Your Garage botysf16 Amazon Fashion Learn more nav_sap_plcc_ascpsc $5 Albums Fire TV Stick Subscribe & Save Patriotic Picks Shop-by-Room Amazon Cash Back Offer roadies roadies roadies  Amazon Echo  Echo Dot  Amazon Tap  Echo Dot  Amazon Tap  Amazon Echo Starting at $49.99 All-New Kindle Oasis AutoRip in CDs & Vinyl Best Camping & Hiking Gear in Outdoors
Customer Discussions > Music forum

Elvis Presley


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 126-150 of 1000 posts in this discussion
Posted on Aug 7, 2012 8:51:22 PM PDT
Well Hinch, so much for the Elvis discussion.

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 8, 2012 12:49:41 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Aug 8, 2012 1:11:39 AM PDT
Hinch says:
Music Luver

Yes, Chuck Berry was a guest the week John and Yoko were the guest hosts on The Mike Douglas Show. Both Chuck and John looked like they had a good time. I didnt see anything that suggests anyone in those performances had a problem with Yoko. I agree with a previous post. If Chuck didn't want to perform with Yoko, he would not have. I have the whole week in the VHS boxset. I don't know if it's available on dvd.

The whole thing about John's comment was taken out of context. His conversation with a British journalist and friend, Maureen Cleave, was not about The Beatles or how popular they were. The article, published in the London Evening Standard newspaper on 4 March 1966, was about John's personal life. The conversation at that point was specifically about Christianiity. This is part of the article.

>>>>Experience has sown few seeds of doubt in him: not that his mind is closed, but it's closed round whatever he believes at the time. 'Christianity will go,' he said. 'It will vanish and shrink. I needn't argue about that; I'm right and I will be proved right. We're more popular than Jesus now; I don't know which will go first - rock 'n' roll or Christianity. Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. It's them twisting it that ruins it for me.' He is reading extensively about religion.<<<<

As the article says, John was reading and studying religion. No one in England gave it a second thought.

When "John Lennon said The Beatles are more popular than Jesus" was printed on the cover of an American teen magazine 6 months later, it hit the fan in "the Bible belt".

I wonder if John had said "sports are more popular than Jesus" what would have been said. It probably would never have even been reported in America and I'd guess the article would have remained unknown here.

Here is the complete article.

http://www.beatlesbible.com/1966/03/04/how-does-a-beatle-live-by-maureen-cleave/

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 8, 2012 12:53:09 AM PDT
Hinch says:
Maybe we can get it back on track if everyone will just ignore the troll.

>>>>In Internet slang, a troll is someone who posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion<<<<

Nuff said!

:-)

Posted on Aug 8, 2012 1:03:55 AM PDT
Hinch says:
Let's list out favorites.

Here is a list of some of my favorite Elvis songs off the top of my head and in no particular order.

If I Can Dream
Heartbreak Hotel
I Want You, I Need You. I Love You
Too Much
Teddy Bear
All Shook Up
One Night
Don't
Follow That Dream
From A Jack To A King
Long Black Cadillac
Santa Bring My Baby Back
Blue Christmas
Santa Claus Is Back In Town
How Great Thou Art
I Believe
Take My Hand Precious Lord
Crying In The Chapel

I could keep going for a while, but I think those are my favorites, although I may have forgotton some.

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 8, 2012 1:22:52 AM PDT
Bernard J. says:
I think the remarks were said in a matter of fact manner, rather than in a boastful one.

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 8, 2012 1:56:15 AM PDT
Hinch says:
Bernard

I think you're right.

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 8, 2012 5:33:27 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Aug 8, 2012 5:35:06 AM PDT
zlh67 says:
DKPete -- agreed about DMok. Kinda pointless. I wasn't trying to change his mind so much as get at what inspired the deep hatred, because to me anyway, just making bad music isn't nearly enough. The "Jesus" comment seems pretty weak too and the more I pressed on that, the thinner and thinner his arguments got, so that explanation just doesn't hold water to me either. But at this point, not worth it. He can hate Lennon for the toothpaste he used as far as I'm concerned.

Re my comment of "no defense of Lennon" with Yoko, yeah, that was a joke. I've posted several times in various threads that I don't really have a problem with her. I don't like her singing or her other art and I do wish that Lennon had never entangled his career so much with hers, but like you, my feeling is that if she was good enough for John and she made HIM happy, then... oh well. Fair enough. His life.

