What if we knew nothing but the music?

[Matthew]

Sometimes I wonder if we as fans know too much about Elvis and his private life. How does this permeate into the music we love and appreciate? Do we “feel” different when we listen to the Graceland sessions knowing what we do about this period compared to if we only had the music and no knowledge of the period? Imagine in the distant future all historical records of Elvis Presley are lost along with his music and by chance someone discovers locked away somewhere a copy of each and every one of Elvis’ original singles, EPs, and albums. The music must speak for itself. All that is known is what is written on the album sleeves. The only photographs are those printed on the jackets. Eerie thought don’t you think?

Do you remember being an Elvis fan when all you knew was the music and the image? Do we know too much?

[Steve_M]

I wouldn't be the fan I have been if i only knew the music.
Elvis wuld be not much differetn to me than Bing Crosby, great voice and......oh, that's it.
Frank Sinatra would have more appeal to me because there would be an "edge" that framed the music. Gotta have that smoething else to go with it.

Elvis had loads of things in spades.
The charisma, the looks, the cars, the clothes, the attitude, - all before he let one note escape his mouth - you were sold, hook line and sinker.

[brf1964]

I agree to a certain point, but not all that we know is true anyway.

[Steve_M]

I agree to a certain point, but not all that we know is true anyway.

What is it i know that is not true?

[likethebike]

Helps in some cases like those '76 tracks you mention and hurts in others. For instance many fans like to dump a little on "Burning Love" because they heard Elvis didn't want to record it. A specific example is the 1971 Christmas album which played much better before the reports of Elvis' boredom during the sessions came to light.

It does help our esteem though overall to know what happened behind the scenes. We know now that it wasn't a lack of taste that led Elvis to some of those dopey movie songs. "Heartbreak Hotel"'s singular quality is actually increased by hearing the story of its birth and knowing that Elvis was the only person who believed in it. And knowing how nervous Elvis was before the '68 show gives even it more of a thrill.

Still though in some ways it hurts as a listener because it kind of outlines what we should like and what we shouldn't. Also, it can have a reductive effect on our ability to appreciate Elvis as an artist. Many reviews are have commented that Elvis performed "Suspcious Minds" so well because his marriage was in jeopardy. (Even though for Elvis/Priscilla marital relations, things were still decent enough in 1969.) Too many fans buy into the idea that unless an artist has experienced/is experiencing the specific emotions in a song, he/she can't perform it well which is hogwash.

[likethebike]

I agree to a certain point, but not all that we know is true anyway.

What is it i know that is not true?

We're all in the Matrix.

[Little Darlin]

I'm the same as SteveM on this one, I don't think I would be a big a fan as well with just the music.

I'd grown up listening to Elvis, but only saw him,I mean really saw him in TTWII, that was it for me. From then on I went to the Library and got every book out I could just to learn more about him.

The trouble today is people think they know a lot about Elvis' private life and they don't really...it's just whats been fed to us.

Still I would envy one of those fans opening a box to find all his recordings, remembering what my first time of listening was like.

I don't think about the time frame of recordings, as again we don't know what was going on, it's what has been fed to us to lead us to that conclusion.

[Luuk]

I vaguely do remember a time when all we knew was the music and the image.
I also remember I had hair, long long ago.

[mr burrows]

Are there many blind elvis fans do you think?
If I was blind i dont think I'd be able to distinguish bewtwixt Elvis Presley and some other guy like Buddy Holly or Gene Vincent; I would not be able to say 'he will become a household name; a legend', simply by listening to their voice.
If we knew nothing but the music we would have never seen the revolutionary moves on the Milton Berle Show, TTWII, or '68. When I listen to Elvis I imagine him singing the songs on the stage or whatever, but when a blind man listens to Elvis- what does he see?

[Cryogenic]

If we knew nothing but the music ................ we would still be awed.

Or not.

It's too hard to say. As a great EP fan once said: it's all about the music and so much more . . .

