Talk:Jim Morrison/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Several Questionable Entries

There doesn't seem to be a great amount of citation going on with this article. I know for a fact that many of the things that were purportedly said by various individuals in this article were taken directly from the lines in Olver Stone's "The Doors" movie, and would be contradicted with statements made by the rest of the band in interviews and documentaries. I wouldn't be surprised if half of this article needed to be modified to correct inaccuracies like that. Do I want to do it? Nope. But if anyone else cares enough, I'll be happy to let you know there's plenty of work to be done.

Irish Ancestry?

What is the source for this? His biographies say he's Scottish. His mother's last name is Clark. I believe that's English.Wll the name Morrison is the gealic approximation of 'Moors Son'.We have to remember that during Roman occupation Celts were sent to Morroco and the Moors/Moorish were sent to Ireland,so Jim was probably from Irish descent

are you implying that the romans occupied ireland? and clark is an irish name, if not the biography im reading now seems to think differently

Marital Miscellaneous

See the discussion below under the heading "Morrison's Wife at Common Law." Briefly: The California probate court found that Morrison and Courson contracted a common law marriage under Colorado law. That means the he *was* married - if not as a fact in practice, at least as a fact in law. It is irrelevant that Morrison and Courson did not perform the formalities to contract a statutory marriage. The whole point of common law marriage is that it is a legally binding marriage which is NOT formally contracted by any one act, but by a coincidence of numerous acts (such as Morrison referring to Courson's parents as his in-laws, which counts as the two of them holding themselves out to the public as husband and wife).

Today, common law marriages can only be contracted in Scotland, the District of Columbia, and eleven U.S. States -- one of which is Colorado. California has not permitted marriages to be contracted as at common law since 1896, but the California Family Code explicitly provides that all marriages are valid in the state if they are validly contracted according to the law of the place of celebration. All U.S. states are the same on that point. As long as you were legally married according to the laws of the place where you got married, your marriage is legally valid in any U.S. state -- and that includes common law marriages.

There has been some discussion of Morrison's marital status and apparently some disagreement, as well. The last person changed the intro to indicate that Morrison had a "spouse." I think it's misleading to leave it at that because Morrison never formally got married. His relationship was recognized as being a common-law marriage by the California probate courts two years after his death, based on a number of factors, including his actions while in Colorado with Courson. I've added the phrase "common-law" to the intro and hope it resolves some people's concerns about accuracy.

24.7.5.47 08 March 2006

Sheesh, some people sure get bent out of shape at the mention of Pamela Courson and the California probate court's recognition of her status as his common-law wife. Although some info about Courson has been in the intro paragraph for quite some time, it is probably better placed in the section dealing with Morrison's personal life. I have added a mention of Morrison's untimely death to the intro in its place. I doubt that this will please some fanatics but it seems to be a reasonable enough arrangement. Ande B. 10:31, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

More Miscellaneous

... would be another contender for bacchanalia, but I've never been so I'll leave it to someone who can write about it with more confidence. Koyaanis Qatsi 18:54 Jul 22, 2002 (PDT):After months of thought, replaced bacchanalia with vices, which had to be extended to cover the Morrison case.

I've written a 20-printed-pages paper about Jim Morrison for school last year and I'd like to submit extracts from it to wikipedia. I think Jim would be the first person ever to be explained together with his work. A major part of my paper was about the main-themes of his poems and songs. What do you think of that? There's also a German translation planned. see [1] for the paper. -- TomK32 17:20

Concerning the edit of (18:43 5 June 2003);

• "..reportedly enraged his father, ending all communication..." that is heresay, not the facts. Why take the part out about his mother? Surely she was an influence on Morrison too?
• It's known that Morrison began consuming large amount drugs well before the Doors group formed.
• "...basically being blacklisted.." Some concert cancellations do not equal blacklisting.

It is not relevant that some of Jim Morrison's So called fans, deface the French cemetary gravestones. Why give them notice? (unsigned)

because you cannot visit Pere LaChaise without noting his post-death cult there. French girls in halter-tops swarm all over the cemetery, querulously asking "Ou est Jeem?". As you near his gravestone the painted graffiti grows heavier, and on the nearest mausoleums these transfigure into signposts and arrows all pointing the way for his admirers. At all times of day, at least 10 young people are clustered around the tombstone, generally strumming their guitars and singing old Doors hits. It's an actual phenomenon, one which no one who has actually been to Pere Lachaise can miss, and deserves to be mentioned. And it's interesting. -- Someone else 17:46 6 Jun 2003 (UTC)

[Again, I stand by the idea that vandals deserve no place in Morriosn's bio page. It had nothing to do with his life. Misguided people doing destructive things to people's gravestones possibly should have their own listing under; Morrison Gravestone Phenomenon. I admit the defacing of property is unusual, but not significant at all to Morrison's life.]

*.."in the years folowing his death, fans allegedly spotted Morrison.." got to go.  Tabloid fotter. 

Oliver Stone and his movie, The Doors, should not get a first or last mention in a Jim Morrison article. Ray Manzarek's remarks concerning that film should be revisited.

• To me the idea of wikipedia is to collabratively create a fair, honest, fact filled article on a person, place, or thing. This version is not factual, full of POV, and very incomplete. The article talks about unsubstantiated ideas, blatantly incorrect statements, and unimportant sidelines i.e. vandals in the cemetary. What does that have to do with the man, the character, the music of Jim Morrison?

I think a fair, factual version is the one I added to. (9:45 6 Jun 2003) Thanks, Xio

I think this still reads like too much of a PR release. The bit on the potential assassination gave me a good chuckle, thanks. Also, I can't understand why you keep removing the bits on Pamela Courson. It was important to Morrison, even if it wasn't important to you. Koyaanis Qatsi 17:32 6 Jun 2003 (UTC)

I agree that much of this is unworthy of an encyclopedia, though quite funny (did Morrison fake his own death or was he killed by the government?!). The site that purports to show JM still alive is crazy enough to have something to do with him, but has no place on this page Brentford 23:59, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)

[Pamela Courson is mentioned as long time girlfriend. Whether Courson is important to Morrison seems to be stated with this included sentence. In another version, His two girlfriends are mentioned in the first paragraph about his life. I'm not sure that that's the place where they fit in. Also, the two statements on two of his girlfriends just said things weren't official. That's not saying much at all about Courson, who Morrison said was his soulmate.] Xio

The pic of the cemetary on a person's page about his life seems weird. Xio

A public domain pic of Morrison is hard to find...I hope this version seems better. Xio

The Indian story certainly explains the Peace Frog bridge. "Indians scattered on dawn's highway bleeding. Ghosts crowd the young child's fragile egg shell mind."

Removed a quotation misattributed to Morrison:

• "You know that it would be untrue, you know that I would be a liar if I was to say to you, 'Girl, we couldn't get much higher.' C'mon, baby, light my fire."

Though he is famous for singing these lines, it is one of the few Doors songs where he did not actually write the lyrics. It was written by Robby Krieger, the guitarist for The Doors. ~ Kalki 10:58, Jul 23, 2004 (UTC)

Suggestions for reading?

I plan to add a list of books about Jim Morrison to this article. There are many books written about him, some better than others. This will be very helpful to people who want to learn more about this important artist and performer. Any suggestions, folks?

I went ahead and added books that I have read. These books are the ones you are talking about, although, there are some books written about Jim by the other members of the band but I have not read them so I do not know how good those books are. --Lizardking85

Rumored authorship?

Along the same line, I also ask this question: Should there be a list of books that are "allegedly authored" by Morrison on this page? There is strong evidence that these "books" are hoaxes. Why are they included here? This kind of stuff fuels inane rumors that Jim Morrison is still alive, which is egregious and irresponsible.

DATE? what is december 8, 1971? Not born, married, death. removed

Jim Morrison did not drop out of UCLA

The film school was having their annual film "festival". The students would present their films to the class to see if their films would make it to the event. Jim Morrison's film according to Jerry Hopkins' book "The Lizard King, The Essential Jim Morrison", his film was not liked but was given a complementary "D". Jim did not take criticism very well so he told his professor that he was going to quit, but it was too late because he was already going to graduate. When it was time to pick up his diploma he was walking down Venice beach smoking dope. This whole page needs to be redone because there are countless misleading statements. I have read all of the books about him pretty much and I would like to take a stab at it.

That's fine. Please use the books as references and cite your sources. Cheers, -Willmcw July 7, 2005 05:28 (UTC)

Question

I'm a bit too young to have experienced The Doors first hand, so, i'll have to ask the older wiki editors: Is it just me, or was Morrison what in the 1990s we call a geek? a geek that got the idea how the social structure of his time worked, and he reversed engineered and turned it against itself?

Project2501a 22:42, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

PS but then all poets do that inside-out thing, don't they?

He turned it against itself, and also against himself. But rather than a "geek", he was more an intellectual. ---Alexander 007 10:38, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

I'd say "Bohemian" is a better term.

[Bohemian]] was used to describe artists, writers, and disenchanted people of all sorts who wished to live non-traditional lifestyles. bogdan | ^Talk 10:47, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

Bohemian can fit him well, but "Bohemian" does not refer specifically to intellectual types. Many "Bohemians" are complete dimwits. I wasn't looking for a one-word description in any case. ---Alexander 007 18:41, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

In the 90's I would say that he would be what we call am 'EMO' maybe not a geek.203.39.13.66 03:56, 23 August 2006 (UTC)me

Grave Picture

Anyone in paris willing to go take a picture and GFDL it for us? Hipocrite - «Talk» 20:42, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

Speaking of Morrison's grave, here's an interesting piece of information that maybe should go in the article. I've read that Père Lachaise is looking to get rid of Morrison's remains. They say that they can't cope with the fan attention (and vandalism) that his grave attracts. Basically, they would ship Morrison's remains to anywhere in the world, to anyone that would simply pay for the transference. How about that?? Regards, Redux 01:07, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

That'd be a suitable addition if you can find a decent source for it. I've heard the same thing. Cheers, -Willmcw 05:56, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

I read this on the respected Brazilian magazine VEJA. They have all of their contents online at their website going back as far as 1997. I could probably find the piece (it was either about Morrison himself or the French graveyard — most likely the latter, if I recall correctly), but no one here would be able to access it, since the contents of their archive are exclusive to subscribers (which I am), and plus it'd be in Portuguese. But it is there, they ran the story and mentioned specifically the thing about Lachaise's administration being eager to get Morrison out of there. I could post the link to the story here, just to vouch for its existence, if it would be preferred (but again, no one would be able to open it). Regards, Redux 06:48, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay. This is the link to the VEJA story on Morrison: [2]. I remind people, however, that this content is restricted to subscribers of the magazine, so most people will not be able to open the page linked. Also, the article is in Portuguese. The declaration that Père Lachaise can't wait to get rid of Morrison's remains was made by historian Christian Charlet, who's the Administrator in charge of the cemetery. The story was published by the magazine in its issue released on May 26, 2004. Should we include the information now? Regards, Redux 21:43, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

I read some time ago that the cemetary decided not to move Jim's remains because his grave site was the 3rd highest tourist attraction in Paris after the Louvre and the Mona Lisa -- I do not however, have a source for this -- Krysstoffer Rodriguez-Lopez

I have been to jim's grave about 6 months ago, I have video and photo coverage of his grave contact me for info. vescio21@hotmail.com please use subject JIM MORRISON WIKI. October 15, 2006.

