 |
 |
CEOs need to be bullish in negotiations and a large number of CEOs are known to have manipulative psychopathic personalities. Col Parker was the “CEO” of Elvis Presley Inc. where sadly there was only one employee who he needed to thoroughly exploit in order to increase their incomes. Managers of other celebrities, e.g. Basil Grillo who became the head of ‘Bing Crosby Enterprises’, achieved similar things to Parker seemingly without the psychopathic personality. Of course what Parker achieved in the 1950s as Elvis’ manager was extraordinary and quickly pushed Elvis into the $1million a year bracket. It is no wonder that they stuck together as a team for as long as they did. However having only one employee meant that Parker, with a known gambling habit, would obviously push for money over the creative interest of his client. There would have been less pressure on Elvis if Parker had actually managed other clients thus getting additional income streams. The Beatles manager Brian Epstein was able to book international tours, line up movie contracts and record deals for the world’s biggest group yet he also managed multiple other stars such as Cilla Black and Gerry and the Pacemakers . Sadly there is no doubt that Peter Guralnick’s new book about Col Parker is a disappointing whitewash of the truly bizarre character that was Elvis' manager. However I do believe that other reviewers have missed an obvious explanation as to why Guralnick published such a book. The author notes that he has been collecting information and working on the theme of this Parker book for around 30 years. So you can imagine his disappointment when in 2003 Alanna Nash beat him to it when she published her very well researched 400-page book ‘The Colonel: The Extraordinary Story Of Col Tom Parker And Elvis Presley’. Nash’s fascinating in-depth look at not only the early years of Col Parker, his management of Elvis as well as life post-Elvis, covered exactly the same ground as Guralnick. But a way that Guralnick could guarantee more interest in his version of the same book would be if he took an opposite stand to the regularly acknowledged rather negative view of Col Parker. And the fact that Baz Luhrmann’s drama ‘ELVIS’ (it was not a documentary) featured Col Parker as 'the villain' added another timely marketing opportunity. By Guralnick stating that everyone’s assumption of Col Parker was in fact wrong - that he never interfered in Elvis’ musical recordings, all those bad 60’s movies were Elvis’ fault, that he did everything to support Elvis throughout his later career - guaranteed that the author would get masses of exposure and interviews on mainstream media. It was a clever marketing move and he did indeed generate the expected publicity. However to get to this new view-point Guralnick had a few major hurdles where he needed to alter reader’s previous perceptions, including the following..
That's a pretty long list - and I'm sure there are several more items that people could add – but the way Guralnick often gets around this these points is either by ignoring them completely or suggesting that people's past recollections were not accurate. Guralnick stayed on good terms with Col Parker's second wife Loanne and he often uses her recollections to challenge previously stated facts. This is ridiculous seeing as she obviously had a positively biased viewpoint about her husband, as well as the reality that Parker would tell her fanciful stories of his past, tales that he just made up.
To wrap up this gorgeous rose-tinted look at Col Parker Guralnick bookends his version with two telling statements.. Elvis in November 1955 upon the signing to RCA Records and receiving more money than he had ever dreamt of… “Again I say thanks and I love you like a father.” And Parker in 1978… “We made a hell of a team. Sure, I loved him." But knowing how Parker actually exploited Elvis after his death, a better more representative quote might have been … “Elvis didn't die. The body did. .. It don't mean a damn thing. It's just like when he was away in the army.. This changes nothing.” – Parker in August 1977
The 624-page book is divided into two halves, the first features Guralnick’s look at Parker's life with reference to his telegrams and letters. The second half of the book includes a selection of these actual letters with the author's interpretation of how they fit into the Elvis' history. Some of the stories are repeated in both sections of the book so it would have been a more attractive read had he combined both sections chronologically into one. Guralnick's detailed Footnotes, Index, Bibliography, the large number of photos, and list of credits is top-notch as we would expect from any of his volumes. To be honest if one ignores the obvious bias towards the angelic side of Parker there is still a fascination to all the details that Guralnick has discovered, as well a chance to read plenty of the telegrams that Parker sent. In the past these telegrams have been a real guide to any author or museum that needed to know about the timeline of Elvis' historic legacy. Parker’s early carnival life is absolutely riveting, albeit highly romanticised by PG. The very rootsy style of promotion, sometimes bizarre but almost always successful, that he developed there, would eventually become a blueprint for modern music industry. The Eddy Arnold section is also notable for how the roots of managing Elvis were laid down. Once Parker took over Elvis’ management the hard-core deals and pushy negotiations are fascinating to observe via his actual correspondence. Having access to the Graceland archives the book also includes tons of fascinating photos, including over thirty of Parker with Elvis, plenty of them that I have not seen previously.
