April 1972 --> "An Erection of the Heart"

[drjohncarpenter]

On Thursday, April 6, 1972, Creem magazine photographer and art director Charlie Auringer and editor Lester Bangs went to see Elvis in concert at the Olympia Stadium in Detroit.

720406_Detroit_010.jpg

Here is what they saw, and remembered, about that long-ago evening.

720406_Detroit_001.jpg

720406_Detroit_002.jpg

720406_Detroit_003.jpg

720406_Detroit_004.jpg

720406_Detroit_005.jpg

720406_Detroit_006.jpg

I got taken too the one time I saw Elvis, but in a totally different way. It was the autumn of 1971 [sic], and two tickets to an Elvis show turned up at the offices of Creem magazine, where I was then employed. It was decided that those staff members who had never had the privilege of witnessing Elvis should get the tickets, which was how me and art director Charlie Auringer ended up in nearly the front row of the biggest arena in Detroit. Earlier Charlie had said, "Do you realize how much we could get if we sold these fu.cking things?" I didn't, but how precious they were became totally clear the instant Elvis sauntered onto the stage. He was the only male performer I have ever seen to whom I responded sexually; it wasn't real arousal, rather an erection of the heart, when I looked at him I went mad with desire and envy and worship and self-projection. I mean, Mick Jagger, whom I saw as far back as 1964 and twice in '65, never even came close.

There was Elvis, dressed up in this ridiculous white suit which looked like some studded Arthurian castle, and he was too fat, and the buckle on his belt was as big as your head except that your head is not made of solid gold, and any lesser man would have been the spittin' image of a Neil Diamond damfool in such a getup, but on Elvis it fit. What didn't? No matter how lousy his records ever got, no matter how intently he pursued mediocrity, there was still some hint, some flash left over from the days when...well, I wasn't there, so I won't presume to comment. But I will say this: Elvis Presley was the man who brought overt blatant vulgar sexual frenzy to the popular arts in America (and thereby to the nation itself, since putting "popular arts" and "America" in the same sentence seems almost redundant). It has been said that he was the first white to sing like a black person, which is untrue in terms of hard facts but totally true in terms of cultural impact. But what's more crucial is that when Elvis started wiggling his hips and Ed Sullivan refused to show it, the entire country went into a paroxysm of sexual frustration leading to abiding discontent which culminated in the explosion of psychedelic-militant folklore which was the sixties.

Lester Bangs - "How Long Will We Care?" August 1977
http://www.elvis-collectors.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=57626

Bangs' essay, from the Village Voice in August 1977, may be the single greatest piece of writing ever done on the subject.

Click the link to read the entire thing.



If not familiar with Lester, read more of his work (including the above essay) in this anthology:

Psychotic Reactions and Carburetor Dung: The Work of a Legendary Critic: Rock 'N' Roll as Literature and Literature as Rock 'N' Roll
https://www.amazon.com/Psychotic-Reactions-Carburetor-Lester-Bangs/dp/039453896X/

720406_Detroit_007.jpg

720406_Detroit_008.jpg

720406_Detroit_009.jpg

Photos:
http://www.bigcitybluesmag.com/

[elvinda58]

Was Elvis fat in 1972?I don't think so.

[Robert]

Was Elvis fat in 1972?I don't think so.

I enjoyed the article but the credibility ended right there.

[DEH]

Good review but the fat comment? People associate the jumpsuits with him being fat to the point they talk themselves into thinking he was fat.

[pmp]

I do find it odd that the man who hates Goldman so much is happy to publicise something like this.

Firstly, what were all these albums with one new song and otherwise previously released material? The Camdens? Well, if you'd bought the Burning Love and Separate Ways singles, you didn't need to buy those two albums for the "new song" anyway.

"The buckle on his belt was as big as your head." Really?

Fat in 1971 or 1972? Hardly.

A concert in Vegas where Elvis sang in the dark? Really? I think we'd be talking a lot more about that if it happened.

The only erection of the heart this particular journalist seems to get is from reading his own twaddle...and I have no idea why the original thread couldn't have been revived?

[Ryan73]

Had not read that essay before Doc. Again, thanks for bringing essays like this on Elvis into our little bubble here.

