I was reading some of the accusations aimed at Larry and his book on the other website, and if one were to believe what was said, you would think that Larry's book on Jim was X-rated. I've read the book a few times already, and any sexual references that I can remember were pretty mild compared to what I've seen in some biographies, and I do not see how it makes Jim look anything less than human, like we all are. If any one of us had been in Jim's shoes, a good number of us might have given in to some of the temptations that stardom can bring. I think the majority of the fans who have read Larry's incredible account of Jim's life will agree that it did not tarnish his image one bit, even though he might have given in to some things that a lot of people wouldn't approve of. It just proves that Jim was human, like the rest of us.
Re: Stretching the truth...
Posted by Larry Jordan on March 8, 2014, 11:00 pm, in reply to "Stretching the truth..." Edited by board administrator March 8, 2014, 11:18 pm
Mike, the futile attempt to derail sales of the book out of sheer jealousy and vengefulness on the part of a few disturbed Reeves nuts hasn't succeeded so they have taken their crusade to Amazon where they hope to gain more exposure. Good luck to them. Any discerning person who runs across this rubbish will note that it is contradicted by much more intelligent and thoughtful reviewers who also posted on Amazon.
This "review" is so full of bile and inaccuracies it's not worth my time to respond to it point by point.
In the Amazon "review" below I am quoted as telling three people I purposely put a lot of sex in my book on Jim Reeves just to make money. That total fabrication is reflective of the same disturbed mindset that has been so evident on the Holland website. The prudery and moralistic fervor some of these sickos publicly embrace is contradicted by stories I could tell you about their private behavior which is anything but noble.
Serious reviewers have given "Jim Reeves: His Untold Story" high marks for AVOIDING a descent into sensationalism and tabloid journalism. Billboard magazine, for one, has called it a "balanced" account of Jim's life, and the respected former editor of Country Music People magazine in the UK, Tony Byworth, likewise praised me for NOT writing an exploitative book regarding Reeves. I would also surmise that BBC 2, with its 15 million listeners, would not have used 13 soundbites from me as an authority on Jim in their November 2013 one-hour tribute to him had they any doubts about my scholarship as an author.
Anyway, I thought this review so deranged I am sharing it with you here myself. How pathetically desperate these people are to impact sales, when all they're doing is STIMULATING sales, as my bank account would prove. It took me 13 years to write this book because I wanted to be ACCURATE and DOCUMENT what I printed. "When it doubt, I left it out."
I am scrambling to make arrangements to reprint "Jim Reeves: His Untold Story" in order to be prepared for a big promotional campaign as the 50th anniversary of Jim's passing nears this summer. My recent medical procedure was part of an effort on my part to improve my health such that I can travel abroad to promote a re-launch of the book. There are big announcements ahead.
Incidentally, you can go to Amazon and click COMMENT underneath the post and add your own opinion regarding its veracity.
Here it is from Amazon:
2.0 out of 5 stars Should be called: Jim Reeves the Tabloid Story, March 2, 2014 By Comac "wonder boy" (texas) - See all my reviews This review is from: Jim Reeves: His Untold Story (Kindle Edition)
I truly looked forward to reading this book, even though it is 661 pages long. The first fifty pages I thought "wow, this Larry Jordan is a great researcher". Fifty pages later I had "questions" about the motives of Mr. Jordan. About 2/3 thirds of the way through the book I wanted to stop, but decided to finish. The book could have been the ultimate biography of Mr. Reeves, but Larry Jordan decided to write a "large pulp edition" book worthy of the National Enquirer Tabloid. Most of the book is gossip, hearsay, sensationalism and innuendo. It is shame that Mr. Jordan, who was obviously trusted by so many used this confidence to act like a Jackal feeding on a dead carcass. I am a writer myself and because of that I have been