The new insertion about a supposed girlfriend, Martha Clark

There are enough scurrilious rumors going around about Jim Morrison that we don't need to include this rumor alongside two women who DID play an important part in Jim's life.

I agree. Material as detailed as this needs a solid source, but none has been provided. Let's take it out until the references, if any, can be checked. -Will Beback 19:43, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

I also changed "common law wife" to his "cosmic mate," as Jim and Pamela were not married; in fact, he was single. Common law marriage has never been legal in California. Pamela was able to get this distinction only through the probate court some 2.5 years after Jim died by claiming they had a common law marriage in Colorado (CA at the time recognized a "common law marriage" if it was legal in another state and the parties became residents of CA) in order to be entitled to "widow's benefits."

It's important that facts are stated on this site, instead of rumours, conjectures and misinformation. If that's what folks want, then they can read any of the dozens of "biographies" of Jim for their fill of BS.

But "cosmic mate" is not an appropriate term for a Wiki article; it's Morrison's personal reference for Courson. "Common-law spouse" is the closest appropriate terminology biographers have in describing Courson's relationship to Morrison. We could use "domestic partner," but in its current connotation the term only refers to LGBT relationships. But all in all, it doesn't make any sense for Wiki editors themselves to use "cosmic mate" in reference to Courson. We're supposed to have a "neutral point of view."--Pinko1977 02:03, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Agreed that we are supposed to be NPOV, but I'm not sure what is non-NPOV about that phrase. However, if that is objectionable, the closest appropriate terminology that is factually accurate is "live-in girlfriend". The problems with the "common-law wife" phrase have been pointed out by others above - there is a clear, objective meaning to that phrase, and it doesn't apply. Morrison was never married, common-law or otherwise. Merenta 20:07, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Ok can't you just say that she was his partner - I think everyone could understand that203.39.13.66 03:59, 23 August 2006 (UTC)me

The Unknown Soldier : first video ?

What's this about Jim doing the "first video"? The Beatles music videos in Hard Days Night pre-date in my opinion. MA

While "Hard Days Night" is a feature film rather than a video, there were music videos before "The Unknown Soldier". The earliest one I can document is Bob Dylan's video for Subterranean Homesick Blues, filmed May 8, 1965. I have corrected this article. Merenta 17:10, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Was Dylan's Subterranean "video" shown on television? No, but "The Unknown Soldier" had a limited television viewing audience, and it was named by VH1 as the "first official video 15 years before MTV." I'll go with VH1.

Death edited by some anonymous user, please remove.

There is an incomplete sentence under the Death section of the main article and it seems to be a false statement as well. It is quoted as: "supposedly he is still alive living in the french underground" for easier finding. ([3] by 210.210.33.231.) Thought I'd leave the editing to someone else as I am not authorized to do so. 70.37.74.226 06:13, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Mother's Recent Passing

I just wanted to let everyone know that Jim's mother Clara Clarke Morrison passed away December 29, 2005 at the age of eighty-six. You can find this tribute to her life at the Doors official website here. --Pinko1977 22:29, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Spelling of the Brecht / Weil operetta

I have a question about the use of German spelling for the word "Mahogany." Since the rest of the title has been translated into English, why does this one word appear in its German form? If you do a web search, the "mahogany" spelling is used consistently on both commercial and university sites that use the English language. "Mahagonny" is used in the original title and on German language sites. Does the Wikipedia have a convention regarding this spelling? It shows up in the same manner on the link to the article about the operetta. Thanks. Ande. (Who doesn't do much of this editing stuff.)

It's hard to know how to translate nouns that have similar spellings. However this discussion would be best handled at the article itself, Rise and Fall of the City of Mahagonny. Thanks for catching the underlying error, the confusion w/ "3 Penny Opera". Cheers, -Will Beback 07:09, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Faked death & postmortem rumors

Deleting a balanced discussion of a text you dismiss as conspiracy theory and preposterous is simply POV by selective editing. It's a fact that some deaths have been faked successfully before, it's more than wishful thinking by fans, it's relevant to the subject, it was written with balance, and it deserves fair mention. 69.145.82.2 08:48, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Well, first we have fils du soleil pulling a relevant mention of the hoaxed-death angle, which my POV complaint speaks to, then we have 24.7.5.47 pulling it yesterday sans explication, and since neither of them seems to grasp wikipedia well enough to discuss matters, it seems we're in for a revert war followed by an admin giving them a lecture they'll probably ignore till he/she locks them up for a bit :-/ 69.145.82.2 07:18, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, you're right, I should have justified my edit - I was new to Wikipedia at the time. The "Jim Morrison cowboy" is not only a hoax, it's also a scam : this guy is using his fraudulent claim to sell videos and other products. I'm sure everybody can agree we don't want to give him publicity by linking his site to this page. However, a brief mention along all of the "postmortem rumors" - as is the case at this time - seems fair and acceptable. Fils du Soleil 21:05, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Hello, 69.145.82.2! You seem to be talking about me here a bit (24.7.5.47). Honestly, I had seen previous removals of the cowboy stuff and took your re-posting as just another nuisance posting but it looks as if you are serious about the matter. Didn't intend any insult. But the cowboy hoaxer really doesn't warrant a full discussion of the possibility that he may be "genuine." That's just giving unnecessary credence to a hoaxer and it is not NPOV, as you believe. Just because something is written in a neutral tone does not mean that it is a neutral view point. By giving equal weight to the cowboy story, you lend it too much credence and create an unbalanced description. It would be similar to giving a full fledged discussion of the merits of the Moon-Landing Deniers on a page for NASA. I added a paragraph about the various rumors that surround Morrison's death because I think you are right about these rumors being important to his myth and appeal. I would expect at least some people would be drawn to this page to check out such rumors, the cowboy rumor being the most recent. Someone else has added a link to the cowboy story, and that might satisfy your purposes. 24.7.5.47 08 March 2006

Excuse me, no credible evidence exists that Jim EVEN WANTED to "fake his own death." Could we please remove the tea-reading BS and stick to the facts? First you need to understand Jim Morrison's background: He was the over-protected oldest son of a prominent, comfortable middle to upper-middle class intact family, who rebelled at 21 in the 1960s. Let's not spin more garbage around Jim, OK? It wasn't until January 1971 that Jim came up with the anagram of his name, "Mr Mojo Risin'." The remark Hopkins quoted in his book attributed to Jim talking about "faking his own death" came about in 1966 when Jim was trying to figure out a way to garner the group more attention. Period.

(I'm responding to the preceding paragraph.) We have no way of knowing whether Morrison ever wanted to actually fake his death. What we do have are statements form Hopkins and other Door's members about such an idea. Those were statements that lots of hopeful or gullible fans took as being fact. I think it's helpful to explain why so many people initially refused to believe that Morrison was really dead. Why those beliefs are so enduring is a different story. People like the cowboy hoaxer certainly play on this with some regularity. And, unfortunately, way too many people fall for this stuff. Hey, I just met a guy who fell for the Nigerian bank account scam and lost close to $100,000! And the guy isn't even stupid, at least in the rest of his life, just naive and foolishly hopeful. 24.7.5.47 10 MAR 2006

Let's avoid editorializing on the article page

Someone has rather strong opinions about Morrison and even stronger opinions about Morrison's fans. Unfortunately, nearly all of the edits made by the recent poster rather froth with contempt and, perhaps not surprisingly, make as many errors as the poster has attempted to "correct." I reverted the article to an earlier one by Silentium who seems to be making careful edits. Perhaps the other poster could post his / her remarks on the discussion page so whatever valid concerns he / she raises could be addressed in a non-inflamatory manner. Ande B. 21:25, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

When I first read the information on Jim Morrison, it was pretty accurate. However, during the past few months, a number of typos, grammatical errors and plain misinformation has appeared, examples of which include: Jim was never married. Common law marriage has never existed in California. Dates of birth of Jim's siblings, and other dates and locations where the family lived were deleted. Too much emphasis on whether or not Jim really died is conjecture, not fact.

The article is supposed to be non-biased, straightforward, and factual. There is too much editorializing. It appears some folks would like to change the course of history into their way of thinking, culled, I assume, from the numerous books written about Jim, and seeing "The Doors" movie (which, according to those close to Jim, failed to capture the intelligent, charismatic man and was one long MTV-style video). Information on the Morrison family is speculation only, but presented here as fact. Jim's parents often appear as monsters, something they never were in real life.

I haven't made any changes, just commenting on the subject matter.

A. Beaconsfield

Sorry, Beaconsfield, but you are going beyond editorializing and becoming simply argumentative and hostile on the article page. Your comments belong here where they can be considered more dispassionately.

There are many reasons that bring people to celebrity biographies on Wikipedia. For Morrison, some of the most common are questions are about whether and how he died, whether and to whom he was married. There are plenty of tabloid rumor sites out there and the least that Wikipedia can do is enable the curious reader to satisfy their desire to get at some real facts. Whether you disapprove of people's curiosity is not relevant. If you don't think that certain sources are reliable, and plenty of them aren't, then start a section that responsibly presents the critiques that other, more reliable sources, have made of those weak sources.

I have no idea what you are referring to when you claim that Morrison's parents are represented as monsters.

You seem to have mistaken the definition of NPOV to mean "the point of view that I agree with." I don't believe that is the standard and expect to be corrected by those more knowledgeable than I am if I am wrong about that. Attributing motivations or attempting to psychoanalyze other contributors is not helpful and would be experienced as insulting to most people I know.

As to the near hysterical cry that "California has never recognized common law marriage," you are absolutely wrong. Article Four of the U.S. Constitution requires all the states, including California, to recognize the effect of the laws in other states, even common-law marriages formed in other states. This is generally referred to as the "full faith and credit" and "privileges and immunities" clauses. So, ever since California was admitted as a state, it has accepted the common-law marriage status of those who enter into such arrangements in sister states. The fact that California does not permit common-law marriages to be initiated within its borders is not relevant to the discussion.

It doesn't matter how long it took the California courts to determine whether Courson and Morrison entered into a common-law marriage: that was their ultimate determination and it was never overturned. (There is no such thing as common-law divorce in American law. Common law spouses must go through the same procedures as formally married couples.)

The bulk of the time in the probate case was eaten up by litigation over the amount of debt Morrison owed the Doors for advances made during his life and excessive attorney fees generated in part by Courson's insistence on fighting the Doors and everyone else, including her own attorneys, each step of the way.

Please don't start arguing law with me because, like it or not, I am a California attorney. (Note: Nothing I state here is to be taken as legal advice.)

If you have facts that should be added to the article, by all means add them. But arguments have no place there.

If I have wrongly accused you of making changes actually inserted by someone else, then I seriously apologize and redirect my comments to the real culprit. 24.7.5.47 06:49, 13 March 2006 (UTC) __________________________________________________________________________________ You have wrongly accused me of making changes. Read my last sentence: "I haven't made any changes, just commenting on the subject matter." Apparently, you didn't read that because you were too busy trying to discredit me. I am not arguing with you. BTW, from which law school did you graduate? Stanford Law School here; I practice patent, trademark and intellectual property law in the City.

The only reason Pamela was able to get the "common law marriage" status was because no one appeared on behalf of the family (the next of kin) to dispute that claim. It was her last grab at the Golden Goose. I am surprised by the so-called experts who perpetuate Jim's and Pamela's wonderful relationship when in reality it was a dysfunctional dance by two young adults who were disabled by their own internal problems. No psychoanalysis here, them are the facts.