And I've never bought into this 'she broke up the Beatles' noise or that she led him around like a dog on a leash; John had his weaknesses, insecurities, etc. like the rest of us, but all told, he was a very domineering, headstrong and stubborn individual himself. I think so many people do not get Yoko's appeal to John -- physically and/or otherwise -- that they think he MUST have been tricked, bullied or somehow suckered into going with her and can't grasp the idea that he went willingly. She clearly filled a hole in his life that was created by some of the tragic losses from early in his life, but again, if that's what made him happy, complete, etc., so be it.

Posted on Aug 8, 2012 5:34:40 AM PDT
zlh67 says:
Now to (possibly) get this back to the original topic...

I wonder what ELVIS thought of John Lennon....

Posted on Aug 8, 2012 5:50:03 AM PDT
D. Mok says:
> my feeling is that if [Ono] was good enough for John and she made HIM happy, then... oh well.

Heroin made Janis Joplin happy right before she overdosed. Forty measures of vodka made John Bonham happy right before he choked on his own vomit. So you must be fine with heroin and alcoholism too. Exactly how much of a puppet are you?

I don't know Yoko Ono. From what I've read, she's not a bad personality. Her caterwauling and horrible performing ethics and judgment are a whole other matter. As for whether she broke up The Beatles...couldn't care less. If anything, good job, Yoko -- it freed Paul McCartney and George Harrison from the dead weight and personal tyranny that was John Lennon.

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 8, 2012 6:51:21 AM PDT
Severin says:
While I'm sure that the Beatles were headed for derailment anyway I think Yoko put them on the express track. She had no business being in a recording studio with the greatest pop band in the world. I don't think she adds anything to the few Beatles tracks she's on like "Bungalow Bill," less disruptive on 'Revolution 9' which is a sound collage. It was just bizarre when they brought a hospital bed into the studio so that John could be with her when she was recovering from an accident. Imagine how the other 3 felt when John said she's now in the band. Supposedly she wasn't aware of their music but I think she backtracked on that statement later on.

As for D. Mok's statement that she freed McCartney and Harrison from Lennon's dead weight and person tyranny I find that very troll. McCartney was leading the band since Sgt. Pepper by default. And I'll take 'Come Together' or 'I Want You' over any McCartney tune on "Abbey Road."

Posted on Aug 8, 2012 6:51:48 AM PDT
zlh67 says:
Ok, so William Hung is better than John Lennon and now Yoko Ono is the equivalent of... heroin?

I guess as long as it all makes sense to you, bub.

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 8, 2012 7:00:25 AM PDT
zlh67 says:
Donald -- all the stuff with Yoko in the studio and appearing (even in cameos) on the White Album, etc., I put on John, not Yoko. I don't even know if John invited her or if she more asked (or insisted) or if it was just assumed that she'd be with him there as she was everywhere else, but either way, if Yoko was going to be a divisive presence, it was incumbent on John to nip that in the bud and say "You and I have our thing, but the Beatles is my career and my thing with Paul, George and Ringo, not you, so wait here and I'll be back." But that's not how he handled it. That's at least as much on John as it is Yoko, if not more imo.

But truthfully, they were all frustrated, burnt out and being pulled in different directions by '68-69, so imo Yoko was just one of many things and if it hadn't been her, it likely would've been something else. Little wonder it fell apart. I think in today's world that band would have taken a 2-3 year break and then went back to it, but back then it was all or nothing.

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 8, 2012 7:30:41 AM PDT
Severin says:
John said he'd been looking for an excuse to quit the group since he did "How I Won the War" back in 1967. His feeling was that he and Yoko were one person, where he went she went. There was such a drastic change in him since he met Yoko that it's no wonder she gets all the blame. He certainly supported her musically even interlacing their songs on "Double Fantasy" so you couldn't just play his songs on one side.

I read somewhere that Yoko introduced John to heroin which was not helpful. This was during the "Get Back/Let It Be" period. Oddly enough John said something similar to D. Mok that if Yoko did break up the Beatles then she should get credit for all the great music George and Paul were making. To me that's like crediting Tori Amos' rapist for inspiring her first album.

Posted on Aug 8, 2012 7:34:00 AM PDT
Jules says:
I remember thinking he was in love and not thinking clearly. Most of us have had the experience of being 'head over heels' in love with someone our friends and family do not understand. For some reason unknown and unseen to the rest of us, John loved her and we should respect his choices.

Posted on Aug 8, 2012 9:19:50 AM PDT
D. Mok says:
> so William Hung is better than John Lennon and now Yoko Ono is the equivalent of... heroin?

You are just too thick.

The point is, whether Yoko Ono made John Lennon oh-so-happy is completely irrelevant to the merits (or lack thereof) of John Lennon, both in terms of personality and musical quality. Soon-Yi Previn may make Woody Allen happy as a clam, she has no relevance to whether Allen's films are good or bad.

