|
|
Post by Aba21 on Jul 27, 2003 18:27:53 GMT -5
But there was help. And I'm not so sure that nobody did stand up for David. Reports are that not everyone was in agreement. Just like it was reported that it was is the same way it was reported that it was not.No he said-she said. Yes we know that don't we Mike? But who had the last word? Who could have made everthing all right in a heartbeat? Only one man.....BG. He could have said David's in the group and that's it and Otis would have nowhere to go but sit his A$# down and be quiet. But he didn't and allowed it to be put on the group voting him out like he had no say. To me that's the  in the equation. There are a lot of things Otis could have done to help the situation if he had the power some seem to think he did....but it still comes down to BG. |
|
|
|
Post by MikeNYC on Jul 27, 2003 18:33:25 GMT -5
Yes we know that don't we Mike? But who had the last word? Who could have made everthing all right in a heartbeat? Only one man.....BG. He could have said David's in the group and that's it and Otis would have nowhere to go but sit his A$# down and be quiet. But he didn't and allowed it to be put on the group voting him out like he had no say. To me that's the in the equation. There are a lot of things Otis could have done to help the situation if he had the power some seem to think he did....but it still comes down to BG. But at least speak up...don't wait until 10 years later to see that Eddie & David were on to something. And that's what happened. That's why they couldn't take their success to another label like the Four Tops,Gladys & The Pips,and the Spinners did. |
|
|
|
Post by Tess on Jul 27, 2003 18:38:48 GMT -5
Mike, Ugh.... because it was near the end of the book and I just finished reading it? JUST KIDDING! Though I did just complete it today. The discussion of the function and dysfunction of the Motown/Gordy family; it seemed apropro.  Regarding the lack of appropriate treatment for substance abuse in those days, addictions were viewed as character flaws rather than the legitimate illnesses that we know them today to be. The attitude was "get your act together" and as we all know now just saying no is not enough. Tess |
|
|
|
Post by pcjames4 on Sept 2, 2003 14:37:17 GMT -5
When you have the best singer ever, you keep him in the group.....Period. You do whatever it takes to work through the issues. It's not like the other lead singers didn't eventually have the same problems as David.
However, you don't change the name of the group for David's sake.
Like Eddie, errr, Terron said " I vote he stays."
|
|
|
|
Post by MikeNYC on Sept 2, 2003 15:09:51 GMT -5
And you don't work David like a government mule and ignore his opinions& concerns on the group.  |
|
|
|
Post by selfishreasons on Sept 2, 2003 15:26:19 GMT -5
And you don't work David like a government mule and ignore his opinions& concerns on the group. No, you don't ignore David. But here's the thing if I had Eddie, Melvin, and Paul in a group I feel alittle bit easier about letting David go. Come on, it's Eddie, and Paul. But here is how I tackle this question. I do as if I'm a member of the group. Paul: If I'm Paul I say, "Yes, Let him go." If I'm Paul I know that on any day I can perform like a King and own the stage. I also know I can do much of the david material. Not all, but much. His voice was lower, but not way too much lower. Singing his two solo songs, I can gather he must have known exactly was his voice was capable of. Eddie: Though I am familiar that Eddie wanted David to stay, if I'm Eddie I also say yes. Eddie had some good hits and would have been able to score more. If I'm Eddie, I say say. Though his concern about who's gonna take those other leads was a good question. After all, the people they loved David. Otis: Knowing Otis now, you know he's say yes. But If I'm Otis then I'd say no. Melvin: If I'm Melvin I think I say yes. Melvin seems that type that can get along with anybody. Now, if at the time Melvin wasn't getting along with him or was feeling imposed upon, I think no would be the right answer. |
|
|
|
Post by Aba21 on Sept 2, 2003 15:43:05 GMT -5
The problem I had is nobody in the group appeared to be looking at the big picture. It's understandable given the fact no one knew what the big picture would be. But if thier motto was no one is bigger than the group and do we really know it was for sure, then the decision was easy...he goes.But if you look at what he brought to the group and if they could have found a way to get him help for his problems then I think he stays. Problem with that was nobody knew what to do because nobody knew how to treat what he had at that time. I don't think enough effort was put into finding a way to keep him.......It was you got a problem....you got to go!
