elvis

topic posted Sat, July 7, 2007 - 6:14 PM by  dave
(presley)

anyone else think elvis is at least partly to blame for everything bad about music today?
posted by:
dave
Tucson
  • Re: elvis

    Sat, July 7, 2007 - 11:40 PM
    Colonel Tom Parker, yes... but Elvis, no
    • Re: elvis

      Sun, July 8, 2007 - 7:25 PM
      angelboots---ok, the truth is i don't know a lot about the history you're referring to. could you elaborate a little?
      • Re: elvis

        Sun, July 8, 2007 - 7:32 PM
        oh--& i was asking you to elaborate on your answer, not the history. i can look that up myself...
  • Re: elvis

    Sun, July 8, 2007 - 3:15 PM
    Re: "Elvis to blame"
    Are you out of your mind???
    The crap on the radio is the sole responsibility of the idiots who recorded it and the fools who buy it.
    • Re: elvis

      Sun, July 8, 2007 - 3:16 PM
      P.S.
      Elvis Presley: "The King of Rock 'N Roll" always and forever.
      • Re: elvis

        Sun, July 8, 2007 - 7:23 PM
        1...out of my mind...possibly.
        2....sole responsibility...yes, i agree w/you for the most part. i'd still say elvis at least set a precedent. maybe it's just a personal bias. but my impression is that he took a music that already existed &, frankly, kinda sterilized it.
        3...well, he'll forever be TITLED the king, anyway...
        • Re: elvis

          Sun, July 8, 2007 - 10:26 PM
          that was kind of a joke about Tom Parker... kinda sorta.. he called every shot and every move Elvis made.... he made every single decision for good or ill.... and many of them were for ill, esp from after his army service on... the bad movies, all that

          But I agree that Elvis can't be held responsible for all bad music... no one artist can be... and I don't really think he can be accused for any bad music...

          took a music that already existed and sterilized it? what do you mean? you mean black r & b, blues, etc? he drew from that, and from country music as well...

          but if that's your interpretation, then you gotta throw them all in there... Johnny Cash, Carl Perkins, Jerry Lee Lewis, Buddy Holly, etc etc... every white rock and roll performer of the 1950s... you can't just single out Elvis. and is that what you want to do really? say that all of these 50s artists "set a precedent" by sterilzing r & b? because that precedent in it's entirety is rock and roll, and everything that came from it---garage rock, British Wave, glam rock, punk rock, goth, industrial, indie, emo, etc etc etc... if Elvis and the other pioneers hadn't done what they did back then, none of that would exist.

          he did set a precedent ,you are right... and thank god for it... but it's not the one you seem to think he set... you can't hold Elvis responsible for all the crap in rock music that came after him. Well, you can, but you also have to credit him with every single good thing in rock music that came after him

          I mean all forms of art and music are influenced by what came before them... it's all amalgams and fusions and blends... people don't create in a vacuum... blues and r&b themselves were influenced by things that came before them... call and response stuff from Africa and the days of slavery in the US, gospel, etc

          you could just as easily say that Elvis brought that music to the attention of white people....

          also, you are forgetting the huge influence that Elvis had on those who came afterwards... The Beatles, the Stones, the Who, etc etc... all of them, all the major players of the 60s (and beyond) were influenced--positively--by Elvis....

          I think you would have had to have been around then (and I was not) to fully appreciate what he did and what he meant

          and I say this as someone who doesn't even own one single Elvis album.... I'm not really a gigantic fan myself, (I do like some of his stuff lot though) but he really is The King... I recognize his importance in rock and roll history, and appreciate him immensely, even if I'm not a huge fan... (I'm not a big fan of 50s rock in general, actually, but I see it's place... if not for it, nothing that came afterward would exist)

          I went to Graceland and Sun Studios, I think everyone should at least once in their lives... and watching him in film footage, esp early on... well, his charisma is undeniable....
          • Re: elvis

            Sun, July 8, 2007 - 10:41 PM
            you raise some good points, & these are points i've had brought up to me before.
            i dunno, like i said it could just be a personal bias.
          • Re: elvis

            Mon, July 9, 2007 - 7:53 AM
            I think there's a mythology of Elvis (much of it blown way out of proportion) and there's the work. I have no trouble saying that his is the strongest body of work in Rock and Roll. Yes, even all the way up into the 70s he was making some of the best, rawest, gut-bucket rock and roll in the world. And what makes Elvis such a fascinating American artist is that it's done largely without pretense (at least from the point of view of his performances). Elvis never quite had a handle on how he did what he did. He just went out there, instinctually, and created Rock and Roll. It was the way Elvis did it. Nothing calculated. In a lot of ways, I believe, he was a man tortured by his inability to understand what he had done that was so great.
            He was revolutionary to everyone except himself.