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 8, 2012 9:23:15 AM PDT
Gena Chereck says:
Here are some of mine:

Mystery Train
Jailhouse Rock
That's All Right / My Baby Left Me
Marie's the Name (of His Latest Flame)
(You're the) Devil in Disguise
Little Sister
Viva Las Vegas
Suspicious Minds
Burnin' Love
Crawfish
Lawdy Miss Clawdy
Good Rockin' Tonight
Heartbreak Hotel
Blue Christmas
Santa Clause is Back in Town (love Trisha Yearwood's version, too)

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 8, 2012 9:34:49 AM PDT
Severin says:
I have to agree that Yoko detracts from all their musical collaborations. Separately I can take her doing her own thing, the early screaming period but she can't sing like a normal person. I can't stand listening to 'Yes, I'm Your Angel' on "Double Fantasy." On the "Live Peace In Toronto" album she okay doing 'Don't Worry Kyoko' but 'Cold Turkey' would have been better without her. The only later songs of hers I liked were 'Kiss Kiss Kiss' and 'Walking On Thin Ice' because she doesn't really sing on those, she speaks and she emotes.

Posted on Aug 8, 2012 10:18:58 AM PDT
Yoko Ono as an artist, has never been my cup of tea...

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 8, 2012 10:26:50 AM PDT
zlh67 says:
Well, yeah, ONE of us is definitely thick, bruthah, but I don't think it's me.

Try to follow along:

- I made a crack that I would not defend Lennon and his association with Yoko Ono

- another poster tried to explain their relationship a little deeper and kinda-sorta quasi defended Yoko and John's relationship with her

- I then clarified that I had no real problem with Yoko and was really just making a joke; I added the statement in question, that if Yoko made John happy, oh well, ie, that's his choice, so.... good for him. Matters not to me either way and I won't criticize him for it.

From THAT, you started ranting about heroin killing Janis Joplin and vodka killing John Bonham as if either of those 2 things could be even loosely equated to Yoko Ono, insinuating I'm a "puppet" for (I guess) blindly approving of John's choice of Yoko even though she could.... kill him (just as heroin had done to Janis and vodka had done to Bonham?). yeah, whatever, dude.

But yes, you are correct that Yoko and how happy she did or didn't make John Lennon has nothing to do with the merits of John Lennon. But you'd be incorrect in thinking that I ever said it did. So you see: you arguing a point that was never made in the first place makes you look, well, kinda thick.

Got it?

Posted on Aug 8, 2012 10:41:54 AM PDT
D. Mok says:
Then why did you bring up "how happy she made him" in the first place? It's irrelevant. Junk information. What's next? You're going to bring up Bill Conti? Simon Le Bon? Just as irrelevant.

Posted on Aug 8, 2012 11:29:27 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Aug 8, 2012 11:35:38 AM PDT
zlh67 says:
D Mok.... C'mon, man. Seriously, this is not that complex.

Here's what I said, verbatim: "My feeling is that if she was good enough for John and she made HIM happy, then... oh well. Fair enough. His life."

So what does that mean? Well, it means that him choosing her was just that: his choice. And not one I would criticize because.... it's his choice, not mine. I don't know Yoko, but from what I've read, I don't think she'd be for ME, but she obviously seems to have made HIM happy and as it's his choice and he's the one who has to live with it, that's all that matters to me. His choice, his life.

As an artist putting work out in the public domain, I can make criticisms of Lennon's career moves such as choice or quality of songs, and I have (since you think I'm such a Lennon apologist "puppet", read my rather unfavorable review of "Walls and Bridges" or my luke-warm review of "Live in New York City" right here on Amazon). I can criticize his choice of producer or even the title or cover of an album (or electing to include his wife's songs on his albums), but... choice of spouse? I guess for me that's a little too personal and even if it wasn't, I wouldn't presume to know enough about Yoko and how she was as a spouse (vs. what we read in the media) to criticize such a personal choice. So... I don't. That's me though.

Posted on Aug 8, 2012 11:48:06 AM PDT
D. Mok says:
> but... choice of spouse?

And you're living in your own deluded little world.
I couldn't care less whom John Lennon wanted to marry. If Yoko Ono were John Lennon's deadliest enemy, I'd still not excuse Lennon for bringing her onto every stage, into every show, letting her ruin Chuck Berry's song, letting her feeble songwriting, singing and "musical" sensibilities contaminate everything.

He wanted to marry a horrible singer, that's his prerogative. Forcing us to listen to her is completely different. You don't see me attacking Linda McCartney, because Paul McCartney never let her ruin everything. McCartney had a much firmer grip on his music. John Lennon sacrificed all creative quality just to please his bedmate. That's the very definition of "henpecked".