Throwing dice with Red West on location for King Creole, March 1958.
But for me the strange outcome from reading the book is that it never actually changes my previous negative view towards Parker since so much of the known history has been deliberately left out or obfuscated. The new details only help confirm how Baz Luhrmann’s movie was closer to the truth than we might have expected. Any knowledgeable reader would surely feel that Guralnick is trying to do a “snow-job” on us all. Parker would be very proud!
Looking briefly at Guralnick’s snow-jobs.. 1. Parker’s discharged from the US army due to “Psychosis Psychogenic Depression.. Constitutional Psychopathic State, Emotional Instability.” This is partly explained by suggesting his second-wife Loanne knew the real answer "She was convinced that he simply grew tired of the regimentation... and, true to his nature, conceived of an ingenious, if inexplicably painful, way out". 2. His strange behaviour in cutting himself off completely from his Dutch family. This is partly excused by “the permanent estrangement from his mother, and entire family… was certainly the cruellest in its consequences both for himself and those he loved.” Until then Parker had been sending his Mother letters and a monthly allowance which then stopped. Parker could have of course re-established the family relationship at any time, so in fact the emotional trauma was solely forced onto the family, not the absent son. 3. His malicious treatment of Hank Snow – partner of “Jamboree Attractions” Briefly noted as “an uncharacteristic action, and one that went against all his principles of business”. 4. His participation in cutting Elvis off from good composers i.e. Lieber / Stoller, and the Suspicious Minds debacle. Stating that Parker was never involved in Elvis’ musical endeavours is ludicrous. The main example of Parker cutting out the brilliant Lieber / Stoller team when they tried to stimulate Elvis’ creative side is easily avoided as there is no mention whatsoever of these great composers in the whole book! Similarly, while Tom Diskin is noted to be Parker’s right-hand man doing everything he is asked to - even signing letters that Parker wrote - the Suspicious Minds debacle where Chips Moman refused to give up the publishing is excused by blaming Tom Diskin! It is malicious to state that Col Parker wasn’t physically there so it was nothing to do with him. 5. The lousy 60’s movies. In the book the low-quality 1960s movies in the book are blamed on Elvis where Guralnick suggests, "It was not so much the movies’ lack of creative sustenance as Elvis' own almost total absorption in his spiritual studies that kept Elvis away from what had been the one driving force of his life ever since he was a small child. .. it was obvious to everyone he couldn’t wait to get off the movie set as soon as possible, just so he could go back to his new spiritual texts." This is no excuse as Parker had already signed up his client for the unending treadmill of movie fluff way before Elvis met Larry Geller and started delving into his spiritual quest. The contracts were signed with no stipulation that Elvis had any right to insist on a good-quality script. The Beatles made one film per year – the idea that one artist could bang out three per year was absurd. 6. Wanting the ’68 Comeback Special to be Christmas themed. This is detailed below, but Guralnick’s defence for Parker is very weak 7. Not touring Elvis internationally. The possibility of Elvis touring internationally in 1970, 1971 or 1972, when he could have made millions overseas and really enjoyed meeting his foreign fans, is not discussed. Later on there is the lame excuse of Elvis’ prescription drug use. This makes little sense as in the 70s & 80s all the famous bands that enjoyed “sex&drugs&rock’n’roll” were touring overseas. 8. The malicious financial exploitation of Boxcar Enterprises. Parker earned 40%, his cronies 45% but Elvis only got 15% There was no excuse for this total exploitation of Elvis and it beggars belief that Guralnick deliberately avoids the issue by never mentioning it in the book. Not one word. 9. The RCA Buyout – Parker getting $6million, Elvis only $4.5million This is excused with the comment that “Elvis had a desperate need for money” it was an “unprecedented deal” and that Parker negotiated more than RCA originally offered as if that makes it fair. Nothing justifies the manager getting more than his client. 