My rant was directed at the people who make edits without first discussing them here. Repeating rumours and outright whoppers from the various books written about Jim does not an accurate biography make. Jim has turned into a cardboard cut-out on which anyone can paint his or her image of their "Jim," then force feed it to the masses as fact.

If people want to continue exploiting Jim, then by gosh, go ahead and do it. The Estate's coffers only swell with each "new" Morrison adventure. (Amazing how much that guy packed into five years.) By last count, he's been married 4 times, has 11 children, is hiding out in Africa, signed his name over 25 million times (keeping eBay as the premier Morrison goldmine), ad nauseam.

You'd be surprised at the people who knew Jim Morrison well and visit this site to get yet another chuckle at some of the more outrageous claims. Wikipedia is sadly just another extension of the great Morrison myth.

And to Fils du Soleil: Au contraire. You are referring to the "Lizard King," not the real Jim Morrison. If Jim hadn't had competent legal representation, he would have landed in prison over the Miami incident (not to mention his numerous brushes with the law). Jim had nothing but respect for Max Fink and was very impressed by Fink's representation. In fact, Jim became enthralled with the legalities of the trial, namely the "free speech" defense, took copious notes and planned on writing a book about his experiences in America's courts. ----192.168.255.255 _____________________________________________________________________________________

Gee, if lawyers start to get involved, we're never gonna make it... Who would have thought that an article on Jim Morrison required so much legal expertise, especially regarding an artist who had so much loathing for authority and the law in general. Guess life can sometimes be ironic. Fils du Soleil 13:57, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Hello Fils du Soleil, guess ya just never know. When I was in art school I would have never imagined that I would become a lawyer. But I found myself attracted to civil rights and First Amendment issues somewhere along the way. I don't want to be a royal pain about anything here, I get enough of that in my work.

When I first dropped by a little while back, it was because I was helping a kid with a junior high modern music project. The site had been vandalized so I had to direct the research to the handful of books I had on the subject. Then I came back later to get rid of the crap and saw just how fanatic some people are about their own version of "truth." If they could write half-way decently, as most Wiki contributors seem to manage, it probably wouldn't matter much. But strident exclamations on the article page are distracting, to say the least.

I am amazed at the vehemence with which some misinformed people spout legal and medical opinions. I don't see a need for that in the Morrison bio. And I doubt that any current contributor here knew Morrison on a personal basis, so all we have are publications of varying reliability and crazy rumors. Crazy seems to attract the most attention.

Anyhow, for whatever it's worth, I did get beat by the cops at a Doors concert when I was a kid. That should count for something! 24.7.5.47 20:48, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Scott Stapp does not belong

Those musicians who Morrison has influenced is truly long and varied. However, this page cannot be a complete list of such persons. To this end, Scott Stapp's name does not belong alongside the other notable musicians who have had significant impacts on the musical landscape. Until Stapp establishes a larger body of work, his name should not be included.

Morrison's Wife at Common Law

Someone should actually read the probate court's decision. It is NOT a "legal technicality." The probate court in California found that Morrison and Courson contracted a valid marriage under Colorado law.

Colorado is one of eleven U.S. jurisdictions (plus Scotland, outside of the U.S.) which still allow the common law contract of marriage. By living together and holding themselves out to be husband and wife (Morrison referring to her parents as "the in-laws," etc.) in Colorado, they legally became husband and wife under Colorado law. It is irrelevant that California does not permit common law marriage, because California law on validity of marriage provides that all foreign marriages are valid in California if they were lawfully contracted by the law of the place of celebration (or in the legal Latin, "per lex loci celebrationis").

Apart from that, Morrison left a will (dated 12 February 1969) in which Courson was named sole heir, provided she survived his death by three months. California probate and family courts are NOT sentimental. If the California court found a marriage was lawfully contracted under Colorado law, then that was indeed the case in fact, as well as in law. Whether Morrison himself (or even Courson) actually beleived they were contracting a common law marriage at the time they did is a debatable question, but that they *did* contract a marriage at common law under the laws of Colorado is *legally* a proven fact, whatever either of them may have thought they were doing.

The ruling by the court simply reinforced the provisions of Morrison's will. Courson having inherited his entire estate by will, as well as as his wife, the heirs to that estate upon HER death were, thus, HER heirs at law instead of Morrison's heirs at law -- that is, HER parents got the lot instead of HIS parents when she died in 1974.

Oh, by the way, California IS a common law state. All of the individual states, and the United States (i.e., the federal entity), common law states EXCEPT for Louisiana, which is a civil law (or code law) state. "Common law state" means the basic law of the jurisdiction is the common law of England. "Civil" or "code law state" means the basic law of the jurisdiction is the French civil code, as propounded by Napoleon. (It was Napoleon who sold Louisiana to the United States in 1803.) Whether a state is or is not a "common law state" is irrelevant to common law marriage.

207.200.116.132 07:08, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

The whole "common-law wife" thing is irrelevant to this article. It's a legal ruling made after Jim died, and in the context of the resolution of his will. So it has no significance other than a legal technicality. When Jim was alive, Pamela Courson was his girlfriend for the last years of his life, and his "cosmic mate" - which is already a lot. So the "common-law wife" ruling may be mentioned in passing, as an aside (which is the case now), but NOT made a central part of Jim & Pam's relationship, and certainly not be mentioned in the introduction of the article, as was the case in an ealier version.

Fils du Soleil 14:28, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

You know, Fils, I'm tempted to agree with you on this part. The common-law stuff was here long before I came around but it does seem to add a lot of consternation. My concern about reducing it too much is that inevitably someone will add it back in and the battles will start all over again. I'm thinking of maybe adding a sentence that says something like "the decision by the court was made in the context of Courson's application for a widow's allowance." Then, perhaps a link to the Courson page for further details. I was surprised that Courson had her own Wikipedia page. Shows what I know about who is important it the minds of fans! Ande B. 22:48, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Good point, Fils! I agree with both of you. The common law designation was awarded by the probate court only after Pamela's petition was filed, and Jim had been dead for several years. Jim was never married to anyone and, while he and Pamela had a somewhat dysfunctional relationship, she was the main person in his life. Giving more attention to Patricia Kennealy only perpetuates the myth she has created for herself as Jim's bereaved widow.

BTW, the biography as presently written is excellent. Well balanced -- not too "out there" (vis-a-vis the rock idol Lizard King image) and not too tame. I like the mixture of conjecture and rumours about Jim's death, since like it or not, these are part of the reason for Jim's continuing popularity and newfound fans.

I suspect when the two documentaries come out in 2007 celebrating The Doors' 40th anniversary, more information about Jim will become known. Admiral Morrison and his daughter Anne met with Dick Wolf on a Saturday afternoon in December 2005 to discuss and participate in the main documentary set for theatrical release. ---- Annie1004, 13:32, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

I have reverted the recent reinsertion and expansion of the details about various common-law marriage laws, which was done by User:207.200.116.14 (who has now been blocked for vandalism). This is not an article about common-law marriage laws. The legalese that was there would be confusing to the average reader, and the section was already too long. I had already worked twice to compress it and bring its tone more in line with the rest of the article. I think I was erring to the side of verbosity by leaving as much in as I did. User:207.200.116.14, if you become un-blocked and seek to edit this article some more, please do not just re-insert these long tangents into the article. Consider working on articles on that topic, and come discuss any proposed additions to this article here on the talk page. And when you do, please place new comments *after* the previous comments, not before them. Thank you. --Kathryn NicDhàna 04:35, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Inscription on tomb

I changed the wording slightly in the section dealing with the transcription on Morrison's tomb. In Roman characters, it reads: KATA TON DAIMONA EAYTOY. Only the Greek delta is changed to the letter "D." Previously, the description read that this was a "transliteration," which was inaccurate and may have induced someone to attempt to render the pronunciation into English. My background with ancient Greek is quite rusty and focused on the Aeolic dialect, I don't know what dialect was chosen for the inscription. Most of the time, the Greek character upsilon is transcribed as a capital "Y" although it is generally pronounced as "u." I don't know which dialect would render the upsilon as "u" in one instance but as "v" in another' although the "V" may have been intended as the Greek letter "nu." I'm not familiar with that convention and would appreciate it if the person who rendered that transliteration could point me in the proper direction. I believe it is more useful for the reader to see the letters as transcribed rather than an attempt at an English pronunciation. Thanks for any insight. Ande B. 01:45, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Film

Does anybody know the whereabouts of Morrison's thesis film?

ABresnahan 16:35, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

I seem to recall Manzarek saying he thought that it had been lost during one of Morrison's relocations after school. Try asking at The Doors official site. Ande B 06:03, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Grandparents

I corrected the names of Morrison's grandparents and removed a weird line inserted by the same spammer. Ande B 06:03, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

My understanding from several family members is that Jim was particularly close to his grandmother, Caroline Morrison, because she encouraged & nurtured his passion for the arts (something neither Clara nor Steve had any use for; this was the cause of a lot of friction between parents and son). OTOH, according to the books writtens about Jim, the Admiral's parents were cold/strict/teetotaling, etc., which is not accurate.----Annie1004 13:59, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Hello Annie 1004, I'm sure that the Morrison family has been subject to a great deal of unfair criticism and pop-psychologizing by people who have nothing better to do. But the Wikipedia is designed to reflect what is callled "verifiable" and "sourced" matierial, which may not necessarily "true" or "accurate" material. This is understandably a source of frustration to those who have actual, personal knowledge about a person or any topic. If you know of a verifiable, written or recorded source of reliable information that contradicts any of the material in this article, then it would probably help your cause to cite to that material as a source for clarification. As you no doubt understand, the Wikipedia cannot simiply accept the word of contributors because, on the internet, anyone can make claims that are incapable of being verified. It also takes some practice to learn to write to the "approved" Wikipedia "neutral" style. I'm going to suggest that we consider creating a subsection to this article captioned something like "Problems in verifying Morrison's personal history." Perhaps inconsistencies among various authors and from interviews can be briefly high-lighted there. But unless the Morrison family makes a publicly available statement for all to read, we're pretty much stuck with the written materials, good or bad, that have managed to be published. And I, for one, would not blame the Morrisons for being reluctant to talk to the media. Ande B 22:07, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Aliases/Nicknames

Shouldn't there be a section, or at least a sentence in one of the sections, that lists Morrison's nicknames? It seems strange that there isn't one already...but if there was one, why delete it?--Reed9277 22:59, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

==Question== Was Jim Morrison Gay?

Need opening photo pronto

Jim Morrison is a major cultural and historical figure, and we need a photo of him at the beginning of the article. Can someone suggest a good source for fair use images of Jim?--Pinko1977 20:37, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Both pictures are the same

Both pictures of Jim Morrison are the same. Could there be a different picture for the beginning of the article? Rocketqueen 15:36, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Relationships

Something about Jim Morrison's past girlfriends before Pam Courson, such as Mary Werbelow, should be added along with his red-head 'fetish'.

I'm curious as to why there isn't any reference to, at least, the Mary Werbelow story. (Which, from my understanding, is fairly credible and well-researched by the St. Petersberg Times -- http://www.sptimes.com/2005/09/25/Doors/Mary_and_Jim_to_the_e.shtml )

If we're going to talk girlfriends/lovers/one nighters or what have you, what about Gloria Stavers of 16 magazine? There are SEVERAL sources that have her romantically linked to Morrison.

Native American

I heard he had some Native American in him, anyone know if this is true or not?--Stripedtiger 06:16, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Story about Indians "fake"?