[steve in SC]

Was Elvis fat in 1972?I don't think so.

He wasn’t when I saw him one week from April 6th, 1972.

[Mister Mike]

They should have waited a couple of nights and gone to see the wrestling instead. Maybe it would have been a better fit.

[keninlincs]

He obviously watched the show with his eyes closed if he thought Elvis was fat,otherwise a good article.Thanks for posting Doc!

[egilj]

Nobody with a healthy relationship with the human body, would consider Elvis fat in April 1972. He maybe didn't think so in 1972 either. But as the seventies progressed, he'd projected the overweight Elvis into his own live experience.

I see quite a few similarities with Goldman here. Both got a way with words, both are creative and artistically, but they're not very truthful. He shows a lot of contempt for Elvis, and do not try to understand Elvis as a person nor his situation. Ideas comes easy to him, empathy does not.

[Rob]

And I became a fan in 1972? What was I thinking?

This article sure set me straight.

[sundial77]

If that's fat, then I'm super morbidly obese.

[InheritTheWind]

Good review but the fat comment? People associate the jumpsuits with him being fat to the point they talk themselves into thinking he was fat.

There were different rules for Elvis when it came to weight. If he was 5 pounds over perfection, then he was called “fat.” I’ve seen too many caricatures of him where he’s depicted as weighing 400 or more pounds, which is ridiculous. The jumpsuits didn’t help, obviously, but I think too many people think Elvis was a lot heavier than he actually was.

Since it was a recollection written in 1977, Bangs was maybe misremembering Elvis’ weight based on what Elvis looked like in 1977. He had somehow morphed 1972 Elvis into 1977 Elvis in his memory. He certainly didn’t remember the date right. Maybe he didn’t have access to the pics, which showed a very lean Elvis.

Elvis’ face was slightly puffy at times in ‘72, but his body was about as lean and mean as a body can get.

[DEH]

Even that Rocket Scientist Ozzy Osbourne has talked about seeing Elvis live in the early 70's and calling him fat.

I saw a interview with Debbie Harry years ago and she said Elvis was treated like female actress's and female singers are treated. Where their looks are analyzed and judged all the time and if they gained 15 lbs they would get trashed for it.

[drjohncarpenter]

Had not read that essay before Doc. Again, thanks for bringing essays like this on Elvis into our little bubble here.

My pleasure. And clearly that is one VERY thin bubble.

I knew some would miss the forest for the trees, but I never anticipated every single one would trumpet it with a comment. I hope folks take five minutes and read the entire piece. And appreciate all the photographs, many of which I've never seen before.

[Ryan73]

Had not read that essay before Doc. Again, thanks for bringing essays like this on Elvis into our little bubble here.

My pleasure. And clearly that is one VERY thin bubble.

I knew some would miss the forest for the trees, but I never anticipated every single one would trumpet it with a comment. I hope folks take five minutes and read the entire piece. And appreciate all the photographs, many of which I've never seen before.

I actually clicked on the link you generously provided to read the full article and it's a definite must read as it gives a more than balanced and fair view of Presley and gives high praise where it was deserved. If one only focusses on the negative, well then the point was missed. Again thanks for providing this.

[InheritTheWind]

Had not read that essay before Doc. Again, thanks for bringing essays like this on Elvis into our little bubble here.

My pleasure. And clearly that is one VERY thin bubble.

I knew some would miss the forest for the trees, but I never anticipated every single one would trumpet it with a comment. I hope folks take five minutes and read the entire piece. And appreciate all the photographs, many of which I've never seen before.

I actually clicked on the link you generously provided to read the full article and it's a definite must read as it gives a more than balanced and fair view of Presley and gives high praise where it was deserved. If one only focusses on the negative, well then the point was missed. Again thanks for providing this.

I don’t think anyone missed the point. We read the article. For some of us, facts matter, and there were several factual errors. The article was good. There were factual errors. Both statements can be true.

These errors would certainly matter if it was an article written by someone we didn’t like.

[Ryan73]

Had not read that essay before Doc. Again, thanks for bringing essays like this on Elvis into our little bubble here.

My pleasure. And clearly that is one VERY thin bubble.

I knew some would miss the forest for the trees, but I never anticipated every single one would trumpet it with a comment. I hope folks take five minutes and read the entire piece. And appreciate all the photographs, many of which I've never seen before.

