|
|
Post by MikeNYC on Sept 13, 2004 12:19:46 GMT -5
' Otis spoke of the downward spiral of society these days. “We have become a very decadent society. There is a decline in morals and it seems it’s all about the mighty dollar. " It's been like that for as long as humankind exists ... Backstabbing too? I'm sorry,I'm just having fun with this quote. There is alot of irony in it. :laughing |
|
|
|
Post by ZeldaFScott on Sept 13, 2004 12:27:28 GMT -5
Backstabbing too? I'm sorry,I'm just having fun with this quote. There is alot of irony in it.  Yes, Mike. I think backstabbing has existed for that long, too. In both the literal and the symbolical sense. ;D |
|
|
|
Post by Aba21 on Sept 13, 2004 12:31:10 GMT -5
I can't understand the hatred/anamosity towards Otis. Seems like ANYTHING he says is taken as BS. Otis will always be the one who will be interviewed by someone; he is the last original member of the group. Who else is supposed to give an account of the group's history? If someone were to inquire about the Channels' history, they surely wouldn't come to me, they would go to the original member, which happens to be Earl Lewis. No one made mention of the writer's misinformation concering Paul Williams but Otis gets blasted for one quote - smh I know what you mean. Although it is denied everytime it is brought up, it really feels to me that Otis is held responsible for the deaths of the others and why is he still alive? That's too bad because it shouldn't be that way.................I guess I want to understand that if Otis was so bad, and so not talented.....why was he in the group in the first place and even further, why would all these great singers in the C-5 continue to sing with him? He made a positive contribution to the group in terms of his singing............anything else is up for debate. |
|
|
|
Post by MissTara on Sept 13, 2004 12:37:32 GMT -5
I know what you mean. Although it is denied everytime it is brought up, it really feels to me that Otis is held responsible for the deaths of the others and why is he still alive? That's too bad because it shouldn't be that way.................I guess I want to understand that if Otis was so bad, and so not talented.....why was he in the group in the first place and even further, why would all these great singers in the C-5 continue to sing with him? He made a positive contribution to the group in terms of his singing............anything else is up for debate. I agree as far as not blaming Otis for the other guys deaths. That is just ridiculous. However, as far as why he has been in this group for this long with his unforseen talent? I have no idea. I don't understand that part of "positive contribution to the group in terms of his singing"? |
|
|
|
Post by Aba21 on Sept 13, 2004 12:50:12 GMT -5
I agree as far as not blaming Otis for the other guys deaths. That is just ridiculous. However, as far as why he has been in this group for this long with his unforseen talent? I have no idea. I don't understand that part of "positive contribution to the group in terms of his singing"? Are you a singer? Do you understand what it takes to be a good background singer? That is all he has ever professed to be. If you can't see that he is good at what he does then something is missing from your musical knowledge, IMO. Having sung in groups whan I was younger, and having been around many groups in the business, I have come to the understanding of what makes groups work and having a person willing to do what Otis does was and is essential in the success of any group. Is he the best.........not by a long shot. But he was good enough to be there with them and he did his job.....what else can you ask of him? And furthermore, most of this Otis stuff came after the movie and book, neither of which have anything to do with how well he does his job. I don't like all I know about Mr. Williams but I do not let it cloud my view of him as a singer. He can sing and sing well but he is not a lead singer and never has been one.......you almost have to pull his teeth to get him to lead on one. My question is still out there for an answer. If he can't sing, didn't start the group.....then why the hell did these guys get in the group with him. And even if it was a mutual joining of two groups, my question still stands. Why did they sing with this no talented person? All those articles and quotes form papers and magazines mean nothing to me when it comes to his singing, which is all I am defending. Much of our debates have been about just how much he sings or what parts............If this proposed meeting comes about I will be happy to break down what he does and play songs in which you can hear hsi harmonies without question.It won't be the first time I have been able to prove his worth to the group. |
|
Elbridge
Tempt Fanatic
Elbridge "Al" Bryant
Posts: 28
|
Post by Elbridge on Sept 13, 2004 15:36:10 GMT -5
I have to agree with Tim here. Otis' background parts on a lot of these songs ain't easy - yet he pulls them off brilliantly. Go listen to "Hello, Young Lovers". It ain't easy to get his background part down but that's exactly what he does. His step-out is awful (that part at the end where he goes, "Hello, young lovers, wherever you are) but his background part is fantastic. Go check it out. You might be surprised...  Ed |
|
|
|
Post by MissTara on Sept 13, 2004 15:38:47 GMT -5
I have to agree with Tim here. Otis' background parts on a lot of these songs ain't easy - yet he pulls them off brilliantly. Go listen to "Hello, Young Lovers". It ain't easy to get his background part down but that's exactly what he does. His step-out is awful (that part at the end where he goes, "Hello, young lovers, wherever you are) but his background part is fantastic. Go check it out. You might be surprised... Ed Aba, I'll get back to you when I have more time to respond to that. But Ed, I hear Paul on Hello Young Lovers. That is great |
|
|
|
Post by MissTara on Sept 13, 2004 15:41:41 GMT -5
Which by the way is a fabulous song. However, I hear Cloud Nine, Get Ready, Ole Man River etc (just examples) with Otis doing background and personally his voice over powers the others which to me makes the harmony not good. Its almost check out time at work for me :laughing but you get the gist
|
|
|
|
Post by JoAnne on Sept 13, 2004 16:54:39 GMT -5
I find it truly amazing that Otis can piss so many folks off all the time. ;D ;D ;D The hatred would be better served towards Osama Bin Laden if you ask me..............but since you didn't.............. ;D ;D Just because someone disagrees or don't like what someone else says or does, do not constitute hatered. It happens between, husband and wife, brother and sister, brother and brother, sister and sister, relatives and relatives, friends and friends. If that caused hatred among people, almost everybody in the world would hate each other. Fortunately that is not the case. |
