Magic moments

[hatata]

First of all, thank you Vince for sharing your experiences, memories and thoughts. I really think it's great that you give us all the opportunity to see the Doors from a slightly different point of view.
Having read most of your posts here, I've now got a question of my own.
You've described the Doors and especially Jim Morrison as very human, ordinary, down-to-earth people. You seem to see yourself as the "myth-destroyer" - Jim was no shaman, no poet, he wasn't even very charismatic (at least not more charming than any other rockstar) - and a Doors concert was not at all a mystic experience. Jim was a horrible person destroying his band when he was drunk, and he just a normal, shy, decent guy when he was sober. The other Doors were friendly people and great musicians and you admire them for that. Right?
My question is: if there was nothing really special about the Doors and Morrison, why did you stick with them through all the odds? There were (techniquewise) better musicians around at the time - yet you stayed with just one band, and even after that band wasn't around any more, you didn't want to do the same job for another group. There must have been something great, outstanding about them!

I don't know if I made myself clear enough. The essence in one sentence: you've robbed the Doors of all their myth - so why do you still consider them to be unique, and not just another the-Band (Kinks, Byrds...)?

That leads to the second question, the title:
We all know these times when everything seems alright and we just enjoy our existence, the times which make a life worth living despite of all insanities of the world. Often just a blink of an eye.
Which ones were, in your opinion, the truly "magic moments" during your time with the band? In a different thread you wrote that Fillmore 1968 was the best Doors performance ever - why? What was so outstanding about it?
Some have called a great Doors concert special because of the feeling of one-ness, of unity between the different members of the band and even the audiance. Yet you say that Morrison just liked to have power over people.
I think since you deny everything even slightly "supernatural" or "eternal" about the Doors, it's especially interesting why YOU gave and still give them such an important place in your life. You must have some really interesting stories to tell - maybe you should try to create your own Doors myth - and not just wreck all the others. After all, you still think the Doors should be remembered, don't you? Maybe this thread could be a place for these little, but beautiful and thus most important memories.

Thank you very much for your messages so far - keep them coming!

[Joriki]

Vince isn't a myth destroyer. He's just a realist who had a eyewitness perspective to an experience that has been extrapolated on ad nauseum to make money. The doors were a good band. Probably as good as the Kinks or the Byrds, and they paid. You're insults to Vince are sly. He's not destroying any myths, he's just reporting his experience. Trying to insult him will get you nowhere. The Doors rocked pretty well. I'm sure if a lot of Rock N Roll Singers killed themselves young and never grew old in the public eye, they too could have been mythologized as gods. Sorry, I'm sure Vince'll have more to say about it, but haven't you been listening? The doors were just people. Morrison was just a singer with some talent and some unlivable philosophies about life that were really just a smokescreen to being a pathetic alcoholic and having no reality in his life. Sorry if Vince has hurt your feelings. Maybe if you get some reality in your life, it won't be so important for you to keep the Morrison myth alive.

[hatata]

Could you please read my post again. I did not mean to insult anybody.
"Mythdestroyer" is not necessarily a negative term. I thanked Vince several times. I didn't judge him at all. I just asked two simple questions.
Let me just keep my "reality in my life" you'll keep yours, okay? No need to get angry.

[Rey]

Wow you sure put alot of words into Vince's mouth.

You've taken what he's said and distorted into being the absolute most negative perspective possible.

Maybe you should lay off the sideways insults and relax a little bit, and take Vince's stories for what they are - a practical, straightforward look at the band's history without dreamy, rose-colored glasses.

[vince]

Well, That is quite a post and I am sure that those who read it are waiting for this responce.

First, if you did read all my commentary you will see on siveral of them that I stated, in many ways, that you had to be at a Doors performance to understand what was so attractive about it. I had the opportunity to see and in some cases support, many other groups before and during my tenure with the Doors.

They simply did not compare in either the magic of the performance or the quality of the music.

that i why I stayed with them.

Another reason is that they were well educated, all including Jim, they were intellectual, they were musical, and they were most generous and considerate people to work for.

In other groups there was infighting, drugs and an entourage of generally unqualified "Friends" trying to do a professional job. I did not like working with that kind of people and saw no sense in exposing myself to that kind of environment and having the frustration that would incur.

I do not recall the necessity for any other Rock Star to surround himself with tales of spirits and other such claims to enhance their image. They all had an image. That was always inflated by imagination and public relations and the very fact that, as a popular performer of which the public was well aware, these people, Jim inlcuded and not the least of them, were made idols by admiring fans.

In recent times as a resulkt of guilt, sorrow, a sense of failure or for financial gain, the Morrison myth has been enhanced, intensly promoted and propegated. I have nothing to do with that.