I actually clicked on the link you generously provided to read the full article and it's a definite must read as it gives a more than balanced and fair view of Presley and gives high praise where it was deserved. If one only focusses on the negative, well then the point was missed. Again thanks for providing this.

I don’t think anyone missed the point. We read the article. For some of us, facts matter, and there were several factual errors. The article was good. There were factual errors. Both statements can be true.

These errors would certainly matter if it was an article written by someone we didn’t like.

Those are some 'bold' statements.

[drjohncarpenter]

I don’t think anyone missed the point.

The number of posts remarking on the photos I found is just about zero. The number of posts going ballistic about a single observation from an excerpt of an astonishing essay? Well above zero. The number of posts noting a read of the entire essay, which was linked? Also just about zero.

Again, I knew some would miss the forest for the trees, but I'm surprised you're among them.

[drjohncarpenter]

Debbie Harry is a very intelligent lady. And I'm reminded of that hatchet job biography he did of Blondie at the height of their fame, 1980. Me thinks Bangs was just jealous that his former friends had become successful, so he tore them down in print.
I don't worship at the altar of rock journalists.

Not interested in your derailing of this topic, but your facts are wrong regarding this 1980 biography. This is not a surprise. For further reading, I refer the reader to the July 1980 review of the book in Rolling Stone:

https://greilmarcus.net/2014/08/13/undercover-bangs-on-blondie-and-the-human-race-072480/

[FrankieRider2]

Article was interesting, and one can forgive some misgivings especially if it was written 5 years after the event. Still, the photos are fantastic! Most are new to me, and show our hero in fine form on that long-ago night in Detroit City...

EDIT: I had totally forgotten he was responsible for that comment about "never agreeing on anything again like we did on Elvis".

Thanks for the nudge, Doc.

[drjohncarpenter]

I actually clicked on the link you generously provided to read the full article and it's a definite must read as it gives a more than balanced and fair view of Presley and gives high praise where it was deserved. If one only focusses on the negative, well then the point was missed. Again thanks for providing this.

I appreciate your additional comments and keen observations.

For further reading, I've posted up a topic on Creem magazine's huge review of Elvis' November 1971 show in Boston, with Lester Bangs' colleagues Stu Werbin and Jeff Albertson handling the assignment in superb fashion.

Going by the response to this topic, some may not appreciate Werbin's prose, as he never dons the rose-colored glasses, but the pictures are quite good.


March 1972 --> "Elvis and the A-Bomb"
https://www.elvis-collectors.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=109140

[Ryan73]

I actually clicked on the link you generously provided to read the full article and it's a definite must read as it gives a more than balanced and fair view of Presley and gives high praise where it was deserved. If one only focusses on the negative, well then the point was missed. Again thanks for providing this.

I appreciate your additional comments and keen observations.

For further reading, I've posted up a topic on Creem magazine's huge review of Elvis' November 1971 show in Boston, with Lester Bangs' colleagues Stu Werbin and Jeff Albertson handling the assignment in superb fashion.

Going by the response to this topic, some may not appreciate Werbin's prose, as he never dons the rose-colored glasses, but the pictures are quite good.


March 1972 --> "Elvis and the A-Bomb"
https://www.elvis-collectors.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=109140

Another thought provoking article Doc and thanks again for providing it. The reviewer hit all the right notes from beginning to end in a way that perhaps he had been expecting Elvis to do on that evening. Definitely worth reading for anyone that hasn't clicked on the provided link. Funny how intentionally or not that the writer makes the comparison between the A bomb and Elvis as the Hillbilly Cat himself was once marketed as the Atomic Powered Singer.

[drjohncarpenter]

Another thought provoking article Doc and thanks again for providing it. The reviewer hit all the right notes from beginning to end in a way that perhaps he had been expecting Elvis to do on that evening. Definitely worth reading for anyone that hasn't clicked on the provided link. Funny how intentionally or not that the writer makes the comparison between the A bomb and Elvis as the Hillbilly Cat himself was once marketed as the Atomic Powered Singer.

I thought about that connection as well. Thank goodness he didn't make a comment about Elvis being fat.

Thanks for the feedback.