"Both of Morrison's parents claimed that event never happened. In his many comments about this episode, Morrison stated that he was so upset by the incident that his parents eventually told him he was "just having a bad dream," in order to calm him down. Regardless of whether the incident was real, imagined, or fabricated, Morrison stuck with it and made repeated references to the imagery in his songs, poems, and interviews."

What is the source for this? Cheers.

Rock and Roll Hall of Fame in Cleveland Ohio / Jim Morrison

I was just recently at the Rock and The Roll Hall of Fame maybe about two weeks or more so ago as of this date here in the talk section. And I had taken particular interest to the small exhibit that was focused mainly on Jim Morrisson. I did my best to pay careful and close attention to the chronology time line of the letters and photos through all of 1965 and well into 1971 to and from Jim Morrisson before the time of when he and the Doors had gotten there start. Now in and around what was maybe 1965 for when Jim did not seem to have such long hair as he is so well known today from so many photos that are circulated all over the world leading up to the time for when he died in Paris in what I think was possibly either 1970 or 1971. I was kind of somewhat amazed from that exhibit. That before the time of when the Doors had got there start and in the letters and the photos with his family. He had seemed to me quite bright and educated and infact lucid and clear not just in the ways of poetry and of language and cinema and of film but also in many other ways as well. And so then maybe 4 or 5 years later he is found dead inside of some bath tub somewhere there in Paris. It seemed a shame even though I never really let him nor knew him as others did. I guess that is what excess drinking and drugs will do in a person. Before the formation of the Doors, he had seemed quite sharply intelligent and balanced and rational and educated and quite a unique and a interesting person back in 1965 to know.
www.geocities.com/berniethomas68 06:57, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Ed Sullivan lyrics

Why did Ed Sullivan want the lyrics changed? There is nothing wrong with "girl we couldn't get much higher". I don't see any drug references in that line. Being or getting high can have so many different meanings. Like in Tal Bachman's - She's so High, I don't think he's talking someone high on drugs. Its very strange that anyone would find this line offensive.Davez621 08:05, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, apparantly Ed Sullivan and his associates considered the phrase to refer specifically to drugs. If I had been there, I would have suggested to the group that they ask the Sullivan Show officials if they could replace it with “Girl, we couldn’t GO much higher,” then if they approved that, to add, “Girl, we couldn’t GO TOO much higher,” and if they approved that, just sing it with the vowel sounds in “go” and “too” lapsed into a “schwa,” sounding like, “Girl, we couldn’t guh-tuh much higher,” and then, sung in the rhythm and melody of the song, the audience would barely be able to distinguish any change at all between that and the original lyrics. (Sigh) Too bad I wasn’t there to think that up and suggest it to them, eh? —Keith H.

Rolling Stone Mag in 1985

"He's Young, He's Hot, He's Sexy and He's Dead" - worth adding anywhere in to the article?

The Soft Parade

I think there should be a little more mention of the albums, Waiting For The Sun, and especially The Soft Parade (which has no mention at all). As the latter is heavy with orchestrated music, and an example of the Doors' courage in testing new ground, it is worthy of mention. Especially in context of how the staple popular songs from earlier albums were becoming 'boring' for Jim. As for Waiting For the Sun, the mention could focus around how originally, Jim was wanting one side to be an entire recording of Celebration of The Lizard, but was later decided against. So, I'll leave this up to any regular contributors to discuss and/or implement in the article. G.g. 19:06, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

• I agree this would be a worthy addition to the article (although Celebration of the Lizard is already alluded to here and there). And it doesn't sound like something controversial. You seem to have a fair knowledge of the subject, so you should try implementing these ideas into the article. This is what Wikipedia is all about.

Fils du Soleil 03:36, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

• Ray stated in an interview that the live PBS performance of The Soft Parade was one of the best Doors performances ever recorded -- no source -- Krysstoffer Rodriguez-Lopez

Crusty

You forgot the Simpson's episode where Crusty was playing a montage of past shows with him screaming into the microphone while lying on the stage just like you know who.

200.165.103.213 20:06, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Editorializing

I think the section about the legacy of Morrison and the Doors contains some editorializing that should be deleted. Specifically, I refer to the passage:

They let us "break on through to the other side", however briefly. They did indeed open the "doors of perception", doors that can never be shut again. And that is probably the true legacy of Jim Morrison and The Doors.

I appreciate and understand the author's feelings, but this is not really suitable for a Wikipedia entry.

Any comments?

--Skb8721 20:12, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. This article has an ongoing problem with opinion and POV being inserted. Contributors need to remember that this is an encyclopedia, not a music review or personal essay. --Kathryn NicDhàna 20:21, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

• Although it is probably on the fringe of Wikipedia's standard practice, this small paragraph you refer to seems appropriate in an article about a music idol. And it has been here for quite a while without causing any trouble. 172.210.94.179 11:50, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

"[Friedrich] Nietzsche killed Jim Morrison..."

I'd love to include this John Densmore quote in here somewhere. The artistic influences or death sections are the most obvious candidates, but those are pretty well-written right now, and right off hand I can't see anyplace it wouldn't disrupt the flow. Thoughts? Also, if someone has the page number of the quote (from Riders on the Storm by Densmore) it would be good to be able to cite that. --Kathryn NicDhàna 00:36, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

• Do you know what John Densmore meant by that ? Is this a reference to Jim's "dionysiac lifestyle" ? Or just a pun related to Nietzsche's "God is dead, we killed him" ? - Fils du Soleil 00:54, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

I don't have the Densmore book at hand but, IIRC, he was referring to Jim, like many other young people, being adversely affected by Nietzsche's philosophies, and that those ideas led him to act in a self-destructive manner. So, imho, the former, but the latter does add another level of possible interpretation :-) Hence, I added it to the article a while back. --Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 19:59, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

What value does that quote give to the article? Maybe it should be on Wikiquote or in Densmore's article. It really seems out of place in the middle of that paragraph. I will not delete, though, until more people state their opinions.(Antonio.sierra 01:30, 21 March 2007 (UTC))

JIM MORRISON ACCIDENT - YEAR

Hope I'm doing this correctly.

Just saw this in Morrison article.

According to Morrison, one of the most important events of his life occurred in 1949 during a family trip in New Mexico. He described the event as follows:[citation needed]

The accident is being researched for a documentary. So far research shows it happened in 1947, not 1949, while the Admiral was stationed in New Mexico. Jim said it was when he was around four years old, maybe just turned five, before they moved to Los Altos, California. I'll check data, since you need a citation and get back soon.Salliort 23:08, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

LA WOMAN ALBUM REHEARSAL DATE CORRECTION

I would like to add a correction to:

After a lengthy break, the group reconvened in November 1970 to record what proved to be their last LP with Morrison, L.A. Woman.

Actually the group had reconvened for rehearsals for the album by the week of October 12, 1970. I interviewed Jim for Circus Magazine on October 13, 1970. They had a meeting that day after the interview and I watched one of the rehearsals for L.A. Woman on October 15, 1970. - Documented in Lost Interview Tapes: Number Two.Salliort 23:22, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Any editors reading this? Guess not. Also Stephen Davies' book, 'Jim Morrison, Life, Death, Legend' Chapter 8, (citation)Salliort 17:32, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Kathryn, It's now several weeks later and I'm wondering why you have not bothered to answer my request to clarify Patricia's real standing with Jim Morrison which was that Jim did not take the ceremony seriously. Her own words in the book Rock Wives and her own words in the Riders on the Storm CD clearly state the doubt she had about Jim's feelings matching her own.

We need balance on this. I do not find the entry as it stands balanced in the inference. So let's change it with Patricia's. What we have about Patricia now is contributing to the lack of credibility from which Wikipedia seems now to be suffering.)Salliort 23:17, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

KENNEALY MORRISON - PRESBYTERIAN MINISTER WITNESS. HANDFASTING LEGITIMATE?

Kathryn,

I have checked a variety of sources: Kennealy Morrison's autobiography, her Rock Wives interview, newspaper interviews, etc. The only place I can find any reference to the "Presbyterian Minister" is in Kennealy Morrison's blog on livejournal.

Since "blogs are largely not acceptable as sources" (wikipedia usage-sources) and every other source I was able to find in various archives and search engines does not in any way identify the witness as a Presbyterian minister, I hope you concur that it is not correct to keep that reference in Jim's article.

I would like to discuss this with other editors as well.

It's in *Strange Days*, hang on and I'll see if I can find the page number... page 63, hardcover edition. --Kathryn NicDhàna 22:18, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for the info.

A question as to WIKI procedure: My source for almost all of my information about Jim came directly from Jim. We were able to discuss a great deal about both personal and other subjects over the period of time we knew each other.

What makes my personal experience "Original Research," which cannot be used on Wikipedia, different from Patricia's first hand information (Original Research), which is used as a fact on Wikipedia? Is it the fact that Patricia wrote her original research in her AUTObiography?

You have said you also have knowledge. What makes it different for both of us?Salliort 00:04, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi Sallie, What makes your, or my, recollections or analysis of the matter (or our recollections of what someone else may have said to us) Original Research is that our opinions and recollections have not been previously published by a reputable source. And if they had, it would be more appropriate for another editor to document our work than for us to quote ourselves. What makes the inclusion of information that was published in Strange Days not Original Research is that, even though it is an autobiography, it was published by a major publishing house (Dutton/Penguin). In order for the book to be published, the content had to first be cleared by the firm's lawyers. This degree of accountability is one of the things that makes it a more Reliable source than, say, a posting on a personal web site or message board. If the author of that book wanted to come here and post additional recollections that had not been previously published, she would also not be permitted to add those things as any unpublished recollections would be considered original research. Please read the links. I hope this makes it clearer. --Kathryn NicDhàna 00:39, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Thank you, Kathryn, it does. Salli Salliort 05:51, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Kathryn,

I have asked for a more balanced POV on the Kennealy handfasting ceremony. Several days ago you asked for documentation. Several days ago I posted the section pertaining to this matter for you on private talk.

The Doors on the Doors, (Hyperion) gives Jim's POV. It is now documented that Jim did not take the ceremony seriously. The way the article on Jim currently reads it gives the facts but in a manner that clearly conveys that Jim also took the whole ceremony seriously. Since Jim did not and it is documented, it is my opinion that it would be proper for you to finally allow the quote from Victoria Balfour's Rock Wives where Patricia says that Jim probably didn't take it seriously, or a quote from the new release, Babe Hill's quote perhaps. I think this would be the fair and accurate thing to do. Isn't that what Wikipedia is about, fairness and accuracy? Salliort 00:26, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Well, we could add a quote from one person (say, Babe Hill) who claims Jim said one thing about the ceremony, then another who swears he said another thing, plus the letters and poems Jim addressed, "To my wife, Patricia" and "To Patricia Morrison". Then we could add a quote from one person who claims Jim swore he was leaving Pam and only stayed with her out of pity, then a quote from someone who claims Jim swore to the end Pam was his one and only. Then a quote from someone who claims Jim said he was intending to reconcile with his parents, and another who claims Jim died yelling "I hate my father". That's a lot of clutter. A lot of hearsay. I think the approach we have now is best: Just the facts. What *is* documented is that Jim signed a document stating that he and Patricia declared themselves "wedded". That is of a whole different order of proof than hearsay. --Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 01:09, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Kathryn,

The quotes in The Doors latest book (published by Hyperion) were run through the same legal process as Patricia's book "Strange Days." So to use any of those quotes would follow the documentation Wikipedia allows.