As for why I'm this extreme in attacking John Lennon? When a restaurant gives you rotten food twice in a row, what do you do? And what do you do when said restaurant has the gall to put down a neighbouring restaurant (we'll call it McCartney Grill) that serves great food? I bought Working Class Hero TWICE just because I was always tricked into thinking there's something worth listening on it. Turns out every second is crawling with maggots. And when I'm a paying customer, I have EVERY right to complain about the shoddy quality of the goods I'm getting. The $30 could have gone towards buying another copy of Laura Nyro's Stoned Soul Picnic, with $10 to spare.

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 8, 2012 12:15:00 PM PDT
zlh67 says:
D Mok -- Lennon never "forced" ANYONE to listen to Yoko, least of all you. Each time you see her on tv or hear her on the radio, be it solo or with Lennon, just turn it off and... ta daa! Problem solved.

And... if I were stupid enough to buy music I didn't like, and buy it twice even, I would be kicking my own head in, not that of the artist. No one twisted your arm (or if they did, it wasn't John or Yoko).

Re Lennon being henpecked, that's a pretty big presumption that John only worked with Yoko reluctantly and did so to keep the peace and appease her. Got any factual evidence to back that up?

And btw, I ate at McCartney Grill once and got a nasty case of irritable bowel syndrome, but you don't see me frothing at the mouth at Macca or his no-talent wife who sang not a lick better than Yoko. You give Paul points for being smart enough to keep her off to the side and out of the mix, but I say if THAT's how he felt about her lack of musical skill, he should have just kept her at home. Lennon may have had poor judgment with the level of exposure he gave his spouse, but at least he was honest about it.

Posted on Aug 8, 2012 12:39:38 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Aug 8, 2012 12:41:46 PM PDT
D. Mok says:
> but you don't see me frothing at the mouth at Macca or his no-talent wife who sang not a lick better than Yoko.

Ho ho ho. You've just proven yourself to be truly tone-deaf. Linda McCartney was a pretty bad singer, but her pitch and tone weren't even close to the mangled singing of Yoko Ono. Linda McCartney sang like a non-singer, an average karaoke warbler, and hid in the background where she could do less damage. Yoko Ono not only sang with even worse pitch and expression, with an accent that could choke a horse, but she did it obnoxiously, self-seriously, and at the expense of every other musician in the band, trying to get attention. In a karaoke bar, Linda McCartney would get sympathy claps and be tolerated, while Yoko Ono would be pelted with beer glasses and kicked out.

> Lennon may have had poor judgment with the level of exposure he gave his spouse, but at least he was honest about it.

And he's supposed to get points for that?
Which one is worse? A killer who's got brain problems so he doesn't know killing another human is wrong, or a murderer who knows that killing is wrong and does it anyway?

Posted on Aug 8, 2012 1:01:35 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Aug 8, 2012 1:12:03 PM PDT
zlh67 says:
>>> Ho ho ho. You've just proven yourself to be truly tone-deaf. Linda McCartney was a pretty bad singer, but her pitch and tone weren't even close to the mangled singing of Yoko Ono.

There is a point of diminishing return where once a singer is far enough along on the "bad singer" scale, it doesn't really matter if anyone else is further still or by how much. I don't want to hear either one of 'em (and Linda definitely passed that point; by a country mile).

Re your murderer analogy, I don't think it applies since bad as both wives were as singers, neither caused any actual casualties that I'm aware of. Bottom line: both John and Paul put wives onstage that probably didn't belong there. Lennon felt his did and presented her proudly. You can question his judgment, but not his honesty.

Macca knew his wife didn't belong so turned her mic off in the mix, a deception to both his fans AND his wife.

Which one do I respect more? Lennon. As in his songwriting, he was just more honest about it.

But, this ain't about Lennon vs McCartney or Linda vs Yoko, it's about....

Wait, what is this about again? I have no idea. Each time I make a point you try to shoot a hole in it, so I explain and you simply move on to some minute phrase in my explanation as a new point of attack because you know you were wrong before. And invariably, the new attack is on a phrase you've completely misinterpreted and are wrong about... a-gain. It's exhausting and frankly I would rather chop off my own leg and beat my head with it than try and explain anything further to you, so: it's been real, it's been fun, it just hasn't -- well, you know the rest.
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


Recent discussions in the Music forum

 

This discussion

Discussion in:  Music forum
Participants:  85
Total posts:  2095
Initial post:  Aug 4, 2012
Latest post:  Mar 21, 2016

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 9 customers

Search Customer Discussions