Without knowing anything else about Elvis, other than the superficial trimmings, we'd have no compass to navigate. The music would lack all context and be essentially meaningless. But maybe it would still be beautiful. But then .... can you have beauty without meaning? This is a very philosophical question and the kind you can easily tie yourself up in knots over.

Even when I was a casual fan of Elvis as a child, I can't recall a time when I wasn't aware of the basic "rags to riches" story that underpinned his life. Or his strange looks. Even the name was inescapably unusual: ELVIS. Everything about this person just makes you want to pay more attention. I have no recollections of a time when this basic fact wasn't somehow true to me (even before I could consciously articulate it).

Mr Burrows: you've put an interesting question forward. Another one is: what does a non-English speaking / knowing person hear when they listen to Elvis? If we could find someone who fits both of these characters, and if we could somehow get them to communicate, I'd feel like a very rich man. Or boy. It's a good point you made about imagining Elvis on stage. I always imagine this, too. Elvis was such a visually arresting person and such a dynamic performer that it's impossible for me not to. No other person in the history of recorded music is so real to me, while remaining perfectly unreal.

[Steve_M]

There's the reverse effect as well, people / fans who believe in the myth(s) and because of that they have an increased appreciation of Elvis without realsiing it's a dfalse one.

But what good does it do to enlighten them? We'd gain nothing ourselves and their illusion would be shattered. The truth is out there for them to find on their own if they want to, not for others to impose on them without invitation.

[drjohncarpenter]

With Elvis, his music is so compelling and mysterious and exciting, it is only natural that people would want to know more. There is no way anyone could be content to just have knowledge of the music alone. It's why we are still here, thirty years after the man's demise, discussing all aspects of his life and career, from SUN outtakes to the final tour.

And don't forget how thrilling it is to coo over another "hot" and "sexy" photo in the Picture Section.

[E-Cat]

And don't forget how thrilling it is to coo over another "hot" and "sexy" photo in the Picture Section.

http://www.elvis-collectors.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=34526

[likethebike]

Elvis does not sound like Gene Vincent and Buddy Holly. They share a tradition and some vocal mannerisms (which both men copped from Elvis) but Elvis' dynamism was unique, his sense of phrasing and his voice.

What a blind man would say about Elvis was answered in Memphis in 1954 when all those kids flipped over "That's All Right Mama" having no clue who the singer was or what the singer looked like. It was answered again on a nationwide level when "Heartbreak Hotel" hit in 1956. Elvis' appearances on the Dorsey show were not highly rated and Elvis did not sing "Heartbreak Hotel" , he added it to his appearances on the show because millions of people across the nation were flipping for it. The hope was that you could get to see the man who was making this mysterious new music. That Elvis looked like he did and moved as he did cinched the deal.

[drjohncarpenter]

Elvis does not sound like Gene Vincent ...

That may be true, but when both Gladys Presley and Scotty Moore heard "Be-Bop-A-Lula" in June 1956, they were sure it was Elvis. Mom liked the song, and Scotty thought he was out of a job.

[likethebike]

Maybe it's a measure of our fanaticism but I'm sure there are many of this board including myself who could tell Elvis from any imitator in about 15 seconds or less.

[drjohncarpenter]

Maybe it's a measure of our fanaticism but I'm sure there are many of this board including myself who could tell Elvis from any imitator in about 15 seconds or less.

You don't think Gladys or Scotty knew what Elvis sounded like?

[likethebike]

They apparently didn't listen closely enough.

[drjohncarpenter]

That was funny.

[Swithin StCleeve]

Sometimes I wonder if we as fans know too much about Elvis and his private life.

Certainly.
A few years ago I read The Death Of Elvis. In it is details of his autopsy. I remember thinking to myself, 'why are you reading this stuff, just how much do you need to know about this bloke',
I took a decision then, to curtail my Elvis reading. I saw it as an unhealthy obsession.
Since then, I've bought few Elvis books. I don't seek out facts about his personal life, and I don't care for bodyguard books.
My Elvis spending goes on CDs, which I get a great deal of pleasure from, and the occasional book like Elvis '57, which look at the earlier days of his career. Plus, I love the late fifties era.

