|
|
Jul 9, 2004 3:47:26 GMT -5
Post by ghostman on Jul 9, 2004 3:47:26 GMT -5
Besides the part where Otis claims Paul appeared to Eddie I noticed a few other things slightly off. O describes Lamont Dozier as having a voice slightly higher than himself, which was a 2nd tenor like Paul. Did he mean David (or Richard) instead? Paul always took baritone, one interval lower than O. He also somehow left Woodson out of the picture when describing David's memorial service, saying Dennis took lead while the 5 others sang. Finally he initially said Eddie did his job beautifully at the Reunion and apparently recanted in the Epilogue describing it as uneven.
|
|
|
|
Jul 9, 2004 10:26:31 GMT -5
Post by Ivory Fair on Jul 9, 2004 10:26:31 GMT -5
You might have a point on all of those other things, but how can we say that O was wrong about his story about Paul's "ghost" when it's just one's man against anothers? (or are you not counting that?)
|
|
|
|
Jul 10, 2004 3:20:13 GMT -5
Post by crella25 on Jul 10, 2004 3:20:13 GMT -5
I have to find my book for this. But I will say, if Paul was going to "come back" and say something to anyone in the group, it would be Eddie. Maybe he did and Eddie wanted to keep it to himself. but for O to make this statement was IMO, bad taste. No, I was not lying next to O when the sighting took place, but I haven't seen anything to back his story.
|
|
|
|
Jul 11, 2004 7:55:25 GMT -5
Post by Ivory Fair on Jul 11, 2004 7:55:25 GMT -5
Oh good grief!  |
|
Jammo
Tempt Fanatic
Posts: 39
|
Jul 11, 2004 11:45:13 GMT -5
Post by Jammo on Jul 11, 2004 11:45:13 GMT -5
I have to find my book for this. But I will say, if Paul was going to "come back" and say something to anyone in the group, it would be Eddie. Maybe he did and Eddie wanted to keep it to himself. but for O to make this statement was IMO, bad taste. No, I was not lying next to O when the sighting took place, but I haven't seen anything to back his story. Otis-bashing!! |
|
|
|
Jul 15, 2004 15:23:29 GMT -5
Post by Temptress on Jul 15, 2004 15:23:29 GMT -5
:laughing
|
|
|
|
Jul 16, 2004 2:00:12 GMT -5
Post by crella25 on Jul 16, 2004 2:00:12 GMT -5
Not at all, the name of the thread is Errors in the book. According to Eddie, this statement was an error. And it seems unlikely that Paul would show himself to Otis. have nothing against O, glad that he has kept it together all this time. Just giving my take on the subject. I'm still glad he wrote a book. |
|
Jammo
Tempt Fanatic
Posts: 39
|
Jul 16, 2004 6:56:49 GMT -5
Post by Jammo on Jul 16, 2004 6:56:49 GMT -5
Maybe Paul showed himself to them who wanted it the most (missed paul the most).
|
|
|
|
Jul 16, 2004 9:10:38 GMT -5
Post by kym on Jul 16, 2004 9:10:38 GMT -5
Maybe Paul showed himself to them who wanted it the most (missed paul the most). Personally I think its unexplainable - Eddie can't decide who comes to you after they die. Its his opinion, he apparently didn't think that Otis and Paul had that kind of relationship - Eddie wasn't there and neither were we. |
|
|
|
Jul 16, 2004 9:55:52 GMT -5
Post by kalisa2 on Jul 16, 2004 9:55:52 GMT -5
No, but what Eddie was saying was that the conversation between him and Otis about "Paul sighting" never happened, that's all. Otis claimed that after his "Paul sighting", he and Eddie talked and Eddie said Paul had come to him also. It appeared to me that Eddie was also saying that Paul did NOT appear to him after death. But for sure that that particular conversation between he and Otis never occurred.
|
|
Jammo
Tempt Fanatic
Posts: 39
|
Jul 16, 2004 11:51:18 GMT -5
Post by Jammo on Jul 16, 2004 11:51:18 GMT -5
The whole thing about Paul appearing after his dead is unexplainable. I personally do not believe that paul really appeared to otis. I think it was Otis's mind that "messed up" and so paul strangely appeared "at the foot of Otis's bed", as it says in the book.
|
|
|
|
Jul 16, 2004 21:18:19 GMT -5
Post by EddiesLuv on Jul 16, 2004 21:18:19 GMT -5
Personally I think its unexplainable - Eddie can't decide who comes to you after they die. Its his opinion, he apparently didn't think that Otis and Paul had that kind of relationship - Eddie wasn't there and neither were we. That's not what Eddie said. Eddie said he never told Otis that Paul came to him (after he died). Eddie's statement had nothing to do with Paul's and Otis' relationship or whether Paul came to Otis (after he died). |
|
|
|
Jul 17, 2004 17:33:32 GMT -5
Post by JoAnne on Jul 17, 2004 17:33:32 GMT -5
That's not what Eddie said. Eddie said he never told Otis that Paul came to him (after he died). Eddie's statement had nothing to do with Paul's and Otis' relationship or whether Paul came to Otis (after he died). :clapping: :clapping:  |
|
|
|
Jul 17, 2004 17:42:12 GMT -5
Post by JoAnne on Jul 17, 2004 17:42:12 GMT -5
I don't understand why O posted a picture, in his book of Paul, with his wife sitting on his lap and said, here's Paul with a friend?  What's up with that. :shocked He knew that was Paul's wife! |
|
Elbridge
Tempt Fanatic
Elbridge "Al" Bryant
Posts: 28
|
Jul 19, 2004 1:32:12 GMT -5
Post by Elbridge on Jul 19, 2004 1:32:12 GMT -5
I don't understand why O posted a picture, in his book of Paul, with his wife sitting on his lap and said, here's Paul with a friend? What's up with that.  He knew that was Paul's wife! Given the fact that there were many other picture ID errors, I wouldn't totally put that on Otis. One would imagine Otis would have double-checked but who knows... Ed |
|