People have asked me questions and I have endeavored to answer them honestly and in as much detail and factually as I can. I am not interested in destroying myth as I am in making facts and "The real story" available. If this does not agree with the myth, that is what myths are about - not truth, not facts but a manufactured aura, stories and incidents that are supposed to elevate the average to the position of a god.

What you want to believe about the Doors as a group and Jim or any of the buys in that group is entirely up to you.

I have stated that I frlt that Jim was not a poet. I did not suggest that he was not a writer. I have never denied that he wrote some incredible lyrics - and you know that even today, the best of those remain as standards for songwriting. I have also stated that some of his best material is possibly, probably, based on his personal experiences and life.

There is a great difference between being a Poet and being a songwriter, a lyricist, and a story telly. Jim, in my humble opinion, as I have repeatedly stated - and which you chose to ignore - not the former and most certainly is all of the latter.

As far as being ordinary people - Is there something wrong with being ordinary yet having great talent in the writing, arranging, and performing music. Does that ability - which is the "Job" of a rock band musician, make them better and greater than a Doctor, a Housekeeper, Mother or Organ Builder.

Have you ever given thought on your way to the Holy Alter of Doors worship that I am a builder of muaial instruments. The largest, most complex and expensive of them all. Before they can even learn to play instruments, they need people like me to make them. Now, who is the more important?

The fact that the members of that group - all of them - were just average people is much to their credit. I met a lot of Stars in the Music and Motion Picture business in my time and I can tell you that the arrogance, ego trips and overbearing nature of most of them made the doors look like children in a sand box. I can say with some pride (in them) that those guys never let their fame make tham insufferable bores that many such became after they achieved notoriety.

Though Jim liked to manipulate audiences - as told my other people as well as I - it did not make him into some kind of monster. When sober, Jim was a most common man. I find nothing wrong with that and I cannot understand why you should either.

Can you tell me what was "Supernatural" about the Doors that I have denied? Can you point out in which posting I did not give credit to their talent, musical abilities, quality of their performances? Though I have stated clearly that I did not like some of their music, primarily as a result of a change in style, where have I stated that it was inferior or lacked in skill.

Your question why I stayed with the group. Have you ever head of, or understand, what the word Loyalty means? Because few people today are willing to make commitment to anything, including themselves, does that mean that I should debase my sense of loyalty and dedication because Jim was, at times, a bad boy?

You ask what shows I felt were good and answered your own question. If you do not understand what made a good Doors show from my writing then I can not really say much more to make you understand.

I have politely answered your rather negative commentary. I was invited to this forum - In fact it was created so that people can come to it and express openly, honestly and sincerely, their thoughts, facts and opinions concerning the Doors, their history and, until it gets intimately personal, their public life. Reread my posting and get real.

Under Any circumstances, Do not tell me, or anyone else on this or any Forum, what I said or seem to think. I will do my own saying, despite your efforts to save me the time. I do not leave room for "Interpretation" of what I ean. I use words with specific meaning and with specific intent. Don't bother yourself trying to suggest otherwise.

Were I you, I would appologise to the member of this Furum for your commentary - for your deliberate distortion of the values and experiences I hold quite important. Don't bother with any appologies to me. I have thrown better people off the stage and out the door.

Be welcome to this place. But come with sincerity and the decency to ask question, not make distortions. If you want to believe in the myth, fine with me. That is your right and privelable. But don't insult other members of the Forum by posting your distortion of my specific words as being what I said or meant to say.

[hatata]

Well, thank you very much for your long and honest answer.
Obviously, as I was completely misunderstood by you and others, I put my first post in the wrong words. This may be because I am not a native English speaker. Sorry. I did not mean to attack you, your opinions, or the beliefs of you or other people on this board. I didn't mean to be negative at all. It seems like I said the opposite of what I wanted to express. I am not at all a fanboyish follower of the Morrison myth.

Anyway, I really do thank you for answers and for all you have done in this board and in the real world.
All the best and good bye

[vince]

I have read you post more than once, I assure you. When someone writes anything which can be considered controversial, it is always wise to read it more than once to be sure of the meaning contained therein.

You have command of the English Language to make you syntax and grammar quite clear. You sentence structure and punctuation indicated the extent of your familiarity with the language.

When you commit words to paper or sound to the ear you should consider what you say BEFORE you say it. You should never say anything that you do noty mean and never fail to make you meaning clear.

In any case, you have made statements about what I have said and what I mean by my writing. You have no right to do that. You have the right to state your opinions.

Your personal interpretations of what I said and what I feel about this group is what has brought the wrath of the Forum down on you.

You can have your opinions and you can state them. But don't tell me what my opinions are. I know what they are and I have mnade them eminently clear in clear and precise English. It takes me a long time to write a post or a reply because I choose my words very carefully to indicate me precise thoughts.