            Fascinating and important American character.
            • Re: elvis

              Mon, July 9, 2007 - 9:12 AM
              People always associate Elvis with R&B, Blues, Country etc... and yes he did use forms of music that existed already (don't we all?) but often people forget what he "did" with that music. He put together musical forms that just weren't mixed before in suchHa way that he did it. Yeah, one could argue and use Hank Williams Sr. or Jimmie Rodgers as early white pioneers of Country/Blues fusion. But Elvis' fusion was totally unique. And if he ever did only one good thing in his life, to make white folks see how GREAT Gospel and Blues is, then he earns a gold star in my book. People also forget that Elvis' two main singing influences were Dean Martin and Mario Lanza, who would have thought that their influence would fuse so well with Gospel and R&B? Also, no one ever accused him of ripping those two singers off now would they?
              Chuck Berry had just as much influence of Country Swing in his music as Elvis had the Blues in his, no one ever says Chuck stole from white people. Elvis never stole black music, he just showed folks just how much he loved it, and how moved he was by it. He couldn't sit still, he HAD to move, and he absolutely had to sing it. That's a music artist if I ever heard one.
              • Re: elvis

                Mon, July 9, 2007 - 6:42 PM
                Bravo to both of you!! well put. you both were much more eloquent than I was

                and yes, dave, if you are gonna let Johnny Cash, and all those others I mentioned, and the ones mentioned in these subsequent posts, get a pass on "ripping off a music that already existed" but hold Elvis somehow responsible for it... then yes, you have a personal bias... and a very severe one...
                • Re: elvis

                  Mon, July 9, 2007 - 9:32 PM
                  ok, you win.
                  • This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.

                    Re: elvis

                    Tue, July 10, 2007 - 8:31 PM
                    the best rawest most powerful EP is the Sun Sessions stuff......everything else just icing on the cake.....the 50's RCA stuff is listenable but they [Chet Atkins and co] kinda ruined the rockablly feel of his voice and presentation........there were some good toons in the 60's[the Memphis recordings and a few of the movie cuts] and even his last big hit "Burning Love" was pretty cool........
                    • Re: elvis

                      Wed, July 11, 2007 - 1:51 PM
                      Some people blame Pink Floyd for the horrible state of pop radio today, because they took rock and roll away from being dance music in the '70's, it became so much more of a spectator sport. Most of the excitable types like dance music because they get to move around, and now rock is just for listening in your room or on your ipod or whatever.
                      • Unsu...
                         

                        Re: elvis

                        Wed, July 11, 2007 - 6:04 PM
                        I dunno, I have a hard time sitting still listening to rock music!
                        • Re: elvis

                          Wed, July 11, 2007 - 6:16 PM
                          LOL jen

                          yeah, I dig some of the later Elvis tunes too.. I love "Suspicious Minds" I also love the cover version of it the The Fine Young Cannibals did back in 89 or 90
                        • Re: elvis

                          Thu, July 12, 2007 - 12:48 PM
                          I dunno either, but I go to a lot of rock shows, and people rarely dance there, they hardly nod their heads. They just stand around being all aloof and too cool for school.
                          • Unsu...
                             

                            Re: elvis

                            Thu, July 12, 2007 - 10:20 PM
                            EXACTLY!
                            That's just a pose. People are so insecure!
                            I guess you gotta go to the right shows, too.
                            I go to a show to get lost and freak out a little and just cut loose!
                            I don't wanna stand around like a bunch of mannequinnes!
                            • Re: elvis

                              Fri, July 13, 2007 - 7:04 AM
                              *laughs* I totally agree... though there are some things that are impossible to dance to, like most of the music of the aforementioned Pink Floyd.. Or Genesis or any of those art rock bands.

                              And I loves me some Sufjan Stevens, but I don't think I could dance to his music.

                              There are plenty of others, but you get the idea.

                              If I can dance to it, I will, but there is plenty of rock that is not danceable
                              • Re: elvis

                                Fri, July 13, 2007 - 7:06 AM
                                Lord, even Jimi Hendrix and lots of other music from the sixties... awesome, but undanceable... unless you want to do some non-rhythmmic hippie freak out interpretive dance... which I do not

                                Dancing to Led Zeppelin? not so much
                                • Re: elvis

                                  Fri, July 13, 2007 - 8:29 AM
                                  Don't get me wrong, I like a lot of proggy stuff, I love Pink Floyd, but that phase of rock really did a lot to split the pop music audience into those who like to dance and those who don't. And then punk came along and got some of that audience kinetic again, but I think at that point things just started to fragment into all these little genres so much that Pop radio now just settles for the lowest common denominator.

Recent topics in "Quality Music Snobs"