That is why we should have Patricia's quote from her interview in Rock Wives about Jim's probably not taking the ceremony seriously. That would solve the whole problem. It is a fact. Patricia said it. It is documented in a book that went through the same legal process as Patricia's Strange Days. It is probably the most honest statement Patricia has made about the handfasting.

The only Mrs. Morrison that I knew of was Pamela and she was legally Jim's wife per the states of California and Colorado. So the letters addressed to "My wife, Patricia," are doubtful as to source, because the veracity of the handwriting as Jim's is in question by those who are familiar with his handwriting.

Additionally, those particular letters seem to have increased since Jim's death. The letters that Victoria Balfour and Jerry Hopkins saw were described as a very small handful. Jim referred to about ten letters, poems, and drawings in total that he sent to her in 1970, not 1971. By 1971 Jim was through with her and had kicked her out of his life. So the fact that Patricia says they are legitimate, doesn't hold a lot of credibility in my book. I would take Jim's word over Patricia's letters, notes, and "document."

Finally, I have to wonder why you're stalling on this. What is your interest here? It can't be just Wikipedia. If so, you'd just allow the quote from Patricia in Rock Wives.

As I have posted to you repeatedly over the last couple of weeks, that would balance the tone and allow Patricia to save what face she is able to, in view of the fact that the only principal participant who took that handfasting seriously was Patricia.Salliort 18:03, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Kathryn,

It's been a couple of weeks.

The section on Patricia's ceremony still reads as though both Jim and Patricia took the ceremony seriously.

Jim did not. Patricia knew that. She said so on a CD, which I have in my possession, and in Rock Wives, so will you stop blocking the posting of a reasonable and more balanced view in Jim's article and allow the quote from Rock Wives?

It's avoidance like yours that is contributing to Wikipedia's loosing credibility in research circles.

Perhaps you would like to refer this to someone else at Wikipedia who might have a different perspective on this situation?Salliort 23:36, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

JIM FILM SCHOOL: UCLA DID NOT HAVE ONE THEN

Jim studied at the College of Fine Arts, UCLA. The College of Fine Arts was established in 1960, with degrees available in art, dance, music, and theater arts.

Although Jim studied film courses at the College of Fine Arts, he got his degree in Theater Arts.

UCLA did not have a film school until 1989 when it became the School of Theater, Film and Television which replaced the College of Fine Arts.

See UCLA History Project on UCLA website. Salliort 16:47, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

The Theatre Arts department was UCLA's film school. Everybody called it "film school". While we should be technically accurate, we should make it clear he was attending film school. The new language is too indirect. -Will Beback · † · 19:26, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Actually no, it wasn't.

In 1963-64-65 the Theater Arts Department was part of the College of Fine Arts. The Theater Arts Department was not ever listed as UCLA's film school. After basic courses in theater, you could study courses in Theater or Film. The film courses at UCLA were not as extensive as what they are now. They were not comparable to the courses taught at USC's film school at that time. The curriculums were different in scope and importance.

People who went to UCLA or planned to go to UCLA said they were studying film or cinematography, but there was no film school there. Therefore, Jim could not attend film school.

From what I remember, calling it the film school was something that they called it after they left UCLA, not while they were studying film there.

In 1963-64 I was planning to transfer from Santa Monica City College to the College of Fine Arts where I was going to study theater as opposed to studying film or cinematography. I had friends there studying cinematography and theater classes.Salliort 22:59, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

I just know that it was common usage to refer to UCLA's "film school" long before 1989. I think we should be correct but not punctilious. If Morrison said he went to film school then we should also incorporate that usage. -Will Beback · † · 05:49, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

"Film school" is the common usage, even among those at UCLA.[4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12]. I've edited the text to include both designations. -Will Beback · † · 22:46, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

guys, who died before 30

We should start such a category, not? Jimi Hendrix, Curt Kobain, Jim Morrison, James Dean ...

We had one, it got deleted.

A Deleted Paragraph (But added, due to its beauty, to the discussion section)

Since this paragraph is problematic as part of an encyclopedia, I deleted it. However, since it is such a profound and beautifully worded paragraph, I moved it here so it could be preserved.

--Andy Jones

"If my poetry aims to achieve anything, it's to deliver people from the limited ways in which they see and feel", Jim once said. And that is exactly what he and The Doors achieved. With their hauntingly beautiful music that stays with you long after "the music's over", they take us to uncharted territories. They let us "break on through to the other side", however briefly. They did indeed open the "doors of perception", doors that can never be shut again. And that is probably the true legacy of Jim Morrison and The Doors. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 12.210.68.227 (talk) 12:10, 16 December 2006 (UTC).

• This paragraph should probably be put back in. Although it is on the fringe of Wikipedia's "standard policy", it is indeed quite well written and informative, and it's probably acceptable in an article about a music idol (and it's been here for a very long time without causing any trouble). - 172.204.69.111 03:08, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

That material certainly does not belong. It is not written in an encyclopedic tone and makes POV value judgments without attribution. -Will Beback · † · 22:44, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. It does not belong in the article. ~ Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 23:01, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Also agreed. The paragraph clearly doesn't fit with the rest of the article. Wikipedia isn't the proper venue for a tribute of this type, it needs to be removed or edited so that it conforms to wikipedia's conventions. 211.31.161.9 13:50, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Jim Morrison & The Doors' Legacy

Here is the paragraph in question, for future reference (keeping it, removing it, or putting it back in). - Fils du Soleil 19:40, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Jim Morrison often claimed he walked in the footsteps of French poet Arthur Rimbaud (1854-1891), once having said, "I am a Rimbaud with a leather jacket". Some sources allege, although it's unverified, that while in France at the end of his life, Jim undertook a pilgrimage to Rimbaud's birthplace in northeastern France, Charleville.

This lineage between "the man with the soles of wind" (Rimbaud's nickame) and "the Lizard King" (Jim's nickname) is very fitting. Both symbolized the bravado and the rebellion of youth against a conservative society that seeks to squelch the individual through social control. Both were brilliant individuals torn between their ambition to shake things up through their art and their temptation to drift away, before being caught up and finally struck down by their inner demons. Most of all, they were both visionaries with a profound and mystical feeling that there is something "more", something "beyond", something that their poetry and music allowed us to touch, if only for a brief moment.

"If my poetry aims to achieve anything, it's to deliver people from the limited ways in which they see and feel", Jim once said. And that is exactly what he and The Doors achieved. With their hauntingly beautiful music that stays with you long after "the music's over", they take us to uncharted territories. They let us "break on through to the other side", however briefly. They did indeed open the "doors of perception", doors that can never be shut again. And that is probably the true legacy of Jim Morrison and The Doors.

Celebration of the Lizard (Absolutely Live)

Jim "You know whats really weird; Los Angeles California has the best landscape and climate and all that, but New York has the grooviest people". To which the crowd goes wild. This would lead me to believe that the version in absolutely live is in New York and not the Aquarias in LA?????

Wild Child

I doubt that the song Wild Child is about Arthur Rimbaud as the subject of the song is ostensibly a young woman - the subject matter may refer to Rimbaud, but I wouldn't go so far as to say it was about Rimbaud. Tzittnan 22:35, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Please don't replace his entire life story with, "he is a god."

That's all... please respect the man and don't destroy this page. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sholt8 (talk • contribs) 04:44, 10 March 2007 (UTC).

   Why not?--Jimbolives (talk) 06:03, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Do not delete the information regarding the Ed Sullivan show, about the two songs.

There were two songs performed on Ed Sullivan the day that Light My Fire became controversial, which also included People are Strange. There are numerous videos available and even a TV Episode guide website features the songs performed on Ed Sullivan. Please, let's do some research before we delete information that is credible.

Influence on some hip hop artists

I would just like to add these hip/hop songs and artists influenced by Jim Morrison: On Jay-Z's sixth album his song "Takeover" uses a sample of The Doors "Five to One". On Talib Kweli's first album the song "Down for the Count" contains a lyric by Talib Kweli saying, "Like Jim Morrison we break on through before I care about your take on me, we take on you".

Encounter with Janis Joplin

The "alleged alcohol-fueled encounter with Janis Joplin that left Joplin in tears." is describes differently at http://www.janisjoplin.net/friends/?id=3. The article there is allegedly taken from "Break On Through: The Life and Death of Jim Morrison" and left Jim "crushed" because she rejected him due to his violent behavior when drunk. Of course, that doesn't rule out she was left in tears, too. 87.123.52.37 09:10, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Please stop "editing with an ax" !

These sentences were in the opening of the article :

• (...) and is considered to be one of the most charismatic frontmen in the history of rock music.
• Morrison's death at the age of 27 in Paris stunned his fans; the circumstances of his death and secret burial have been the subject of endless rumours and play a significant part in the mystique that continues to surround him.

A user (Tecmobowl) removed them abruptly, citing respectively "npov" and "made it encyclopedic". He changed the second one to : "The circumstances of his death and burial are not fully known".

I think this raises an important question about Wikipedia : does "being encyclopedic" mean sounding like a police report ? It is policy that edits be NPOV and verifiable, and rightfully so ; but it doesn't mean that they can't also be pleasant and stimulating to read whenever possible - in particular when the subject is a music icon.

I did not write these sentences - and I don't know who did, although it could be found by sifting through the history of the article. But they had been in the opening of the article for a very, very long time. So I put them back in, considering that they are well-written and set the backdrop about Jim Morrison pretty well. This is obviously open to discussion.

More generally, please consider that being true to Wikipedia's spirit and policies doesn't necessarily mean acting like Torquemada. Thanks. - Fils du Soleil 23:48, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

The same user (Tecmobowl) also arbitrarily removed entire chunks of the section "Early years" ([13]) on the same ground that he deemed it "unencyclopedic". This section contained much valuable information, in particular about his family and early years, or important developments about the "dead indians" episode by which Morrison claimed to have been strongly influenced. Again, it is far from being "encyclopedic" to arbitrarily remove big chunks of the article just because you deem them, by your own standards, "unencyclopedic". This could even be seen as a form of "soft vandalism". Please first discuss here on this talk page any other changes of this nature that you intend to make in the future. Thanks. - Fils du Soleil 15:48, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

I did not arbitrarily remove anything. While you may wish that articles here have a bit more color, the goal of wiki is to serve as an encyclopedia. This is not a place for literary creativity. If you have a problem with the style, then rewrite it. However, many of the statements and claims in this article are made without reference. This needs to be fixed. If you want to expand on the section I have edited, please do so. But use encyclopedic information that is based on relevant and reliable sources. // Tecmobowl 02:23, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Well. I think we have a problem here. You removed even more information, this time to the section "The Doors". I do not question your good faith, but the fact is that you are deleting much valuable information based only on your personal and restrictive view of what you deem "encyclopedic". Again, I did not write these parts, so this is not a defense of "my" edits. They were here when I started contributing to the article, and they had already been here for a very long time.

Clearly, we now need some outside input so as not fall into some pointless "edit war" (see below). I will revert your last edits until this question is solved, to the state were the article was before the disputed changes. Please do not make further edits of this sort before a consensus is reached on the question. Thanks - Fils du Soleil 00:03, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

CALL TO OTHER CONTRIBUTORS : the opinion of other contributors to this article would be much appreciated, so we can try and reach some sort of consensus. See above for the details of the dispute. Here are some of the questionable edits made by user Tecmobowl :

1) Abrupt changes to the introduction, the ending of which now reads like a police report : [14], [15].