privileged to meet 3 people who are quoted extensively in this book. All three only have vile comments about Mr. Jordan and his motives. One person told me "Jordan purposely told him he filled the book with sex to sell copies". Once again a shame. The book itself is self published. No reliable book company would print so many statements which are "hearsay" or "unsubstantiated". They would be sued. For Mr. Jordan who claims he is a professional writer, the writing style itself is lacking, more like a 600 page magazine article. The editing is terrible. It is extremely hard to tell where a quote bleeds over into personal opinion. The pictures are terrific- the best part of the book. In case you don't want to wade through this behemoth, here are some of the stories you would miss: Reeves was a degenerate sex fiend who seduced young girls. Reeves was an alcoholic with a violent temper Reeves "stole" some of his top hits, including "Four Walls" and "He'll Have to Go" from other singers Reeves used drugs, mostly pills Reeves (who was from deep East Texas which was highly segregated)-wanted to adopt a black baby Reeves saw Lee Harvey Oswald at a club owned by Jack Ruby, proving the Warren Commission was "wrong" Reeves never liked Chet Atkins--who always spoke of Reeves with admiration. Reeves actual physical body is described from the top of his head to his heels. His toupee is mentioned at length at least on 20 pages and even has a description of how Reeves attached it. Jordan seems obsessed with Reeves toupee. Some of the stories are so laughable, such as the innuendo that Jim Ed Brown and his sister Maxine had an incestuous relationship, that Dean Manuel (Jim's piano player- killed with him in the plane crash) wrote "Last Date" which was stolen by Floyd Cramer and on and on. There is one revelation after another (Jordan often writes "here for the first time"!--such as a tale that Reeves had twin boys by a girlfriend, given up for adoption with Jordan as a detective who tracks the boys down and who uses "DNA" to prove this!! (unsubstantiated of course). Many of the quotes are pure gossip, for example, "Bea Terry" as the other woman who "MADE" Jim's career (once again-revealed for the first time"! ). Leo Jackson, Jim's old guitarist is also quoted extensively, although I understand he later recanted many of his statements and was in such pain he took his own life. Even War Hero and movie Star Audie Murphy is slurred in this book, by implying he had a "girlfriend" in San Antonio,(during a period when Murphy was in California). Reeves airplane crash is another revelation by Larry Jordan. Jordan's extensive research reveals exactly what occurred in the cockpit! He quotes one "authority" after another, while I had one friend of mine, a decorated Air Force Colonel who flew Phantom Jets in Vietnam and later earned the prestigious Lindbergh medal (flying a single engine aircraft over the ocean) review the FAA documents of the crash. The Colonel took 5 minutes and said "spatial disorientation", exactly what the FAA concurred. Jordan mentions a graphic video of the crash he owns and states "I won't describe any graphic details of the bodies and then proceeds to go into graphic detail on the bodies (dogs were eating them and flies had bloated the parts). Worst of all is the way Larry Jordan treated Mary Reeves. It is pitiful that in the first chapter he relates a "33 yr. friendship" and then proceeds to urinate all over the grave of Ms. Reeves whom he befriended, obviously for gain. He continuously tries to reduce Mr. and Mrs. Reeves marriage to a "open marriage", but fails to explain why Jim's letters are full of love or why they continued to take romantic vacations till the day Reeves died? Mary Reeves is also constantly portrayed as a money grubber, who cared less what trollop her husband was "sleeping with" as long as he "sent home the checks". Ms. Reeves loved him enough to keep his name and music alive for 35 years after his death. That hardly sounds like someone who didn't love her husband? Jordan now has a "cottage industry" selling this book and records from old demos (he never explains how he came about owning these demos, but offers publicity throughout the book touting his "Voicemasters" records for sale). I could go on, but I truly hope someday, a credible biography will be written about this iconic singer.
