|
|
Post by MikeNYC on Nov 11, 2003 18:31:59 GMT -5
> The reason being is that people can read between > the (Coke) lines and reality hit them in the head > as far as everybody can't be wrong. ?? > Now, you say Otis built the group from the ground > up,how do you know this? Can you explain how > this was done? Imean Paul created > the style that you see on the stage today,Eddie > dressed them up,no Kool & The Gang,Jungle > Boogie out fits when he was dressing them. Guess you haven't seen pictures of those silver lame suits with the long jackets & goofy-ass hats circa 1968...<g> > David gave them an electrfying performance that > will never be re-created,Dennis was the bridge > over troubled water,Melvin gave them a bass sound > that nobody comes close to...I don't care who it > is that tries,there will never be able to find a Melvin. > So,having said that,explain your statement. Certainly any group is a sum of it's parts, & Paul Williams' sense of style (Otis has always said he was the heart & soul of the group) & Eddie's attention to stage outfits was a major part of their look, but without somebody to get it going, hold the thing together through all the disappointments & setbacks, not to mention taking care of the myriad business details of running a successful organization, then it's nothing more than a group of dreamers, albeit stylishly dressed. The music field is loaded with also-ran's & never-were's. Otis basically started the group, made the major decisions, assigned those duties you're talking about (& who do you think had to take up the slack when Paul's alcoholism got the better of him, or Ruff was off in la-la land, you're going to rely on him to arrange transportation?!), was the business liaison between Motown/Gordy & the act, handles the press (an exhausting job in itself), & most importantly KEPT it going all this time...otherwise you all wouldn't have anything to talk about! That & a million other little details you'd have no conception of unless you've ever lead a band, or even owned your own company (with employees). Somebody has to keep their head screwed on & pilot the ship or you'll never get off the ground (now there's a clumsy metaphor!). They worked well as a team until the mid-60's when Ruff, Paul & Eddie started falling out. That's 3/5th's of the group right there...believe me, somebody had to keep it going, & that man was Otis, so let's cut him some slack & give him his due. Without him they'd be consigned to the history books long ago, along with Marvelettes, Mary Wells, The Contours, & a bunch of others that didn't survive the 60's. Are you talking about the "Riverboat Gamblers" outfits that they wore on the back of the Cloud Nine LP cover? The one that gave them rave reviews for at the time? Is that what you're talking about? Otis basically started the group? Why ,because he was with a merger? Where,other than Otis' account ,do you get that Paul's acholism got the best of him? Didn't affect him when he was wondering about how the fans would react to the group cutting the middle of the road standards that they covered on a Mellow Mood LP! Or is that the problem? When you voice your concerns,you're a problem,or have to be in "La-La" Land? Every body that voices their concerns is a proplem? Please explain! |
|
|
|
Post by AnnaKonda on Nov 11, 2003 19:25:46 GMT -5
Certainly any group is a sum of it's parts, & Paul Williams' sense of style (Otis has always said he was the heart & soul of the group) & Eddie's attention to stage outfits was a major part of their look, but without somebody to get it going, hold the thing together through all the disappointments & setbacks, not to mention taking care of the myriad business details of running a successful organization, then it's nothing more than a group of dreamers, albeit stylishly dressed. The music field is loaded with also-ran's & never-were's.
I am not so sure about the myriad business details ... As much as I could extract from the remarks of Aba, Melvin had quite a bit to say when it came to business ... Melvin may not have showcased his business side, but I am sure, he was not only involved "on the side." Do you seriously think that Eddie Kendricks, David Ruffin, Paul Williams, and Melvin Franklin were a bunch of "foolish dreamers?" That they were in need of guidance by a seasoned businessman. What makes you think that? I think they were interested in their careers and their artistic development and financial issues as well as any other artist ... Or, did I misconstrue something here? 
|
|
|
|
Post by MikeNYC on Nov 13, 2003 10:38:09 GMT -5
Certainly any group is a sum of it's parts, & Paul Williams' sense of style (Otis has always said he was the heart & soul of the group) & Eddie's attention to stage outfits was a major part of their look, but without somebody to get it going, hold the thing together through all the disappointments & setbacks, not to mention taking care of the myriad business details of running a successful organization, then it's nothing more than a group of dreamers, albeit stylishly dressed. The music field is loaded with also-ran's & never-were's.