And let's be honest, Elvis was just a pop singer, we don't need to understand the man to appreciate his art. He was at his best delivering pop music, not tortured renderings from the bottom of his soul. Give me Big Hunk Of Love over Hurt anyday.

I think some fans get over serious about Elvis' music. It's not Nick Drake.

[Steve_M]

I'm the other way around.
I intend to slowly give up being an Elvis fan, I've tried the quick way but it doesn't work, I'm drawn by further interest in the man, certainly not the music anymore. I'm hoping the the FTD Sun project will be the final purchase and I doubt very much if I would purchase it if it wasn't for being primarily a book release.

[Swithin StCleeve]

I'm the other way around.
I intend to slowly give up being an Elvis fan, I've tried the quick way but it doesn't work, I'm drawn by further interest in the man, certainly not the music anymore. I'm hoping the the FTD Sun project will be the final purchase and I doubt very much if I would purchase it if it wasn't for being primarily a book release.

I know what you mean. It can draw you in.

Whe you listen to an Elvis record what do you hear? I often think it's like hearing an old friend, it's comfortable, it's what we've always done. . but just how much is entertainment?
I mean, we're all waiting for the Wild FTD. I can hear people in the hall and I'm thinking "ohhh, it's the postman". . yet I know all the songs, I've got the out-takes, hell, I've got thee volumes of 'Wild In The Country' LPs I've never played, I picked them up an auction ages ago! So it's not music I'm looking forward to is it? It's the very male thing of adding to the collection.
It's he thrill of owning something new with Elvis' mug on (a leftover from that nine year old who couldn't afford Elvis albums?). I'll listen to it, and I'll enjoy it, but will I enjoy it in the same way as I enjoy, say, Joanna Eden singing Singing Out (my favorite new record of last year).
I still get off on the Elvis fifties stuff. And the early sixties nashville stuff too. If I heard that now I'd be impressed, but I doubt if I heard any seventies stuff, now, it would turn me into a fan of make me buy a CD. At this point in my life, save for that old you love it because it's Elvis thing, there's nothing there that says anything to me about my life, as Morrissey put it.

[Mike Eder]

I think the 1971-77 era is severely underrated because of the back and forth about his "mood" or what he took or didn't take debates. Though I am not blind to his lesser performances of that time, I have always for instance liked his studio sessions of 1971 and 1973 irrespective of where he was at personally. Conversely while love most of the fifties work, there are some fairly mediocre songs that I think get more of a free pass because of the romance of the era. I think this is hard but Elvis' music should be judged on it's own merits. That doesn't mean I don't like learning about him as a person or enjoy the photos etc, I just try to keep perspective

[Steve_M]

I go along with the collecting thing, whether it's a male thin or not I'm unsure, maybe it is, there's not that manywomen who seem to do it by comparison.
But I now collect information on Elvis.
Elvis was around in the public eye for about 8000 days.
Thats' less than the amount of differrent Elvis records / CD's that have been released around the world.
But it seems some information from some days are rarer to get hold of than others.
Some days are favourites and I can read about them often.
Unlike Take 2 of a particular track which never really changes, days can change by new information being found, or an alternative photo from that day or even footage or something like that.
A new piece of info to me is like a new record these days and the vault seems almost endless.
I've found some way of enjoying a subject where the interest can and does move forward, and it's never going to be found in the music of Elvis anymore.

The music was really like a football match. I was there to enjoy it along with many other fans, to feel the music almost as one, to have the same passion for the voice. Fans have changed and I don't like the new breed or the new attitude of fans nor do I feel the same about the music now because of those fans.

[Swithin StCleeve]

The music was really like a football match. I was there to enjoy it along with many other fans, to feel the music almost as one, to have the same passion for the voice. Fans have changed and I don't like the new breed or the new attitude of fans nor do I feel the same about the music now because of those fans.

What attitude's that?

(By the way, the 'Wild' FTD has arrived and it sounds lovely!).