Larry, thank you for such a detailed reply to my post. However, for me to go into each accusation made against you would make my reply three times longer than yours, and it wouldn't be worth the time anyway. There were some things mentioned here that were either not in the book at all, twisted around or completely fabricated. Who ever wrote this outrageous review certainly didn't appear to have read the same book that I did! If this was not a definitive biography on Jim, then what would be?! I guess this person would rather read a sanitized bio on Jim that tells us absolutely nothing new, and makes Jim look like a perfect human being, which none of us are. I can't imagine how anyone could find any interest whatsoever in a book like that. I know I wouldn't. A good example would be the the Streissguth book. There were many inaccuracies in this book. There were even milestones in Jim's life that weren't even mentioned in the book, like the Carnegie Hall concert. I purchased this so called bio on Jim the day it arrived in the stores, but upon reading it, was completely dissapointed. This book merely skimmed the surface in telling about Jim's life, and was obviously not researched very carefully at all! Streissguth put out a book on Eddy Arnold at exactly the same time, which I've never read at all. I seriously doubt if this book was researched any better! As I said earlier, the majority of Jim's fans are very happy with your book, and that's really all that matters. There will always be people you cannot please, no matter what you do. Somehow, that reviewer on amazon even mentioned the Voicemasters CD's you've put out in a derogatory tone. How could anyone find fault in new music by Jim being released on all these great discs? It just goes to show you how they can even manage to find fault in something this good! It just doesn't make any sense. I for one am looking forward to the second edition of your book when it's published, as I know many other fans are as well. Keep up the good work, Larry!
Who is this guy? Did he know Mary Reeves also? Larry you are right in not even replying to this guy. What a waste of time,effortand energy. Looking forward to new edition of book. Keep up the good work. Prayers your way. Thanks for all you do. Steve
And further more why would one of the twins come forward and be appreciative for all you have done Larry? As Art Carney would say."Sheesh! What a grouch!"
I got a call from one of the twins today, whose name is Joe Hendricks, and he was flabbergasted by the idiocy of the Amazon poster who made fun of the DNA test results and acted like this was all bogus. Well, it is not a laughing matter to two men whose birth mother was confirmed as having had an intimate relationship with Jim at the very time they were conceived, especially when Reeves was booked at the very club where the woman worked as a waitress.
There are additional details behind this matter that I have not reported in my book.
But as I DID reveal in "Jim Reeves: His Untold Story," a reputable lab tested a blood sample from Joe and compared it with one of Jim Reeves' sisters, and it came back a 95.2% probability of a "biological match," according to the University of Utah DNA Diagnostic Lab. The lab further advised that any test result between a possible aunt and nephew that comes back 80% or greater is SIGNIFICANT.
You might be interested to know that since the publication of my book I have been contacted by a woman whose step sister is also thought to have been an offspring of Jim's (with substantial proof I have not yet reported).
And a woman in Texas has shared details regarding her father, whose mom was a neighbor of Jim's in his early days and was likely the child whom an intimate male friend of Reeves claimed had been conceived as a result of a liaison Jim had with this female.
It may be a joke to those who are insensitive to their fellow man, but one's paternity is very important to people who are adopted and never knew their birth parents.
Only a dolt would make fun of something like this.
I don't think the person who wrote that review even read the book. It appears to me that they just took posts off of the "other" site and blabbered on about what was said there. There are a very few that dislike Larry's book for a couple of reasons, in my opinion.One of the reasons they don't like Larry is because he has issued new music on VoiceMasters. They would prefer that the old RCA masters be released over and over again. It also seems to me that they are jealous. They will post anything that they think might tarnish Larry or his book in a very childish manner. I have a copy of the Streissguth book. I was lucky, I bought mine at the dollar store. If I would have paid anymore, I would have felt taken. It really is a dreadful book. I have reread Larry's book a few times, and I can assure you, you wont find it in the dollar store.....EVER. Its well written and very well researched. All the details, my goodness. As I have said before, Larry keep up the great work. Mary Reeves would be proud of what you have done to keep Jim's memory alive.
Thank you for bringing the facts to the light. I know that it is not to embarrass anyone but the truth is the truth. I look at it this way. In his position girls would literally throw themselves at him. I have had the same thing happen to me and I am just a preacher not a singer. You would not believe the things some folk propose to a fella on the road and alone. I can undertand how a guy could give in to tempatation. I don't condone but that is where grace and forgiveness comes in. After reading and re-reading your book, my take is that Bea Terry was the only one who really had Jim's best interest at heart. I would have like to have met her. She certainly truly loved Jim. What a class act!