I am not so sure about the myriad business details ... As much as I could extract from the remarks of Aba, Melvin had quite a bit to say when it came to business ... Melvin may not have showcased his business side, but I am sure, he was not only involved "on the side." Do you seriously think that Eddie Kendricks, David Ruffin, Paul Williams, and Melvin Franklin were a bunch of "foolish dreamers?" That they were in need of guidance by a seasoned businessman. What makes you think that? I think they were interested in their careers and their artistic development and financial issues as well as any other artist ... Or, did I misconstrue something here? Yeah you thought you were dealing with an open mind! You're not going to get an answer on this. But you can see the bias dripping all over that "opinion".All it is is DISRESPECT. They condone it,and display it with every issue that you bring up. That's why I say whatever I want to say,in whatever way the mood strikes me. And answer any question asked. All I want is the same in return. I put up with their nonsense,they can put up with mine....maybe they'll get on the poll, I mean take a poll and see who spews more nonsense. Whenever they get enough sense to realize ...all that crap that they are trying to throw.........they are doing the same thing. Didn't you see the pride they took in making fun of Melvin's use of perscription drugs? And What's wrong with that picture of Paul in Otis' book? You would think David,Paul,Eddie & Melvin had a four pronged pissing contest and the target was these whinners cornflakes. And ,like Maxwellhouse Coffee,they thought it was good to the last drop! Stick to your opinion, Anna,you don't run & hide like the ones who cry..What Did Otis do to you ?  |
|
|
|
Post by AnnaKonda on Nov 13, 2003 11:29:21 GMT -5
You're not going to get an answer on this.
I know I won't. And I am no longer waiting for one on the issue of the WHITE WOMEN ... But that says it all to me ... ;D That's what I call vituperation.
|
|
|
|
Post by MikeNYC on Nov 13, 2003 12:26:22 GMT -5
You're not going to get an answer on this.I know I won't. And I am no longer waiting for one on the issue of the WHITE WOMEN ... But that says it all to me ... ;D That's what I call vituperation. :sleepy: :bonk: :banghead :shocked :faint: :shocked :nono You lost me on that one.....I don't know where to go. Let me in on what you are talking about. |
|
|
|
Post by winetender on Nov 13, 2003 12:36:34 GMT -5
AnnaKonda; I totally agree with You! Mike; So was I! I had to look it up in the dictionary ???It did mean what I thought! |
|
|
|
Post by AnnaKonda on Nov 13, 2003 12:48:55 GMT -5
Her's what I am taking about; it's only one paragraph ... but the rest wasn't any better, in my opinion
Gender:
Posts: 347
Re: Louis Price the Forgotten Temptation
« Reply #14 on: 11/12/2003 at 17:03:17 »
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Of course it was intentional. You can't have whites & blacks mixing together, especially the kids (ie: music) or you'll have whites marching along with their black brothers in civil rights protests like in the 50s & 60s, then pretty soon those spooks be wanting all our WHITE WOMEN!
Here's my answer:
OOOOHHHH! What a touchy subject! I think white women/girls had a say in that too ... especially in Germany in my days. We were simply bored stiff by the beer drinking, lazy butt, no dancing guys that were hanging out in the discos. We were jumping at the guys who asked us to dance and showed us how to dance ... no matter what they looked like. And then we've got to know each other, talked about America -- and what we thaught it was. And after a while there were so many mixed couples and beautiful children and proud grandparents and aunts ...
We white girls are pretty proud of that accomplishment ... So, it was really us who snitched the black men ... and believe me, some folks did let us know that they'd like to kill us for that.
|
|
|
|
Post by Budrocket on Nov 13, 2003 13:13:52 GMT -5
I was saying "the powers that be" contributed to re-segregating radio in the 70's because music was the great unifier. In other words, you started having white & black kids mixing together, which was percieved as a threat by the status quo, especially after white kids started joining in on civil rights marches, then the anti-Viet Nam protests, etc. Dividing "white" music & "black" music into two different "us & them" camps was a very effective way of dividing *people*.
To further clarify, when I say "powers that be," take a look at who owned the opinion-forming & entertainment media (many of the same who own it now, like Westinghouse, General Electric, etc., all run by rich white men with ties to government contracts & the military-industrial complex).
I was also lampooning the age old fear that black men are going to start stealing all the white women away as a way of making these people look foolish.
If you misunderstood this as a racist statement on my behalf, then I guess I didn't make my point well, & I apologize for any distress I may have caused you.
|
|
|
|
Post by AnnaKonda on Nov 13, 2003 13:45:17 GMT -5
Budrocket,
no need to apologize for an opinion stated ... I am always open for a good discussion, by the way ...
That's why I called it a touchy subject. The way you were building your arguement appeared to me as if portraying all the troubles these powers put up with were solely to protect the white women. This would have been quite foolish, because ww, too, had a free will. We were not only objects to be desired by one group or protected by another ... we chose ourselves whom to love or whom to obey.