2) Removal of many external links, with only this justification "enough with the external links" : [16].

3) Suppression of much valuable information about Jim Morrison's early years, including his family background : [17].

4) Same thing for the section of the article "The Doors" : abrupt changes, with no other effect than removing information and making the article less pleasant to read : [18].

- Fils du Soleil 00:03, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

• • You want to avoid a revert war yet all you do is revert my changes. The fact of the matter is, the information I removed was not sourced. Being from the States, I am very familiar with Jim Morrison and the Doors. Unfortunately, this article is for the general public. I am not suppressing information, just removing information that is irrelevant, in the wrong place, and/or non-encyclopedic. More does not always equal better. If you want information in the article, then provide sources. You'll notice that the article is tagged because it lacks sources. // Tecmobowl 06:03, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

• • For that matter, it was difficult not to edit out more of the content. This article is in horrible shape. It is absent a neutral point of view and is not written like an encyclopedia entry. // Tecmobowl 06:06, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

• • In response to the newly titled section, I have every intention of axing information that does not belong. I will do so when my schedule permits. Statements of opinion and unsourced "facts" do not have a place on wikipedia. // Tecmobowl 23:51, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

You're free to do what you want. But in the future you may want to ease up a little bit, and have a little more consideration for the contributions of other editors that don't fit exactly in your vision of things. Again, it is an excellent thing to follow Wikipedia's policies and guidelines ; but that doesn't mean one has to act like Torquemada. - Fils du Soleil 00:18, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Let's keep in mind also that an encyclopedia, especially one like Wikipedia that transcends the space limitations of print, enjoys the luxury of covering its subjects in considerable depth. Brevity is not a virtue here if it means short-changing the readers and giving them less than a complete view of not only the person Jim Morrison was but also his place in the music and culture of his times. It is neither an exaggeration nor POV to state that Morrison was and is widely "considered to be one of the most charismatic frontmen in the history of rock music," and I can't imagine any definition of "encyclopedic" that would require such an important background detail to be omitted. One of our goals here ought to be to help the reader understand the significance of Morrison's work and his place in American rock music of that period. An encyclopedia doesn't have to read like Jack Webb narrating an episode of Dragnet. If a better job of sourcing and footnoting needs to be done, then let's work on that, instead of just hacking out potentially important material that others have contributed. Let's treat each other with respect, and make sure that our only agenda here is creating the best article about Jim Morrison that we can. - Mark Dixon 19:33, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

• Tecmo Banned Indefinitely. FYI--Tecmo has been banned indefinitely for repeated violations of Wiki policy.--Epeefleche 01:30, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Life in Paris

Does anyone have more information about what Jim did in his last four months in Paris? I plan on reading the books, but just curious. 66.150.206.225 21:07, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Ok-- found a site here: http://www.geocities.com/SunsetStrip/Palladium/1409/

Grave popularity

From the article: "Morrison's grave is amongst the most popular graves in the cemetery and has become one of the most popular tourist destinations in Paris" Yeah right. In a city where you can choose to visit the Eiffel Tower, Louvre, Versailles or the Notre Dame among many other places. Does someone really believe that many people will visit Jim Morrisons grave over those places(+50 more) i mentioned?

Er, yes. They do. And the gravesite is featured in the definitive guide, Cimetières et sépultures de Paris. 69.3.210.139 05:55, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Supposedly, Jim Morrison's grave is one of the 10 most popular attractions in Paris - after la Tour Eiffel, le Louvre, Notre Dame or l'Arc de Triomphe, of course. But I should add that the whole Père Lachaise cemetery is a popular visit in Paris, both for locals and tourists, notably because of the many famous people buried there. Special "theme circuits" are even organized - eg "Romantic writers and poets", "Historical figures", "Practionners of the occult", etc. - Fils du Soleil 22:18, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

I currently live here in Paris and have been to Le cimetière du Père-Lachaise several times in search of graves of artists I work on (and because it is fantastic and peaceful). Anytime I am anywhere near division 16 I am constantly asked by people from all over the world where the grave of Jim Morrison is. As a matter of fact, if you even look a bit lost in the part of the cemetery near the entrance served by the Philippe Auguste Métro stop, the guards who work there will ask you if you are looking for the grave of Jim Morrison. It is assumed. Just the other day, while leaving, I encountered a Polish family, an older Japanese woman, three blonde Californian teenagers, and a smootching couple of indeterminate origin, all hurriedly making the pilgrimage in the last 15 minutes before the cemetery closed. "Où est la tombe de Ghzeem Moreeszohn ?!" Right outside that entrance there is a bar completely devoted to Jim Morrison with a painted mural, a bunch of newspaper clippings, etc. So even though this is my own anecdotal contribution I can well believe that it is a very visited site. I have not seen his grave personally, but if it is anything like Oscar Wilde's grave there it is pretty popular. I was actually surprised that he is still this popular all over the world. Saudade7 10:06, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

I agree with the disputable facts of Jim Morrison's gravesite being a popular destination. I personally would really enjoy going there above all other Parisian destinations if I ever went there! 71.195.232.174 (talk) 02:56, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

3RR

Someone may want to get a 3RR against Referento.--Epeefleche 16:12, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Blocked 72 hrs for spamming. The 3RR was a factor, as well. - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 16:46, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

John Hennigan "Tribute"

I'd hardly call it a tribute. If John Morrison is indeed a reproduction of Jim Morrison, it's hardly a flattering one.Quadrophenic youth 03:38, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

I also think it's OR. I say we ditch it. - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 15:33, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

There are a number of sources that at least speculate on the subject. I think it's okay to say that there is speculation that has not been confirmed. I'm just not sure "tribute" is the right word. Not only does he play the "bad guy", he also uses Jim Morrison's trademark slightly mystical way of speech to make himself seem pretentious.Quadrophenic youth 04:25, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Not only that, but he has called his finishing manouvre the "Moonlight Drive". Mean anything? Lemon Demon (talk) 18:00, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Didn't know where else to put this: What about the cowboy in Oregon who claims to be Jim and lists Densmore and the FBI as his proof that he is Jim??? Can anyone in Oregon verify?rodeoswest.com

Sparking a riot??

I just happened to be reading Jim Morrison and I see that the famous indecent exposure incident has been rendered incomprehensible. I know that there are folks who say it didn't happen and I also know people who were at the concert and say it did. It certainly was a huge deal at the time so why isn't it discussed here? Can we not mention penis and masturbation in Wikipedia? Or is this gap part of the bickering over style that seems to be afflicting this entry? (For what it is worth, I vote for interesting style over Jack Webb every time.) Parsnip13 15:32, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Just Sad

Only in the current state of the U.S. and (Britain?) would a page about Jim Morrison be constructed wherein "Estate Controversy" came before "Artistic Roots". I am not even a Jim Morrison or Doors fan but when I compare the French version [19] to this one, with its careful emphasis on the person as an artist and poet and on his artistic and intellectual influences, I realize more and more that I was born on the wrong continent (North America / U.S.). Saudade7 09:23, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

That's a pity. I recommend looking up http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emigration at your earliest convenience.

Sources

I've added about 15-20 sources in the last few hours. Is that enough to remove that God-awful tag at the top of the page? :P faithless (^speak) 10:37, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

I think it depends on our goals here. If we have a goal of making this a Good Article, or better, it will need additional sourcing and work. In that case, it would be useful to leave the flag up top. However, in terms of the general run of articles on WP, I think the sourcing is at a mid-level now, and requests for additional citations could probably be served well enough by calling for citations on specific statements or sections.

I haven't gone over all the sources yet, but thanks for taking the time to add them! - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 21:10, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Jim Morrison photo.jpg

Image:Jim Morrison photo.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 04:36, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Weasel words

I added a "weasel" tag to warn people about this.Boab 05:20, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Death

QUOTE: "While there are many conspiracy theories concerning Morrison's death, the official version is widely accepted as the most likely."

• "He died on July 3, 1971, at age 27, and, in one account of his death, was found in the rue Beautreillis apartment bathtub by Courson."
• "no autopsy was performed"
• "Courson had given numerous contradictory versions of Morrison's death"

What is "the official version"? Death2 07:30, 3 November 2007 (UTC) Death2 15:19, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Good work done on sourcing this

It needs more citation, and a bit of cleanup, but I think it could get GA at some point at this rate.--h i s ^{s p a c e} _{r e s e a r c h} 16:05, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

---

CLIFF MORRISON - is he Jim's son? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.81.189.44 (talk) 13:22, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

umm

in one place it says he dropped out of ucla an in another it says he graduated —Preceding unsigned comment added by 162.83.136.244 (talk) 00:43, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Plant and Daltrey

"He was likely the model for other highly charismatic rock front men of the same era, including Roger Daltrey and Robert Plant."

I dispute that sentence. The Who, and hence Roger Daltrey, were famous before The Doors even formed. He damn sure didn't model himself after Jim Morrison. If anything, Morrison copied off Daltrey (although, more off of Jagger, but still...). As for Plant, I can't speak to it, but I would wager that he never saw The Doors or Morrison perform until they were on the same bill as Zeppelin, by which point he already had his persona down. Certainly, there are those who modeled themselves after Morrison; Plant and Daltrey aren't among them. -R 208.101.170.64 (talk) 10:14, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

main pic

should artwork be used as the main picture? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.156.147.234 (talk) 04:56, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

There is currently no photo with proper licensing or source information available on Commons. --Cyfal (talk) 17:34, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Intro paragraph

Every so often someone edits the introductory paragraph by removing the "widely considered to be one of the most charismatic and influential frontmen in the history of rock music" text. Some editors have offered objective criticism by deeming it "un-encyclopedic," and others offer no helpful insight. Calling it "fanboi gushing" does not offer constructive criticism, but derides the efforts of others. Since such a comment is not truly objective, I can only address previous editors' "un-encyclopedic" remarks.

First, other, professional encyclopedias, such as Britannica do not simply recite Mr. Morrison's life in a dry manner. For example, Britannica calls him "one of rock music's mythic figures." Certainly, this type of comment is along the lines of "influential" and "charismatic." To someone unfamiliar with the subject, such a sentence places Mr. Morrison in the context of rock music as a whole. Additionally, it makes the reading less dry and more interesting.

Second, the sentence is not inaccurate. One would be hard-pressed to find him not to be extremely influential, and his charisma is evidenced by many factors, one of which is that The Doors did not survive long without him. The fact that his grave is one of the top five tourist attractions in Paris is further evidence of his influence and charisma as people are still drawn to him decades after his demise.

Third, the sentence does not have to be read as unobjective. "Influence" and "charisma" are not necessarily noble traits. They can be dark and destructive. Some of the more charismatic leaders of the 20th century were the direct cause of the death of millions. Thus, this sentence has been constructed to convey traits that many said he possessed and were not always something for which to revere him.

Finally, the assertion is supported by citation, and no less a source than the BBC. Certainly this is a well-established news source with strong enough credentials so as to qualify as a source for a Wikipedia article. The citation is there to show that this is not mere hyperbole, but well-thought-out and researched.

If you read other comments in Jim Morrison's discussion page, you will see that other editors support the assertion and do not see it as "un-encyclopedic". It has been in the introductory paragraph for years, and no one has yet provided a strong or objective enough argument to justify its removal.