|
|
|
Post by MikeNYC on Sept 13, 2004 17:25:05 GMT -5
I can't understand the hatred/anamosity towards Otis. Seems like ANYTHING he says is taken as BS. Otis will always be the one who will be interviewed by someone; he is the last original member of the group. Who else is supposed to give an account of the group's history? If someone were to inquire about the Channels' history, they surely wouldn't come to me, they would go to the original member, which happens to be Earl Lewis. Okay,but Earl would not go out of his way to make you look bad. He wouldn't write a book and put a picture of you with a drink in your hand and a unidentified woman on your lap with her garders showing. I'm not saying that you live like that,but how would you feel if you saw a photo of you like that? How would your family feel? How would your family feel about it if you were not able to defend yourself like Paul wasn't? I don't see why y'all don't get it. That's where the "HATE" comnes in,not for Otis but for his deeds. Like I'm sure Earl Lewis would not exploit you like that,why Michael Ray,or Super John was not exploited by Aba,or them exploiting him for the sake of telling about the Nets championship years. What you did while offstage has nothing to do with the story,and what Aba did off the court has nothing to do with the Nets championship...what Paul did offstage has nothing to do with the Temptations. Would y'all be so "Loving" towards the author of a book telling your alledged activities? When y'all go home and look at the hurt on your loved ones face,maybe you will identify! Again,I am not implying that y'all led your lives in that manner. I don't care if you did. I would want to know about things that were important to the story....that story being one of the TEAM,or GROUP that you are in. Why you keep wanting to turn this into a "HATE" thing is really beyond me. I'm above that. I can point out how wrong it is without "Hate" towards the person. I can't let y'all twist what I say as HATE. That's just plain untrue. I hate the deed,not the person. I can't speak for anyone else but myself. I don't have to lie about it. But just think about all this HATE talk. Also think about how all of a sudden it's not a hate thing when directed towards the other members of the group. Anything goes as far as that. And truth be told...that amazes me. |
|
|
|
Post by Ivory Fair on Sept 13, 2004 18:39:17 GMT -5
Good point Timmay. And you see, it is hyperbolic statements like this that cause me to call folks "Otis haters" which causes Mike to start about folks peeing on themselves and using 47 smileys in one post. "To hate" and "being a hater" are two different things. Perhaps we need to define our terms...... A "hater" is....... Someone who feels better about his or her self by dissing others success, happiness, or even distress.
to dislike someone else for no real reason besides jealousy
A person who feels anger and/or jealousy for someone who has succeeded in something they have worked hard for.
(Urbandictionary.com)Now, here we have Otis, a man who apparently sang well enough for the greatest (Melvin, David, Eddie and Paul) to choose to sing along side of and yet we continually have people who like to build themselves up by putting the man down. A man who has never said an unkind word about any of them. I cannot sing and have only a very limited formal training on the subject. But I am of the opinion that David, Eddie, Paul and Melvin COULD sing and knew enough about the matter to be able to tell if someone else could sing. I willingly admit that the four of them knew MUCH more about singing than I do and I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that they all knew more about singing that all of Y'ALL did. If you wanna argue with four of the greatest singers of our time, feel free. But I ain't gonna do it. ![]() temptsinfo.com/smilies/wtg.gif![]() So you see, making statements about Otis' vocal abilities (or lack thereof) when he's out on a bus minding his own business not bothering any of us, well, yeah .............. that's hating in the truest sense of the word. |
|
|
|
Post by MissTara on Sept 13, 2004 20:22:16 GMT -5
Otis, ... A man who has never said an unkind word about any of them. What? Where?  I'd like to read that |
|
|
|
Post by Aba21 on Sept 13, 2004 20:46:46 GMT -5
Once again something I wrote turns into something else................how you can talk about what the hell he wrote in a book or a movie when if you read my post it plainly says singing abilities, is a mystery to me.............why can't an answer be given that doeswn't include anything aobut how he lives or what he worte or the movie. That's all I'm asking. I'm so tired of the drink response and the picture in the book.........if that's the only thing you can come up with then ok.............I admit to it and understand it........answer the damn question about whether the man can sing and why did the other four sing with him if he was so non-talented. At some point we should be able to get to the bottom of this without detracting back to the same old stuff all the time. If no one has an answer then let's move on. I am not going to say again I understand about feelings for the book and the movie..........been there done that almost every day for two years............There are some poeple here that want to offer some other opinions and I want want to hear those and if we keep beating up the same horse we will never get to those opinions. His book writing and movie have nothing to do with wether he can sing or not...One of the things I know about singers is that they ain't gonna sing wit nobody who can't sing........sorry but that's the way it is..............if you can't sing a singer will tell you flat out you can't sing the part you're trying to sing so either sing something else or shut up............. ;D ;D ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by Ivory Fair on Sept 13, 2004 20:49:37 GMT -5
What? Where? I'd like to read that You've been hanging around Mikey too long wanting me to prove a negative. But anway, if you find ONE post by Otis Williams on this board disrespecting any of the posters here I'll give you a whole dollar!  |
|
|
|
Post by mcribs on Sept 13, 2004 20:58:55 GMT -5
His book writing and movie have nothing to do with wether he can sing or not... Otis can sing. I heard him. He will never headline with the Three Tenors, or knock the Irish Tenors off the stage, but he is a perfectly fine, smooth background singer. |
|