I suggest you do the same. Obviously, you have the ability. Use it. Don't write a rather negative statement and then blame it on Language weakness.

[hatata]

Okay. Maybe I should have asked the question differently. Maybe I should have written something like this:

Thank you for giving us a look at your truth (probably THE truth) about the Doors, which is (in my opinion) often slightly different to what the myth spread by some people wants to make us believe. It has been really interesting for me to read, and since you seem to be a person who tries to judge objectively (that is my own personal interpretation and not necessarily your real aim), which I appreciate, I would find it really interesting to hear one thing from you:
What was so special about the Doors that you never wanted to work for another band after the Doors were gone? (I think I read this somewhere here, if I'm wrong then I'm sorry and you can dismiss the question)
If I may speak from my own point of view, it's the little beautiful moments, when nothing particularly amazing happens, maybe everything just seems alright for a minute or two - it's these little moments that stay in the memory and after years still mark a period of a life as outstanding and special. It's the small experiences that one cares about (that is at least the way it is for me).
Now I would be really happy if could tell us stories of some of these great moments during your time with the Doors, which I personally find very interesting. Not Miami, not New Orleans, but maybe just a special short conversation, a word from Robby or Jim.
I know that these experiences are very very personal (at least they would be for me), and therefore I'd fully understand you if you wanted to keep them for yourself. But since you have answered so politely on all the other questions, I wanted to express my hope and ask.



I hope that's better, I hope it does not sound insulting to you or anyone here.
I know you've already partly answered the questions above, I just wanted to try to transport the message the way I obviously failed to deliver it in the first post.
Thanks again.

[vince]

Another interesting post.

my truth - Does that mean that there are different forms, types or styles of Truth depending on who is telling the "Truth" snf what "Truth" appears to be. From another point of view, truth is what I want it to be rather than a purely factual, analitical, objective ansolute.

As for stories, I have put several of them on the web and on this Forum in the form of replies.

I have been very open and honest about why I stayed with the Group throughout their trials and tribulations.

I do not "Try" to be objective - I am objective or I make it clear that I have made my opinion known. I do not mix fact with fiction.

Understand something. I do not get paid by the word for my replies or posting. I do this as a favor for a pretty nice guy who is also a dedicated person. There are also a lot of people who have become members of this Forum to exchange ideas, views and questions. They also like to discuss that great pool of recordings that exist as a result of professional and not so tapings of many, possibly all, of the Doors performances.

I have no agenda. I promote no one. I make no money and get no fame from this Forum or anyone on it. I am no longer affiliated with the Doors or any member of their current management and financial team. In fact, their current manager does not like me all that well. I also acknowledge mistakes when I make them - Two so far. I am not interested in supporting ANY information that is untrue or doubtful. That includes anything I might say.

I have said nothing on this forum or in any writings to anyone else that I am ashamed of or regret. So whatever you attribute my motives and my comments to, there is little except making clear, as far as I can honestly remember my time with the group, events that transpired and good as well as bad times. Where Jim misbehaved I have told that story. Where he was incredibly good, I have si acknowledged and given full credit for skills, talent and personality to the other three guys as well.

Read my many posts to many people over time and all your questions have already been answered.

[hatata]

"Your truth" means the way you experienced the Doors as their Road Manager and friend. A groupie who only met Jim once as a teenager will have a different view of him than you. Yours will be nearer to the "objective" truth than hers.
Damn, please do not feel attacked now , but do you want to feel attacked? (joke!) I know that you do all this here not for any money but just because you are a nice guy who wants to share. Really, I do not doubt your selfless motives, your motivation or anything. I've thanked you half a dozen times. No problem, okay? No need to argue if we both share the same values.

[Rey]

What I don't understand about people who challenge or dismiss Vince is how they claim he isn't telling the "truth".

So far, except for a few trivial things here and there, nobody has been able to contradict Vince's facts. The "facts" are that the Doors, or Morrison, or Bill Siddons, or whoever else did X, Y, and Z. Most of the hardcore fans of the band know the "facts", and knew them already before Vince decided to tell his side of things. What's different about Vince - and what's refreshing to so many fans! - is that Vince's take on all those facts is much more grounded in reality than all the novelists and professional storytellers before him. Where others have spun tales of romantic decay and tortured artists, Vince saw a talented, brilliant guy surrounding himself with fake friends and throwing his life away with selfishness and drug abuse.

Are either one of those perspectives not "true". Of course not... we all know of Morrison's self-destructive tendencies. But where the eye-of-the-beholder comes in is.... Vince doesn't think sloppy stage shows, court cases, and early death is romantic or glamorous, and he says so.

The facts are still the "facts". Vince's gritty and realistic perception of them doesn't change them... so what's the problem?