I would like to hear what other editors have to say about this subject. I would like the sentence to remain, although it well may be that the consensus has changed over the years. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fogbank (talk • contribs) 18:42, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

I see it the same way as Fogbank, although I would "dampen" the style somewhat, e.g. "widely considered to be one of the most charismatic and influential frontmen in rock music." (instead of "...in the history of rock music.").

Let me argue like this: An article about Elvis Presley without mentioning that "he is a cultural icon" would be clearly misleading, the phrase in this case is obviously not "fanboi gushing". Now well, how big is Morrison on the scale of charismatic and influential frontmen in rock music? The answer is somewhat POV-dependent, but nevertheless I assume there is no dissent that he is in the top five or top ten of the "charismatic frontmen". Thus, his charisma should be mentioned in his article.

I havn't the Encyclopedia Britannica at hand, but at least here is a link that states "The dark-edged eroticism of Morrison's baritone voice and pseudo-poetic lyrics helped make the band one of rock's most potent, controversial, and theatrical acts.", isn't this even more than "charismatic and influential"?

--Cyfal (talk) 21:40, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the constructive input Cyfal. After reading your comments, I can now see how a dampening of the language might be a good idea. "[T]he history of rock music" might indeed rub some editors the wrong way. As a result, that language has been removed.

I'm not an expert on Wikipedia's rules of conduct, but I believe that it encourages this type of discourse so editors can come to a consensus. I look forward to others' comments, especially if you believe the mention of Morrison's charisma or influence here is inappropriate. Others may have a better and more objective way of stating his position in rock history without cutting it out of the intro paragraph entirely.

--Fogbank (talk) 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Guys, look at how the Elvis entry reads. Clearly he was a as big or bigger star, than Morrison, but there is no over the top "gushing" in there. In fact his article is written in a very professional tone. Please keep this article encyclopedic. I'm not gonna revert war with you, but I think that opening paragraph is not acceptable and not NPOV. That's why (as you have noticed) when other editors come across this sentence, they remove it. Cshay (talk) 23:57, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for not entering into a revert war as others have done in the past. Yes, the Elvis entry is more neutral, and he definitely was more popular and influential than Morrison. However, it does mention that Elvis was one of the "most influential artists in the history of popular music." Also, the entry for one of Morrison's contemporaries, Jimi Hendrix, reads very like Morrison's present entry.

Perhaps to find some kind of happy medium however, something like "He is best known as the lead singer and lyricist of The Doors, and through his charismatic and sometimes controversial performances, became one of rock music's iconic figures" could be substituted for what is presently in there. Anyone have comments?

--Fogbank (talk) 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Actually, I would keep the term "frontman", because when it comes to rock music in general, there may be more "bigger" figures. But few, if any, frontmen exist that were more influential than Morisson – in the same league is, e.g., Kurt Cobain, above Mick Jagger, but below, e.g., John Lydon, to give a few examples. Elvis is not addressed as frontman. Therefore, I don't see now over the top gushing. (Thanks, Fogbank, for realising my suggestion.) Any suggestions how to express Morisson's position in a neutral and professional encyclopedic tone are of course always welcome, but I would prefer to at least mention it in the opening paragraph. --Cyfal (talk) 17:42, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

The Doors

I don't feel there is enough about The Doors in this article. He is primarily known as their lead singer, yet the band is barely mentioned. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.84.155.122 (talk) 22:21, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

See The Doors. - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 03:46, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Death Rattles

OK, I've cut a lot of the excess verbiage and redundancies that were added to the Death section. Our role here is not to cover every version of every theory and what has been opined by everyone about each theory. The major theories are discussed and sourced, so readers can go to those sources for further information. We simply cannot repeat all of that stuff here and be encyclopedic, and the way it was written, "It is said that he said that she believed etc." was not encyclopedic nor particularly readable.

If you really think more of that needs to be added back in (and personally, I think the section could be tightened up even more), discuss it here first. Thanks. - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 03:46, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Additionally, we need page numbers for a lot of the text in that section, as well as the indication of which edition of the book it is. The things that are sourced to articles, that's sufficient because an article is short enough to skim for the relevant content. With books, however, we really need accurate page numbers. - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 03:48, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Indecent Exposure

Why is there no mention of Jim getting arrested for indecent exposure in New Haven, ct? See New Haven (under Popular Culture) for more info —Preceding unsigned comment added by Smooth0707 (talk • contribs) 19:59, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

New chapter about Morrison's relationship with Thomas Reese

Why does the article omit the allegation in the Patricia Butler book that Jim Morrison, while a Florida student, had a gay relationship with an older man who ran a poetry coffeehouse in Pinellas Park? This comes from a published source. I plan to add a chapter about it. I am citing sources on the two men's relationship, which was about a lot more than sex. The coffeehouse owner, Thomas Reese, told author Patricia Butler how he had coached Morrison to recite his poetry theatrically. Reese did not seek publicity about this, spending the 1980s and 1990s helping young poets, painters and musicians who needed the patronage. But he did tell all about Morrison to Ms. Butler when she approached him in the 1990s.

Because the 18-year-old Morrison evidently started honing his theatrical skills in Reese's coffeehouse, I'm giving the new chapter the ambiguous title "Relationship with Thomas Bruce Reese in 1961-1962." I'm omitting the words "gay" and "homosexual" from the chapter title because several people confirm that Reese tutored Morrison in theater, but only Reese knew for sure about their sexual behavior. Morrison evidently never mentioned Reese to anyone in California. Reese is the only person who has said for publication that Morrison experimented with gayness. Nyannrunning (talk) 19:28, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Your addition is very well written and no doubt made in good faith. However, this appears to be a fringe theory at best. I've never heard that allegation made, nor have I heard of Patricia Butler (nor has Wikipedia, for that matter). It is very important that we not give this sort of thing undue weight, especially when the allegation is so controversial and unsupported (don't get me wrong, you did well with sourcing, but again, this seems a very fringe theory). Considering the unfounded and inflammatory nature of the allegation, this deserves perhaps a passing mention, but certainly not the four paragraphs it currently has. Some might even object to a passing mention; after all, we're dealing with a claim by a non-notable person in a non-notable book written by a non-notable author and published by a non-notable publishing house (I apologize if I'm mistaken in any of that; however, that does seem to be the case). I wouldn't object to a few sentences mentioning the allegation, but it just doesn't warrant this kind of coverage. faithless (^speak) 03:10, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Update: A Google search suggests that this woman and her book are quite controversial to say the least. For instance, this is the first G-hit. I'm no longer sure her writing deserves any mention in an encyclopedia, unless corroborating can be found. Cheers, faithless (^speak) 03:14, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Here's a shorter version.Debbiesvoucher (talk) 01:25, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Why is there no section on his involvement in the Doors?

It seems like it would be logical for there to be a section on his involvment in the dorrs between his early life and the section on his solo work. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.113.98.113 (talk) 07:46, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

The section was evidently removed by a vandal some months back. I've found it and reinserted it. Thanks for pointing that out! faithless (^speak) 08:09, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Van Morrison

Does anyone know if perhaps Jim and Van are distantly related? Jim is of Ulster-Irish ancestry and there is the strong physical resemblance between the two men.jeanne (talk) 15:46, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

I don't really think so, at least not in any very closely related way. If that were the case, it would be something that would have been bandied about over the years. If there is a familial connection, it would be quite far removed. I don't personally think they were that similar in looks. Morrison is a fairly common surname, and it has been in the United States for over 300 years. Wildhartlivie (talk) 17:04, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Irish Ancestry

I've always read and heard that Jim was of Irish descent but, I read on another site saying his father was Scottish and and his mother was English. From what I have previously read, I thought Jim's father was Irish and his mother was Scottish or English. Does anyone know for sure if he was of Irish ancestry? 76.119.245.141 (talk) 16:28, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Bot report : Found duplicate references !

In the last revision I edited, I found duplicate named references, i.e. references sharing the same name, but not having the same content. Please check them, as I am not able to fix them automatically :)

• "climate" :
  • "http://www.huddersfield1.co.uk/poetry/morrisonpoetry.htm, ''huddersfield'',
  • "[http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/6316743.stm ''See e.g.'', Morrison poem backs climate plea]", ''BBC News'', January 31, 2007.

DumZiBoT (talk) 12:40, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Joel Brodsky

There's a mistake in the "Doors" section of this article at the beginning. The article makes it sound like Joel Brodsky took the famous "Young Lion" photographs in 1965 before The Doors formed. They were actually taken at the end of a Doors photo session in either 66 or 67...either way, the article makes it sound like Joel Brodsky approched Jim when he was a bohemian on Venice beach...that's not true. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.184.93.221 (talk) 19:53, August 27, 2007 (UTC)

I agree with the above writer, and, moreover, the way the passage is currently worded, the reference to Brodsky's photo session seems like a non sequitur. --Skb8721 (talk) 07:01, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Unclear Reference

One passage currently reads:

Morrison recorded his own poetry in a mausoleum in a professional sound studio on two separate occasions.

The phrase "in a mausoleum" is confusing, in my opinion: Is this supposed to read "in a mausoleum _and_ in a professional sound studio" . . . or was there literally a mausoleum in the sound studio???

--Skb8721 (talk) 06:57, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

First two members?

Morrison and fellow UCLA student Ray Manzarek were the first two members of The Doors. Shortly thereafter, drummer John Densmore and guitarist Robby Krieger joined.

Actually this was wrong. Ray was playing in his brothers' band called "Rick & The Ravens". Morrison joined this band. Some time after that, Densmore also joined the band. Then they have recorded a demo in the 1965 featuring a couple of Morrison's songs. The demo didn't get any attention and Manzarek's brothers left. After that they changed the name to the Doors, and soon after that Krieger joined. So "The Doors" were from a begining formed of all 4 of them. Rick & The Ravens weren't.

Btw, "were the first two members of the Doors" by itself sounds terrible. You want to say that "The Doors" were duo in the beginning?

Take look at this page for more info: Rick And The Ravens. Astroman --89.216.158.165 (talk) 11:11, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Edit War

STOP CHANGING THE OPENING STATEMENT. Morrison wasn't only known for "baritone" vocals. Read the biography that is referenced for that statement. In this bio and countless others (basically any book or review) you will find that Morrison was erratic, an alcoholic and amongst many other things an eloquent speaker. The new dawn brings the fresh sorrows of man, bleached, weathered and unreturned. (talk) 08:22, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Valley High School?

Is it true that, for a short period of time, Jim Morrison took classes at Valley High School in Albuquerque, New Mexico? WereWolf (talk) 15:29, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Epitaph

Why do you keep deleting informsation I have addes on the epitaph on Morrison's grave? There is a LOT of misinformation out there, lots of nonsense about "demons" and "geniuses"...

Here is what I have written (which has been deleted several times):

[removed for being a suspected copyright violation] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Constcon (talk • contribs) 15:19, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Aside from looking like a copyright violation, it is unsourced, original research and of questionable notability. faithless (^speak) 15:38, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Huh? It is the translation from ancient Greek! ***What copyright violation?*** You prefer to allow people to speculate about demons from hell and evil spirits in trying to understand what is written on his grave? The real issue here is whether you translate this phrase PROPERLY, or not. For example, the translation provided by [47] (about some "genius") is plain wrong. Furthermore, to translate the ancient Greek 'daimon' as a (judeo-christian) 'demon' (evil spirit) is also wrong. This is not a matter of personal interpretation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.205.221.174 (talk) 19:46, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Artistic Roots

In "The Jim Morrison Scrap Book" there are many examples of Morrison's visual art, including both abstract and more traditional forms. Much of which is described earlyer on in the book, as it also states that while he was young he was know for being a gifted artist who would turn 'things he found' into art. Page 15 states he was interested in fine arts all his life. Page 25 has a really nice pull out with some examples of his work. There are a few others too. If anyone out there is interested I'll be willing to help (just message me) but I don't really have the litterary ability to write it in a 'wikipedian' style myself.

