elvis, eyewitness accounts etc.) are accurately cited. Would you please provide evidence that "the statements don't match the sources cited" as you falsely claim. It is nowhere said in the article that Elvis was homo- or bisexual or that he slept with his mother (though there is some evidence that this may have been the case). You say that your sources are Elvis's friend Lamar Fike and Elvis's stepbrother David Stanley. May I ask you for some direct quotes from the sources you have used. Significantly, user Lochdale, who was banned from the Elvis article some months ago, also repeatedly claimed that Elvis was a frequent womanizer who slept with hundreds of women, although many other sources, among them Priscilla Presley and many girls he had dated, say otherwise. Could it be that this user has now reappeared using another name? Onefortyone 05:22, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

The section is way too long anyway, do we really need an exhaustive list of exactly who elvis screwed, or who taught him 'the joys of oral sex'? I certainly hope not. The shear amount of trash lumped into this section means that to remedy it - and help keep the article more concise - I've condensed it down into a much shorter version (based on a previous revision) that everyone can hopefully add to and improve. It will still need some work, but at least the bias and selective quoting are gone.Mingy Jongo 01:33, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

You have deleted large blocks of well-sourced information simply because this information is not in line with your personal view of Elvis the womanizer. This is not acceptable. Onefortyone 05:22, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Interesting primary source

Here is the complete text of a personal letter from Colonel Parker to his secretary (8/25/58). In 1958, with Elvis Presley serving in the U.S. Army and Colonel Tom Parker conducting business from his management office in Madison, Tennessee, Trude Forsher, Elvis and Parker's personal secretary, took care of business at their offices on the west coast. In this 1958 letter to Mrs. Forsher, Colonel Parker catches up with news after a difficult month in which Elvis' beloved mother, Gladys, passed away. It reads:

August 25th, 1958
Dear Trudy and Bruno and Children;
I have been very busy looking after everything in Memphis so you know that we did not have much time to answwr [sic] all mail right away. I have just returned for a few Days [sic] at the office but I must again take off in a few Days [sic] to look after everything in Texas and on to New York, Nicky Admas [sic] came out to be with Elvis last Week wich [sic] was so very kind of him to be there with his friend.
I sure wish you all the luck with our TV setup so keep your fingers crossed One [sic] never knows in this business. I know Elvis appreciate [sic] very much. I will have the girls enclose your wire in the special scrapbook I am making up for him with all thw [sic] wires and cards from all the friends.
I do not know at present when I will get out to the Coast again, however the way things are at present One never knws [sic] I may be out shortly on some business with the Morris office, I will of course call you in event I come out.
Glad to know the boys are doing great they both are very smart and I know both of you are proud of them.
Give our love to Anna and Dolfi when you see them. Mr. Diskin joins me also with best wishes. Judy Spreckels also came all the way to Memphis to be with Elvis for the Funeral this was very kind of her also. And I know Elvis did appreciate this so very much.
There were many flowers from all over and I know you can understand that we had our hands full with looking after all the details for the Family.
Take care of yourself and write when you have time. Mrs. Parker is now back home getting her yard back in order with the flowers. She wishes to be rememberred [sic] to all of you.
Sincerely, The Colonel

Provenance: Trude Forsher Archive (Letter of Authenticity from Mrs. Forsher's son).

This letter proves how close Nick Adams and Judy Spreckels were to the singer at that time. Onefortyone 23:21, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

  1. ^ See Thomas Fensch, The FBI Files on Elvis Presley (New Century Books, 2001).
  2. ^ See Elvis People, A Play by Doug Grissom.
  3. ^ See Lisa A. Lewis, The Adoring Audience: Fan Culture and Popular Media (1992).
  4. ^ Roger D. Blackwell, Tina and Kristina Stephan, Brands That Rock: What Business Leaders Can Learn from the World of Rock and Roll (2003), p.33.
  5. ^ Quoted in Kate McGowan, Year's Work in Critical and Cultural Theory Volume 5 (2002), p.199.
  6. ^ Joel Foreman, The Other Fifties: Interrogating Midcentury American Icons (University of Illinois Press, 1996), p.136.
  7. ^ Philip H. Ennis, The Seventh Stream: The Emergence of Rocknroll in American Popular Music (Wesleyan University Press, 1992), p.251-252.
  8. ^ Donald Theall, Virtual Marshall McLuhan (2001), p.129. See also Sylvere Lotringer and Sande Cohen (eds.), French Theory in America (2001), p.114.
  9. ^ Cameron Tuttle, The Bad Girls' Guide to Open Road (1999), p.192.
  10. ^ See Annalee Newitz, White Trash: Race and Class in America (1996), p.262.
  11. ^ Marjorie B. Garber, Vested Interests: Cross-Dressing and Cultural Anxiety (1997), p.369.
  12. ^ David S. Wall, “Policing Elvis: legal action and the shaping of post-mortem celebrity culture as contested space”, Entertainment Law, vol. 2, no. 3, 2004, 52-53.
  13. ^ David Lowenthal, The Heritage Crusade and the Spoils of History (Cambridge University Press, 1998).
  14. ^ James Elkins, On the Strange Place of Religion in Contemporary Art (2004), p.53.
  15. ^ Paul A. Cantor, "Adolf, We Hardly Knew You." In New Essays on White Noise. Edited by Frank Lentricchia (Cambridge University Press, 1991), p.53.
  16. ^ Rodman, Elvis After Elvis, p.75.
  17. ^ Dundy, Elvis and Gladys, p.288.
  18. ^ Jennifer Harrison, Elvis As We Knew Him: Our Shared Life in a Small Town in South Memphis (2003), p.71.
  19. ^ Hopkins, Elvis in Hawaii, p.58.
  20. ^ Robert A. Segal, Theorizing About Myth (University of Massachusetts Press, 1999), p.109.
  21. ^ Samuel Roy, Elvis, Prophet of Power (1989), p.173.
  22. ^ See Steven Hamelman, But is it Garbage? (paper): On Rock and Trash (University of Georgia Press, 2004).
  23. ^ Time Out at Las Vegas (2005), p.303.
  24. ^ Marjorie Garber, Vested Interests: Cross-Dressing & Cultural Anxiety (1992), p.380
  25. ^ See Patricia Juliana Smith, The Queer Sixties (1999), p.116.
  26. ^ Garber, p.368.
  27. ^ Joel Foreman, The Other Fifties: Interrogating Midcentury American Icons (University of Illinois Press, 1997), p.127. No wonder that "white drag kings tend to pick on icons like Elvis Presley." See Bonnie Zimmerman, Lesbian Histories and Cultures (1999), p. 248.
  28. ^ Roy, Elvis, Prophet of Power, p.173.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Elvis_Presley/Archive_18&oldid=1045369992"