Salli & Janet: Where are they?
#1
Posted 17 April 2012 - 06:57 PM
#2
Posted 17 April 2012 - 09:34 PM
I always thought their perspectives were interesting, since they had that front row seat to the Doors behind the scenes and stuff. I hope they stick around.
#3
Posted 20 April 2012 - 07:57 PM
GG Morrison, on 17 April 2012 - 09:34 PM, said:
I always thought their perspectives were interesting, since they had that front row seat to the Doors behind the scenes and stuff. I hope they stick around.
I agree! But they have taken a beating over the years and got sick of all the crap from certain members. It is too bad. I like a real
perspective from people who were there and knew the scene. What about Mewiscal? She's been MIA for a long time....
And the end is always near.
#4
Posted 20 April 2012 - 08:52 PM
LISCIANDRO: Sugerman's book offended those who knew Morrison best, according to Lisciandro. "Many of Jim's closest friends find that book very objectionable. I call it 'Nothing Here But Lots Of Lies,' because it's full of bullshit. You have to realize that despite what he says, Danny Sugerman did not know Jim Morrison. If you think that a fourteen-year-old can go in a bar and drink with someone, you're crazy. That never happened.
"I know for a fact that Jim did not like Danny," he goes on to say. "Jim told me on numerous occasions that Danny was a nuisance. But because Jim was a nice guy, he was kind enough to give Danny a few minutes of his time. Danny was always pestering Jim. So those stories of Danny having dinner or doing his homework at Jim and Pamela's apartment are hilariously ridiculous. That never happened."
BAM 7th March 1981
PAUL ROTCHILD : Danny Sugarman (co-author of the book) is a fan of The Doors who took Jerry Hopkins' original manuscript and destroyed it. Danny didn't interview me. Jerry did. Danny then changed a lot of my interview to hearsay that other people did. I'm furious about that book and so is everyone else I've talked to who is quoted in it. It's a great piece of sensationalism, very little of which holds to historical fact. The general shape of it is correct, but Jim is sensationalized rather spectacularly, and the best parts of Morrison are not there. The people who really helped The Doors' career are treated in a very cavalier manner, and the only people who come off well in my opinion are the groupies and syocpants who were hanging around the band and close to Danny Sugarman who was a groupie himself".
There's only one thing in the whole process that bothers me, and that is Danny Sugarman's book. If Jim Morrison were alive today, he'd be livid about that book. Not because of the truth it tells, but because of the lies it maintains. Like Sugarman's trying to keep going the myth that Jim might still be alive! That is pure, total, unmitigated bullshit. If Danny had sat there where your sitting and listened to Pam after she came back from Paris, he wouldn't be trying to perpetuate this myth - and that's what it is.
#5
Posted 21 April 2012 - 01:54 AM
i wonder where shebang is too...
#6
Posted 21 April 2012 - 06:13 PM
jlo, on 21 April 2012 - 01:54 AM, said:
i wonder where shebang is too...
#7
Posted 21 April 2012 - 06:15 PM
queenhwy, on 20 April 2012 - 07:57 PM, said:
perspective from people who were there and knew the scene. What about Mewiscal? She's been MIA for a long time....
#8
Posted 21 April 2012 - 07:47 PM
jlo, on 21 April 2012 - 01:54 AM, said:
i wonder where shebang is too...
#9
Posted 22 April 2012 - 11:54 AM
manhime, on 21 April 2012 - 07:47 PM, said:
Salli interviewed Jim for Circus Magazine. You can hear the interview on Youtube or in the Jim Morrison Scrapbook.
Mewsical (Sally) worked for Elektra Records when the Doors were still together and talked to Jim sometimes.
Mizscarlett (Janet) was a friend of Jim's early '71 or so, before he left for Paris.
#10
Posted 22 April 2012 - 02:42 PM
GG Morrison, on 22 April 2012 - 11:54 AM, said:
Salli interviewed Jim for Circus Magazine. You can hear the interview on Youtube or in the Jim Morrison Scrapbook.
Mewsical (Sally) worked for Elektra Records when the Doors were still together and talked to Jim sometimes.
Mizscarlett (Janet) was a friend of Jim's early '71 or so, before he left for Paris.
Sorry, I seem to have hit the wrong button--it's early and I haven't had my coffee yet.
Salli hasn't been on, and won't be around much for awhile yet, because she's up to her neck with family matters.
I haven't been on for awhile because up until recently the board seemed to have been hijacked by trolls and there was nothing worth responding to.
As for the Italian troll (Giza), according to Salli he's someone who got to know Frank when Frank was living in Italy, and Frank told him that only his (Frank's) stories about Jim were to be believed and everyone else was a liar. Something like that, anyway.
Which leads me to wonder--if Babe Hill were suddenly to surface and start posting here, would Giza attack him too?
Edited by mizscarlett43, 22 April 2012 - 03:13 PM.
------Patti Smith
#11
Posted 22 April 2012 - 03:59 PM
#12
Posted 22 April 2012 - 04:02 PM
mizscarlett43, on 22 April 2012 - 02:42 PM, said:
Salli hasn't been on, and won't be around much for awhile yet, because she's up to her neck with family matters.
I haven't been on for awhile because up until recently the board seemed to have been hijacked by trolls and there was nothing worth responding to.
As for the Italian troll (Giza), according to Salli he's someone who got to know Frank when Frank was living in Italy, and Frank told him that only his (Frank's) stories about Jim were to be believed and everyone else was a liar. Something like that, anyway.