10. His later 70’s demands to “get the boy onstage” despite Elvis’ health issues. The traumatic “ice-bucket” moment is not mentioned in the book. After a terrible Hartford concert in July 1976 the book notes, “Col went backstage to talk to Elvis about the show but Elvis had been too groggy to respond. Loanna notes that Parker said, “What can I do? The real Elvis is sharp and clever, but the person I saw tonight didn’t even recognize me. No one knows how much I miss the real Elvis. If only I knew how to bring him back. I miss my friend so much.” Lamar Fike’s angry statement to Parker upon hearing of Elvis’ death, “Well it took you a while but you finally ran him into the ground, didn’t you? He couldn’t run anymore, could he?” isn’t in this book. 11. His 50% contract on Elvis’ earning + side benefits. The excuse that Parker made a sacrifice being solely Elvis’ manager is a poor one. Earning more that the talent you represent is outrageous. Parker’s income would be zero without his only client. The more he worked his client, and the higher percentage he took, the better for Parker’s gambling depts. (His gambling addiction is nicely discussed in the book) 12. Attorney Blanchard Tual’s 1981 legal case noting that Parker was guilty of “self-dealing, collusion, conspiracy, fraud, misrepresentation, bad faith and overreaching” And that he had “violated his duty both to Elvis and the Estate”. This is brushed over rather lightly noting that Parker “offered point-by-point rebuttals to each of the charges, with thinly veiled contempt..” towards Tual. 13. Parker actually stating that he was indeed an illegal alien! So in the Blanchard Tual’s 1981 legal case Parker tried to avoid (or at least delay) his legal troubles by stating that the federal court lacked jurisdiction “since I am not a citizen of the US or any foreign country.” Nor was he a U.S. citizen, “having never become a naturalized citizen of this country or of any other.” This was of course something that would have always caused Parker anxiety. For years he had tried to hide ties to his Dutch family and this presumably caused him genuine fear and a desire not to want Elvis to tour internationally. In his offices he officially blocked any mail for him arriving from Holland - "DO NOT OPEN"! Guralnick however ridiculously plays down this fact writing that “Parker was “a man without a country.” Well, maybe so although in the end this argument, so far as I can see, proved to be something of a red herring.” He then points out that after two years EPE did settle out of court and came up with a deal to buyout Parker and obtain all his memorabilia to use in the future opening of Graceland to tourists. While this maybe what happened it doesn’t in any way negate Blanchard Tual’s findings.
Vince Alex (aka 'Iwillbetrue' from the Steve Hoffman forum) adds his thoughts about the book below.. An obligatory disclaimer. I do believe that ultimately Elvis was responsible for his life, and accepting his flaws is as important, nay, necessary in accepting his greatness. His passivity, emotional volatility, cowardice when confronted, frequent bad behavior etc. has been written about aplenty. And while aspects like trappings of supernatural fame, generational poverty, socio-cultural background, artistic temperament, addiction, possible depression can shed light on his lows (and highs), it is important to acknowledge in good faith that these very valid aspects should be looked at to get the nuance, and not to excuse. Most of the time, he doesn’t interrogate Colonel’s motives or abilities for something which had bad results, instead offers a myriad of cornerstone details that, unless one knows at least somewhat of a chronology/ alternate accounts, can simply be lost for a reader. The book is an attempt to cast Colonel is a ‘new light’, but in attempting to do so, PG has in fact shone light on just how much merit there *is* in these so-called myths.
The early days of the relationship between the upcoming sensation and a dazzlingly intelligent promoter are noteworthy for how just much Colonel believed in Elvis. These early letters to different industry personalities are replete with Colonel succinctly summarizing the best qualities of the Hillbilly Cat. He cajoles, he threatens, he begs. The feeling of utter belief in the promise of a unique stardom for the boy is palpable in every letter. His 1955 letter to William Morris for example, states “this boy, Elvis Presley, has the same type of personality and talents along the line of James Dean” (something he obviously got from Elvis himself). Examples of pushing Elvis' unique artistry and abilities abound in 1955 and 56 letters. These letters truly show Parker's vision and maverick ways. And frankly, this vision is enough to earn him a place in history as one of the greatest managers. That the more powerful person might love and care for the other does not negate the inherent power imbalance and precarious results as the younger one spreads their wings.