|
|
|
|
Post by MikeNYC on Sept 2, 2003 15:47:04 GMT -5
No, you don't ignore David. But here's the thing if I had Eddie, Melvin, and Paul in a group I feel alittle bit easier about letting David go. Come on, it's Eddie, and Paul. But here is how I tackle this question. I do as if I'm a member of the group. Paul: If I'm Paul I say, "Yes, Let him go." If I'm Paul I know that on any day I can perform like a King and own the stage. I also know I can do much of the david material. Not all, but much. His voice was lower, but not way too much lower. Singing his two solo songs, I can gather he must have known exactly was his voice was capable of. Eddie: Though I am familiar that Eddie wanted David to stay, if I'm Eddie I also say yes. Eddie had some good hits and would have been able to score more. If I'm Eddie, I say say. Though his concern about who's gonna take those other leads was a good question. After all, the people they loved David. Otis: Knowing Otis now, you know he's say yes. But If I'm Otis then I'd say no. Melvin: If I'm Melvin I think I say yes. Melvin seems that type that can get along with anybody. Now, if at the time Melvin wasn't getting along with him or was feeling imposed upon, I think no would be the right answer. This is why I say you need to get into the REAL Paul Williams..and not the made for exploitation character that you have been led to believe is Paul. That would be EGO for him,or Eddie to think like that. :bonk: |
|
|
|
Post by MikeNYC on Sept 2, 2003 16:08:26 GMT -5
No, you don't ignore David. But here's the thing if I had Eddie, Melvin, and Paul in a group I feel alittle bit easier about letting David go. Come on, it's Eddie, and Paul. But here is how I tackle this question. I do as if I'm a member of the group. Paul: If I'm Paul I say, "Yes, Let him go." If I'm Paul I know that on any day I can perform like a King and own the stage. I also know I can do much of the david material. Not all, but much. His voice was lower, but not way too much lower. Singing his two solo songs, I can gather he must have known exactly was his voice was capable of. Eddie: Though I am familiar that Eddie wanted David to stay, if I'm Eddie I also say yes. Eddie had some good hits and would have been able to score more. If I'm Eddie, I say say. Though his concern about who's gonna take those other leads was a good question. After all, the people they loved David. Otis: Knowing Otis now, you know he's say yes. But If I'm Otis then I'd say no. Melvin: If I'm Melvin I think I say yes. Melvin seems that type that can get along with anybody. Now, if at the time Melvin wasn't getting along with him or was feeling imposed upon, I think no would be the right answer. This is why I say you need to get into the REAL Paul Williams..and not the made for exploitation character that you have been led to believe is Paul. That would be EGO for him,or Eddie to think like that. :bonk: |
|
|
|
Post by selfishreasons on Sept 2, 2003 19:35:11 GMT -5
I'm not basing this off some character. I'm basing thing off my own feelings and what I think of the singers.
|
|
|
|
Post by dcalz on Sept 3, 2003 9:29:33 GMT -5
I would have voted David out. Despite the dynamic voice, his behavior was so self destructive. It is not fair to put the lives and well beings of four others in jeopardy, putting all their eggs in the basic of someone that wasn't all together.
It wasn't as if they hadn't tried rehab for him. He was in and out on more than one occasion and obviously it never took until the day he past.
|
|
|
|
Post by Aba21 on Sept 3, 2003 12:07:16 GMT -5
I would have voted David out. Despite the dynamic voice, his behavior was so self destructive. It is not fair to put the lives and well beings of four others in jeopardy, putting all their eggs in the basic of someone that wasn't all together. It wasn't as if they hadn't tried rehab for him. He was in and out on more than one occasion and obviously it never took until the day he past. David never went to rehab until long after he was a Temptation. He was ordered to go by court to stay out of jail. They didn't know what rehab was when he was a group member which is why they got rid of him. I wish there had been some kind of rehab to send him to or at least one they knew about so he could have had every chance to stay. |
|
|
|
Post by ZetaLady6 on Sept 3, 2003 21:33:15 GMT -5
I would have voted David out. Despite the dynamic voice, his behavior was so self destructive. It is not fair to put the lives and well beings of four others in jeopardy, putting all their eggs in the basic of someone that wasn't all together. It wasn't as if they hadn't tried rehab for him. He was in and out on more than one occasion and obviously it never took until the day he past. I wouldn't say he wasn't all together, he just went through a dry spell like at some point they all did. David did have problems, but none of which couldn't be fixed with time and help. Kicking him out wasn't the best decision, but as Aba said...what could they do with no rehab. David had just as much love for the group as any of them and it showed in his performance. Unfortunately fame and society got the best of him and he just couldn't handle it alone. Everyone deserves a second chance, but for David it was just too late. |
|
|
|
Post by kalisa2 on Sept 3, 2003 21:57:53 GMT -5
Where was it I saw/read/heard that David went into SOME kind of rehab. in 1967...? a video clip at his death? Somewhere.
|
|
|
|
Post by kanabul on Sept 4, 2003 0:53:35 GMT -5
|
|