Which leads me to wonder--if Babe Hill were suddenly to surface and start posting here, would Giza attack him too?
#13
Posted 22 April 2012 - 04:32 PM
GG Morrison, on 22 April 2012 - 04:02 PM, said:
Yes, she's still here physically, but mentally not so much. I'd forgotten about the family history--Salli hasn't mentioned it in ages, but I would guess her mother is probably beyond being much help with that in any case.
Edited by mizscarlett43, 23 April 2012 - 02:41 PM.
------Patti Smith
#14
Posted 22 April 2012 - 09:30 PM
http://www.thedoors....opic=21356&st=0
LISCIANDRO: Sugerman's book offended those who knew Morrison best, according to Lisciandro. "Many of Jim's closest friends find that book very objectionable. I call it 'Nothing Here But Lots Of Lies,' because it's full of bullshit. You have to realize that despite what he says, Danny Sugerman did not know Jim Morrison. If you think that a fourteen-year-old can go in a bar and drink with someone, you're crazy. That never happened.
"I know for a fact that Jim did not like Danny," he goes on to say. "Jim told me on numerous occasions that Danny was a nuisance. But because Jim was a nice guy, he was kind enough to give Danny a few minutes of his time. Danny was always pestering Jim. So those stories of Danny having dinner or doing his homework at Jim and Pamela's apartment are hilariously ridiculous. That never happened."
BAM 7th March 1981
PAUL ROTCHILD : Danny Sugarman (co-author of the book) is a fan of The Doors who took Jerry Hopkins' original manuscript and destroyed it. Danny didn't interview me. Jerry did. Danny then changed a lot of my interview to hearsay that other people did. I'm furious about that book and so is everyone else I've talked to who is quoted in it. It's a great piece of sensationalism, very little of which holds to historical fact. The general shape of it is correct, but Jim is sensationalized rather spectacularly, and the best parts of Morrison are not there. The people who really helped The Doors' career are treated in a very cavalier manner, and the only people who come off well in my opinion are the groupies and syocpants who were hanging around the band and close to Danny Sugarman who was a groupie himself".
There's only one thing in the whole process that bothers me, and that is Danny Sugarman's book. If Jim Morrison were alive today, he'd be livid about that book. Not because of the truth it tells, but because of the lies it maintains. Like Sugarman's trying to keep going the myth that Jim might still be alive! That is pure, total, unmitigated bullshit. If Danny had sat there where your sitting and listened to Pam after she came back from Paris, he wouldn't be trying to perpetuate this myth - and that's what it is.
#15
Posted 22 April 2012 - 09:34 PM
GG Morrison, on 22 April 2012 - 03:59 PM, said:
Maybe. Maybe not--I'm thinking Frank may have had Danny in mind when he said that, if indeed that's what he said.
Frank's first book, published in '82 IIRC, was intended as a rebuttal to NOHGOA (1980) the sleaziness and darkness of which a lot of people (including me) blamed on Danny at the time. It wasn't until Salli and I started talking 15-16 years later that I found out it was mostly Jerry Hopkins' doing, that Danny had tried to "warm it up" and present a truer and more positive view of Jim but Hopkins* overruled him.
________________
*Hopkins' smarmy intro to AD&AD makes his hostility towards Jim pretty obvious, since Patricia Butler's "biography" of Pamela is at least as much a hatchet job on Jim as anything. IIRC it includes, among other nastiness, the implication that the teenaged Jim had whored himself to Tom Reese, the gay proprietor of the Beaux Arts coffeehouse in Florida, in order to advance his career (!)
Reese was subsequently interviewed by somebody from the DCM and was quite distressed at the way Butler had edited and manipulated his comments so they gave an impression that was the exact opposite of what he'd intended.
------Patti Smith
#16
Posted 22 April 2012 - 09:57 PM
mizscarlett43, on 22 April 2012 - 09:34 PM, said:
Frank's first book, published in '82 IIRC, was intended as a rebuttal to NOHGOA (1980) the sleaziness and darkness of which a lot of people (including me) blamed on Danny at the time. It wasn't until Salli and I started talking 15-16 years later that I found out it was mostly Jerry Hopkins' doing, that Danny had tried to "warm it up" and present a truer and more positive view of Jim but Hopkins* overruled him.
________________
*Hopkins' smarmy intro to AD&AD makes his hostility towards Jim pretty obvious, since Patricia Butler's "biography" of Pamela is at least as much a hatchet job on Jim as anything. IIRC it includes, among other nastiness, the implication that the teenaged Jim had whored himself to Tom Reese, the gay proprietor of the Beaux Arts coffeehouse in Florida, in order to advance his career (!)
Reese was subsequently interviewed by somebody from the DCM and was quite distressed at the way Butler had edited and manipulated his comments so they gave an impression that was the exact opposite of what he'd intended.
Why did Butler even write the book? I mean to get money obviously, but what was her motive? I mean she'd never met Jim or Pam, right? Why the interest? I mean if I wrote a book on Jim it would be out of interest...I never really understood her motive.
#17
Posted 22 April 2012 - 10:03 PM
giza, on 22 April 2012 - 09:30 PM, said:
http://www.thedoors....opic=21356&st=0
See what I mean about miscommunication?
#18
Posted 22 April 2012 - 10:05 PM
*~adrienne~*, on 22 April 2012 - 09:57 PM, said:
#19
Posted 22 April 2012 - 10:05 PM
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users