That's right, Larry. If these people were in the shoes of anyone who never knew their birth parents, they would see things quite differently. I agree with all of the comments here. You can tell they were made by fans like us who truly loved Jim. I do not condone some of the things that Jim did either, but we all make mistakes in our lives, and forgiving is important. Without compassion, what kind of people would we be? I agree also that the Jim Reeves that we know and loved can be attributed to the amazing judgement of Bea Terry, who steered Jim in the right direction, image wise and musically. Jim must have trusted her judgement because it seems he took nall of her advice. As for DNA results, they cannot be disputed---but the people who need to find something wrong, even when it comes to documented proof, will continue to do so. It's not even worth dignifying their accusations with a reply.
Now some of the truth comes out...
Posted by JULIE (Webmistress) on March 11, 2014, 6:59 pm, in reply to "Stretching the truth..."
Now the anonymous poster on Amazon who goes by the name of "Comac" says he/she stands "by everything I wrote... I spoke to Leo Jackson's daughter and she told me he was sorry he ever met Larry Jordan. I could go on, but you aren't worth my time. Let people read the book and decide for themselves about "his research". It is trash and anyone who thinks this book is a tribute to Jim Reeves is an idiot. Obviously Mr. Jordan in grated himself to Mrs. Reeves and as time passed, he became Obsessed with Reeves to the point that he decided "he was in the family". I also heard from some friends at Carthage that his book is despised, not recommended or even acknowledged by any of the Reeves family or anyone at the Texas Country Music Hall of Fame."
So THE SOURCE for this person's claim that Leo "recanted" what he told Larry for his book is "Leo Jackson's daughter"? That's strange. I didn't know Leo had a daughter. Was there ever a DNA test that proved that? NO.
Did Leo dispute paternity regarding this alleged daughter? YES.
The writer is obviously referring to Joyce Jackson's daughter, Joy, and Joyce has repeatedly asserted unequivocally that Leo was the father of her child. She even made this claim in her book -- the same book in which she asserted that she and Leo "loved" each other for 50 years, and pretended like she had a legitimate marriage to him when, in fact, it only lasted mere days and was arranged by Mary Reeves.
A rather well informed defender of Larry's and someone who lives in Nashville and knew Leo and Nell Jackson has posted the truth about this matter on Amazon that is most interesting, and is worth reading. Click the link below to view it.
And incidentally, various members of the Reeves and White families have bought multiple copies of Larry's book to give as gifts. One White family member bought 14 COPIES this past Christmas. Larry also has had long conversations with Reeves family members around the holidays that were most cordial.
As for the Texas Country Music Hall of Fame, I am not aware of them taking any official position regarding ANY book.
It was amusing to see Peter Atkinson post his agreement on Amazon that the book is "full of filth." He was a charter member of the trash site posting club and has been vilifying Larry for years. My guess is, with the 50th anniversary coming up, some of these characters are expecting some big project or announcement so they have worked themselves up into a frenzy trying to discredit Larry ahead of time. They've had so much success so far, haven't they? -- JULIE
Perhaps it would be useful if I were to post excerpts from some of my interview tapes in which Leo talks bluntly about the issue of paternity regarding his "daughter," and what he really thought of the matter? The same "daughter" who is now allegedly telling people that he "recanted" what he told me for my book.
Leo returned to this topic a multitude of times over the years as he was so upset about it and what he had to say was NOT flattering. Stay tuned...
Mike, I respectfully disagree with you. I don't think it would matter to the pond scum that have posted reviews on Amazon and other websites, whether they knew their parents or not. They are simply so filled with bile, hate and jealousy, in their spite-filled lives, that they will lie and obfuscate regarding Larry's book, without hesitation. Speaking of parents, I suspect a couple of them at least, are still living in Mom's basement.
Larry there is no point wasting time to reply to this guy. It is obvious that he has not read the book in its entirety and does not know what he is talking about. He calls everyone who have read the book and thinks it was a tribute to Jim Reeves "idiots" - perhaps he is the biggest idiot to perpetuate misinformation about the Book which he claims to have read. He may be one of those in the fold who pretends to be a fan of JR and who out of sheer jealousy, thrill in spreading misinformation that undermines the work you do and perhaps damaging Jim's legacy as well.
Larry you wrote a wonderful book that was very well researched, and a honest account of Jim's life, documenting his day-to-day activities. My opinion of him did not and will not diminish one bit.