Colonel repeatedly insists (and PG agrees) that he never interferes with Elvis’ creative process but the letters tell a vastly different story. The publishing issues raise their head as far back as 1956. While PG includes letters in which Colonel is advising Elvis that he ‘must also be very careful so we do not have some of these songs going out without having at least the protection for your return’- the crippling effect it eventually had on Elvis’ career is not spelled out for context. There’s a ridiculous defence of Kissin Cousins “it is a flavor that one can cover up many shortcomings in acting and presentation” or the eye-roll worthy suggestions for improving the latter movies. But PG never points out this contradiction, ”We don’t know anything about making films” the Colonel says, “and leave all that to the people who do.” PG doesn't see the irony, as to why Elvis Presley - one of the biggest stars in Hollywood - did not have any creative control. The Viva Las Vegas fiasco where Colonel failed to understand the merit of having a good budget, a good director and a good co-star- instead prioritizing cheap productions to increase profit margins. One would imagine that Elvis was making likes of A Streetcar Named Desire all this while, but then a sudden interest in being a Yogi side-lined him into making Clambake instead!! But hey, PG points out, as if pleading for Colonel's achievements, "Harum Scarum, for which Elvis received a salary of $1 million plus profit sharing". Yay!!
Regarding Elvis' mid-1960's recordings PG writes.. ‘From early 1964 Elvis didn’t go into the recording studio for anything but soundtrack recordings for the next two years. Now many reasons have been advanced for this.’ Of course it was Parker who had signed Elvis up for SIX movies and related soundtrack albums of poor quality Hill & Range material between March 1964 and February 1966. This would hardly increase Elvis’ desire to rush back into any studio, but Parker gets no blame. PG then suggests that it was Parker who caused Elvis’ resurgence in musical creativity with the ‘How Great Thou Art’ session. He states that it was Elvis' interest in spiritual studies which prompted Colonel to strike a RCA deal to record a Gospel album. This has have never been noted before. Ernst Jorgensen has written that Parker specifically wanted a Christmas single and that it was Elvis’ home recordings that influenced Elvis’ inspired recordings at the ‘HGTA session’. It is also noteworthy that Elvis' buddy Lamar Fike befriended Felton Jarvis in Nashville and suggested him as a new producer for Elvis. Jarvis would obviously be more open to recording anything that Elvis wanted compared to the old team of Steve Sholes / Chet Atkins. The importance and influence of having the young Felton Jarvis as his new RCA producer is not even mentioned by PG.
Parker celebrates his 59th birthday on the ’68 Special set with Steve Binder, Bob Finkel, and Elvis.
The ‘myth’ that Guralnick is most concerned about is the trouble over the Comeback Special. How he treats it however, neatly reveals all the weaknesses of his book. Feb & March: Finkel contacts Binder (who is primarily known for edgy content and not Xmas specials), Binder agrees to associate with the project after Howe tells him about his experience with Elvis. Finkel and Binder have lunch. PG writes, “I imagine it took Colonel a moment or two to get used to the idea, but once he was assured that at least one Christmas song would be retained, he never sounded a note of protest.” Very strangely Guralnick then negates his own theory by including the following angry letter from Parker to NBC from months later in August 1968! Parker certainly does protest!
PG also doesn’t mention Colonel’s sleight of hand regarding any RCA soundtrack remuneration to Binder and Howe. Parker lied when he gave Binder his word that “That would definitely be no RCA song or soundtrack album released from the television special.”
The book becomes more even-handed as Parker’s and Elvis’ relationship falls apart and Colonel’s letters to Elvis during this time are actually very moving. He is unable to go through his ‘partner’. He can see that the boy he placed all the bets on and thought could control, is now hurtling towards self-destruction. His pathetic attempts to still rouse the drug addled, paranoid, uncommunicative Elvis are frankly tragic. Especially given his own gambling addiction, which is portrayed very sensitively by PG. While Guralnick does imply that Parker’s negotiations were sometimes misunderstood, to his credit he does include Colonel's angry late 80s claim when he summoned Jack Soden and Priscilla to a meeting in Las Vegas “to demand that he be taken care of in the way that all his years of service demanded. He wanted $1,000 a week as a 'Special Consultant' — and even that, he said, was hardly enough.” By then Loanne was even embarrassed.
Snowmen’s League of America, with Joe Esposito, Gene Smith, Charlie Hodge, Cliff Gleaves, Red West, Elvis, Richard Davis on the set of Blue Hawaii 1961.
Discussed at the end of the book PG’s own interaction with Colonel is quite illuminating in itself. It is tempting to speculate that PG got ‘snowed’ by the Colonel, but I think it would be too simplistic a statement.
Send EIN Your Thoughts - Have we misjudged this book? Do you agree with Guralnick's view on Parker You can check out the book here Amazon US >> 'Hardback' / Audiobook / Kindle
|
|