On the other hand, white women (or some of them in the said situation) were very much aware of the horrible crimes committed against black men under the disguise of protecting their virtue at a time when women were still not considered fully human ...
The problem I had with the statement was rather from a feminist point of view, not so much from a racist one.
|
|
|
|
Post by Budrocket on Nov 13, 2003 14:41:59 GMT -5
No, I didn't mean it to sound anti-feminist either!
Anyway, this is all probably too political for this list. Just commenting on the segregation of radio in the 70's & it's effect on R&B in general.
|
|
|
|
Post by Aba21 on Nov 13, 2003 15:01:03 GMT -5
Certainly any group is a sum of it's parts, & Paul Williams' sense of style (Otis has always said he was the heart & soul of the group) & Eddie's attention to stage outfits was a major part of their look, but without somebody to get it going, hold the thing together through all the disappointments & setbacks, not to mention taking care of the myriad business details of running a successful organization, then it's nothing more than a group of dreamers, albeit stylishly dressed. The music field is loaded with also-ran's & never-were's.
I am not so sure about the myriad business details ... As much as I could extract from the remarks of Aba, Melvin had quite a bit to say when it came to business ... Melvin may not have showcased his business side, but I am sure, he was not only involved "on the side." Do you seriously think that Eddie Kendricks, David Ruffin, Paul Williams, and Melvin Franklin were a bunch of "foolish dreamers?" That they were in need of guidance by a seasoned businessman. What makes you think that? I think they were interested in their careers and their artistic development and financial issues as well as any other artist ... Or, did I misconstrue something here? I really don';t believe any of them were "business minded" at first. I believe certain things fell to certain people and from that came Otis doing the "business". I think they all had a say in what went on at first but as the originals left, more of the onus fell onto Otis lap, and I don't believe for a minute he had any intention of sharing the decisions again after that. |
|
|
|
Post by In Dirty South on Nov 18, 2003 21:51:54 GMT -5
I think that Bo is a good singer, however, I agree that he does riff to much. He was good on "How Could He hurt You" from the Phoenix Rising CD. I saw him perform "This is My Promise" on Soul Train and he messed up the whole thing with the unnecessary riffing. I know Theo was somewhere burnin' up. He would have a Ruffin-like voice if not for all the vibrating and riffing of his voice. I think that Theo was a better fit in the Ruffin/Edwards role. On Awesome, with all the riffing, Bo came off sounding like a pseudo Al Green. G.C. however, I just don't know. I heard that He did really good at the Farish Street Festival in Jackson,MS. I don't see him as a Tempt, I don't see him as a Spinner, since he left them with only one major hit "Its a Shame. He looks older that Otis. I saw him perform with the Spinners on PBS, and he murdered al the songs that Phillipe "Soul" Whynne and John Edwards made hits. If anyone else agrees with me holla back! Peace, Nupeman88
|
|
|
|
Post by Ivory Fair on Nov 18, 2003 22:01:22 GMT -5
Now, see, that's when I LIKED his riffing (well, actually I never had a problem with him riffing at all) but I thought he kicked natural hind-end on his rendition of it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Aba21 on Nov 18, 2003 23:11:40 GMT -5
I think that Bo is a good singer, however, I agree that he does riff to much. He was good on "How Could He hurt You" from the Phoenix Rising CD. I saw him perform "This is My Promise" on Soul Train and he messed up the whole thing with the unnecessary riffing. I know Theo was somewhere burnin' up. He would have a Ruffin-like voice if not for all the vibrating and riffing of his voice. I think that Theo was a better fit in the Ruffin/Edwards role. On Awesome, with all the riffing, Bo came off sounding like a pseudo Al Green. G.C. however, I just don't know. I heard that He did really good at the Farish Street Festival in Jackson,MS. I don't see him as a Tempt, I don't see him as a Spinner, since he left them with only one major hit "Its a Shame. He looks older that Otis. I saw him perform with the Spinners on PBS, and he murdered al the songs that Phillipe "Soul" Whynne and John Edwards made hits. If anyone else agrees with me holla back! Peace, Nupeman88 i'm hollarin' like you in that I wan't all that crazy for his rendition of the Spinners song on PBS either.....hollar! |
|
|
|
Post by Miss Tara on Nov 21, 2003 8:43:06 GMT -5
People are surprised about this? Of course there wouldn't have been a problem with insurance, money or anything while he was IN the group. But I hope Bo gets it just because......Gums, I mean Otis will get what he deserves. ;D And I'll be  when he does. |
|
