I’m pretty sure that originally, at least, Suspicion was published by Elvis Presley Music, no surprise given the Colonel’s compulsion to maximize income… which of course until 1969 kept his client/victim from recording worthy outside material.
Thanks for forwarding, John. And putting Colonel in quotation marks in point two. That honorary monicker is as legitimate as our president’s as the king he sees himself being. I’m sorry you couldn’t buy that Portland ticket, which would have been as shrewd the investment as RCA buying the King’s back catalog for $5 million in 1973. If Parker was really so shrewd, in this deal he stepped on his own rake by not getting more. After Aloha and Burning Love, he couldn’t run the table?
Your description of Guralnick’s revisionism — or capitulation — does suggest a whiff of legacy-focused looking back. I can’t comment fairly without reading the book but I can certainly appreciate that access to archives changes a historian’s prism. And no approach is more attractive than being a contrarian against more than half a century of prevailing opinion. The Singer special and Memphis recordings, Viva Las Vegas — they all suggest that underneath Elvis’s bookings going mercenary, the talent was still there. The Luhrman doc was awful but as late as ‘72 I still found him in good voice and frankness at the MSG press conference. I think Vegas snuffed that flame as that awful box set showed a few years ago where he trundled out the same stale stiff jokes at every show without a whiff of spontaneity. Fine band, mushy indistinguishable arrangements. And he dissed his performances by forgetting words and mocking his efforts. The new doc was so bad I’d have left early if not in the middle of the row.
A manager is indeed responsible for guiding his or her artist’s endeavors. Whether Parker solely saw Presley as a cash register or not, I think his greatest failure was turning the real King into a faux king similar to the president. One of the century’s true cultural icons became a laughing stock on his watch. No reappraisal will likely overturn that judgment.
Agreed. As much as I admire Peter Guralnick’s work, particularly his two-part Elvis bio, I wasn’t buying the revisionist history on Colonel Parker. It’s great and a thrill for him to riffle through the Colonel’s stuff but taking 50% of the guy’s earnings is piracy any way you slice it. I did a Substack about the book.
I noted reviews of new Guralnick with interest but it’s hard to overcome what he and others wrote for decades. Indeed, Chips Moman’s struggle to open the door in the winter of 1969 which produced the best post-Army album of Elvis’s career but was never echoed proves the point.
Albert Goldman wasn’t the most trustworthy scribe, but when he described the ersatz Colonel so burdened by avoirdupois from feasting off his quarry that he fell exiting an elevator and couldn’t get up because the door kept retreating and buffeting him… I couldn’t help feeling justice was being achieved for the King.
Interesting thing is that on the album Terry Stafford recorded that is built around his version of 'Suspicion,' there are two more covers of Elvis: 'Pocketful of Rainbows' and 'Slowly But Surely.'
I've always loved Elvis' version and that harpsichord part (at least that's what I think it is and not sure who is playing it) is kind of cool. Stafford's version is great too but smooths out the intricacies of Elvis' recording - something is kind of lost in playing it a bit too safe.
RCA released Elvis' recording of it in the aftermath of Stafford's version and it did chart.
I’m pretty sure that originally, at least, Suspicion was published by Elvis Presley Music, no surprise given the Colonel’s compulsion to maximize income… which of course until 1969 kept his client/victim from recording worthy outside material.
https://johnnogowski.substack.com/p/elvis-colonel-parker-truth?r=7pf7u&utm_medium=ios
Thanks for forwarding, John. And putting Colonel in quotation marks in point two. That honorary monicker is as legitimate as our president’s as the king he sees himself being. I’m sorry you couldn’t buy that Portland ticket, which would have been as shrewd the investment as RCA buying the King’s back catalog for $5 million in 1973. If Parker was really so shrewd, in this deal he stepped on his own rake by not getting more. After Aloha and Burning Love, he couldn’t run the table?
Your description of Guralnick’s revisionism — or capitulation — does suggest a whiff of legacy-focused looking back. I can’t comment fairly without reading the book but I can certainly appreciate that access to archives changes a historian’s prism. And no approach is more attractive than being a contrarian against more than half a century of prevailing opinion. The Singer special and Memphis recordings, Viva Las Vegas — they all suggest that underneath Elvis’s bookings going mercenary, the talent was still there. The Luhrman doc was awful but as late as ‘72 I still found him in good voice and frankness at the MSG press conference. I think Vegas snuffed that flame as that awful box set showed a few years ago where he trundled out the same stale stiff jokes at every show without a whiff of spontaneity. Fine band, mushy indistinguishable arrangements. And he dissed his performances by forgetting words and mocking his efforts. The new doc was so bad I’d have left early if not in the middle of the row.
A manager is indeed responsible for guiding his or her artist’s endeavors. Whether Parker solely saw Presley as a cash register or not, I think his greatest failure was turning the real King into a faux king similar to the president. One of the century’s true cultural icons became a laughing stock on his watch. No reappraisal will likely overturn that judgment.
Agreed. As much as I admire Peter Guralnick’s work, particularly his two-part Elvis bio, I wasn’t buying the revisionist history on Colonel Parker. It’s great and a thrill for him to riffle through the Colonel’s stuff but taking 50% of the guy’s earnings is piracy any way you slice it. I did a Substack about the book.
I noted reviews of new Guralnick with interest but it’s hard to overcome what he and others wrote for decades. Indeed, Chips Moman’s struggle to open the door in the winter of 1969 which produced the best post-Army album of Elvis’s career but was never echoed proves the point.
Albert Goldman wasn’t the most trustworthy scribe, but when he described the ersatz Colonel so burdened by avoirdupois from feasting off his quarry that he fell exiting an elevator and couldn’t get up because the door kept retreating and buffeting him… I couldn’t help feeling justice was being achieved for the King.
I literally laughed to tears.
That IS funny. agreed. Maybe God was paying attention. Hahaha
Interesting thing is that on the album Terry Stafford recorded that is built around his version of 'Suspicion,' there are two more covers of Elvis: 'Pocketful of Rainbows' and 'Slowly But Surely.'
I've always loved Elvis' version and that harpsichord part (at least that's what I think it is and not sure who is playing it) is kind of cool. Stafford's version is great too but smooths out the intricacies of Elvis' recording - something is kind of lost in playing it a bit too safe.
RCA released Elvis' recording of it in the aftermath of Stafford's version and it did chart.
"Suspicion" is a fabulous tune no matter who sings it.