Also the line in the article; "He also consumed 8 buttons of peyote and tripped for a week and wrote about seeing the "God of Peyote"." at the end of the Artistic Roots section seems dubious. Obviously the song had some sort of connection to Peyote but eating 8 buttons, no matter how large, will not make you 'trip for a week'. Can this just be changed to; "He also consumed a large dose of peyote and wrote about seeing the "God of Peyote"." Or something to that effect. Unless someone can source the origonal statment as being true. The effect of mescaline, even in large doses subsides after 12 hours or less. Also, 8 buttons is not considerd amazingly high, with some Native Americans know to eat over 100. See (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9rYdgHx8yrw) for a reference on that.

EDIT: Since no one has replied to the second part I'm going to change it. - Elcaballooscuro (talk) 12:46, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

It's likely no one responded because new posts should be started at the bottom of the page. I removed the statement. It's unsourced and from the wording, was likely the result of vandalism. Wildhartlivie (talk) 12:18, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Stage diving

The Morrison biographers Riordan & Prochnicky claimed that Jim Morrison was the originator of Stage diving around 1966. That part of Morrison's stage persona could be added to the article. I was not able to find the precise page in their voluminous Morrison bio, though (James Riordan, Jerry Prochnicky: Break on Through. The Life and Death of Jim Morrison. William Morrow, New York 1991. ISBN 0-688-08829-5). Riordan/Prochnicky mention Morrison falling into the audience casually on pages 100, 139, 250-251. There was another passage in their book, though, where they actually claim that Morrison did this as the first or one of the first stage performers (before Morrison adept Iggy Pop did so). Does anyone knows where precisely Riordan/Prochnicky said so? --Diggindeeper (talk) 10:26, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

27 Club

Why cant it be added, whats the consensus? Portillo (talk) 01:23, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

My understanding of it is because it is a contrived pop trivia sort of reference that has no real relevance to the career and notability of Jim Morrison, and I'd have to agree. Wildhartlivie (talk) 07:45, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

What about a link to it in the see also section, like in the Robert Johnson article? Portillo (talk) 22:49, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

It seems to me, at least, that putting it in a See also section singles it out even more. Wildhartlivie (talk) 01:02, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Image/Photo

Can't we have a better one? Or more... I mean the man is gorgeous :-D --Scieberking (talk) 14:10, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Well, you know, when someone decides to donate the picture they took back in 1970, then sure, we can use it. Or, if they come across him somewhere in the mountains of Oregon, a new picture can be taken. Of course, he would be way past retirement age now. Wildhartlivie (talk) 16:46, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Just found this hermit dude in the "mountains of Oregon": http://www.heathenworld.com/Music/images/morrison.jpg --Scieberking (talk) 09:35, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

That has been added and discarded before. It is unfounded conjecture. Wildhartlivie (talk) 23:45, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Better photo for the Infobox, now, no? Not a profile shot, closer to camera, and he's performing, not posing. The Fillmore East photo is in the Doors article, anyway... Doc9871 (talk) 21:28, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

I don't know. I always liked the Fillmore East photo, it's sort of iconic, with the leather pants and all. Wildhartlivie aka Pamela Courson's conscience 21:50, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

For the Infobox, though? I like the Fillmore pics as well, but this pic (Infobox) should show a more "frontal" portrait, I think... Doc9871 (talk) 21:56, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

Or were you just messin' with me? Can't tell anymore heheee :> Doc9871 (talk) 21:58, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

I'm not crazy about that facial expression, it's sort of chubby. I think the Fillmore East image should be on the page somewhere. Wildhartlivie aka Sockmaster to the Stars 22:01, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

Fillmore East image can be here in the article, too - heck, it's not my page! This photo was taken well before the "chubby" phase, as I'm sure you know; before the bearded phase, too! Have you checked Flickr (esp.) or Bing recently, under a "Jim Morrison" search? Many, many excellent photos... Doc9871 (talk) 22:08, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

P.S. - I picked this one in particular because he was actually singing in the picture; it wasn't a "Young Lion" photo shoot-type thing... Doc9871 (talk) 22:19, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

I've actually been too busy lately creating all those sock accounts you read about to look for photos. it's sooooooooo tiring and time consuming. Enough sarcasm? Heh. No, as long as the tight leather pants are on the page, I'm good. Wildhartlivie (talk) 22:24, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

I'll get more and better images in, as I have, don't worry. I've been to Jim's grave at Pere Lachaise; and I'll get as many "non-free" images in as I can, because there are no free images of JIm floating around, as he's been dead for almost 40 years. Cheers... Doc9871 (talk) 22:35, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

To paraphrase Mark Twain: "News of his death have been greatly exaggerated..." :) Wildhartlivie (talk) 22:44, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

How about this one for the info box: http://www.map-of-florida.net/famous-artists/jim-morrison/Jim-Morrison.jpg

Too badass and maybe copyright protected, though ;-) --Scieberking (talk) 11:49, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, that's one of the Gloria Stavers pictures from the "Young Lion" photo shoot I mentioned earlier. Wayyyy too contestable... Doc9871 (talk) 18:45, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

Poetic

Jim thought of himself as a poet and not really a rock star. We should put more emphasis on his poetic ability and the greatness of his lyrics than so much his rock star image. That's how he probably would have liked it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mjosephs (talk • contribs) 21:22, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

English roots??

According to the article it states Morrison was of English descent. The reference given for this just mentions he was of Irish and Scottish decent. I may have missed it and it might say he was of English roots but I'm sure it doesnt say so. Thanks Musicman67 (talk) 17:13, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Patricia Keannealy

I've read several accounts that call into question the reality of her relationship with Jim Morrison, from people doubting the marriage ritual that she alleged took place to people to people claiming they didn't even know each other, or in a very limited way (press to star). There has been several reports of holes in her story of them together, no pictures or letters she claimed she had ever were shown, no band mates had met her outside of a interview scenario and I read that there were even conflicting dates, when she said he was with her but he was confirmed as being somewhere else. Anyone else read the books or heard of this disputed history? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tallestgirl (talk • contribs) 06:31, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

the issue over new image

(comments removed) Karppinen (talk) 09:35, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

Actually, the editor was right to revert this. We do not use mug-shots unless the article is about a notorious criminal. Morrison was not a notorious criminal. Period. That's the end of the argument. Using a mugshot for a non-criminal related article puts undue weight on that event. And we do not use photos from The Smoking Gun. This is a mugshot = not here. Wildhartlivie (talk) 22:11, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

"Injustice"? Are you joking? The last time you tried this with this image, I patiently explained to you that this image is already in The Doors article. If you think it's "clever", as you put it, to crop a well-known criminal mugshot and put it in the main Infobox of a musician, I'm afraid I don't see the genius of that. Without discussion, you just went ahead and re-inserted the mug in an inappropriate place; yet again. Did you think no one would notice or object this time? Saying the cropped image should be in the article and saying it should be the main image in the Infobox are very different things. You seem more interested in putting it in the Infobox, and I assure you that if you don't comment (like you didn't last time), and rather just wait a few weeks and re-insert it; the results will be the same. Thanks... Doc9871 (talk) 06:59, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

P.S. - I really don't mean to sound condescending or discouraging at all to you, Karppinen. This is how I know about WP:UNDUE: I had a devil of a time getting this mug shot (as one of the only free images of the man) into the Jimi Hendrix article at all. Editors (including two administrators) felt that the image was undue, giving negative weight to the subject. Eventually, the article was cooperatively reorganized to allow the image; but it took some convincing arguments to get it in. If I had cropped it, it would "hide" the fact that it was a mug shot in plain sight, as people know what the image is. Now, if I had tried to put the Jimi Hendrix mugshot in the Infobox, or crop it to conceal the mug shot reality and put it in the Infobox, the Hendrix mug shot might not be in the article right now. It's the same for the Morrison mug. I hope you understand, and happy editing! Doc9871 (talk) 05:36, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Morrison at UCLA

What else is known about Jim Morrison while he was a student at UCLA? I recall that Peter Mays, road manager for the Doors, then at the UCLA Film School, Melnitz Hall, observed that Morrison attended Jack Hirschman's class on Antonin Artaud in Comparative Literature within the English Department. Hirschman was then an Assistant Professor of English at UCLA from 1961 until 1966, an Author, published Poet and collegial contemporary of Michael McClure,Lawrence Ferlinghetti, Philip Lamantia, Bob Kaufman, among others.

...In 1965, while in Greece, the Artaud Anthology, which Hirschman edited, was published by City Lights Books in San Francisco. Hirschman's work on the volume includes selecting material and organizing translations from the French, including some of his own translations. He is assisted by others, including David Rattray. The most affirming review of the book is by Charles Bukowski in the Los Angeles Free Press... Hirschman was fired by UCLA for his alleged activities against the state in 1966...Hirschman remained in California living in Venice, from 1967-1971....His students at UCLA include Gary Gach, Steven Kessler, Max Schwartz, Jim Morrison, among others. ....

These above quotations are excerpted from Jack Hirshman's and Matt Gonzalez detailed chronology dated May 24th 2002 which was published by04:18, 15 May 2010 (UTC)04:18, 15 May 2010 (UTC)04:18, 15 May 2010 (UTC)04:18, 15 May 2010 (UTC)Mnemosyne (talk) 04:18, 15 May 2010 (UTC) SFcall: Auto/Biographical Sketch: http://www.sfcall.com/issues%202002/5.24.02/hirschman_bio_5_24_02.htm

Note: This Text goes to Wikipedia Mnemosyne (talk) 04:19, 15 May 2010 (UTC), absent critically relevant comments or amendments. Thanks to all the UCLA Riders on the Storm who can still remember the Sixties, even through the Dark Glass, Gladly.

Hirschman told me (interviewed for Beat Scene Press, Coventry, UK circa 1997) that he barely remembered Morrison as a student. Just one time in particular when JM disrupted a reading Hirschman and others were giving by heckling. Altcult101 (talk) 10:21, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Please see my abridged Wikipedia Article entry for my clean-up. Hirschman's contribution was to introduce Artaud's Theater of Cruelty to Morrison; what better way than to go High-Drama in an other wise boring class room? Also, check out Hirschmans Auto/Bio for his exact words. Hirschman went off the wall in the eighties and became a humorless Stalinist, anyway. My intent was to draw out other people's stories regarding Jim Morrison's student days at UCLA. There were many of Us.Mnemosyne (talk) 18:31, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

How's about we reference that (a link would be nice, and would eliminate the "circa")? Then it could be added to the article! My Mom always told me I was "special", but I can't include that as a reference anywhere... Doc9871 (talk) 10:30, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Well, a cultural historian could request a copy of Morrison's UCLA transcripts to definitively establish the time-line and the classes taken . Anyone interested? Mnemosyne (talk) 18:31, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

 —Preceding unsigned comment added by John Christopher Wells (talk • contribs) 21:40, 14 May 2010 (UTC) 

Mnemosyne (talk) 03:51, 15 May 2010 (UTC) Mnemosyne (talk) 18:31, 15 May 2010 (UTC)