All posts with more than 3000 Hits, prior to 2008

Thu Jul 26, 2007 9:07 am

I'm with midnightx on this one.

There is a major difference in consumer and media impact between a reverential, artistic approach to marketing an artist compared to a lowest common denominator, fast buck approach. Once you start to devalue the artist's credibility it is a long road coming back. Elvis continues to e largely viewed as a relic of a bygone age (tinged by overweight, white jumpsuited clones) rather than applauded for his musical catalog.

Nigel
http://www.elvisinfonet.com

Thu Jul 26, 2007 9:33 am

I’m surprised to hear those words coming from you, Nigel. With your constant reporting about Elvis impersonators, ‘Elvis is alive’ debates, and interviews with loonies like Billy Miller, you are certainly not doing anything to change that perception.

Thu Jul 26, 2007 10:26 am

Rock Legend

I do understand your point.

However, if you're surprised, you obviously have only read a small amount of items on our site! We have been very vocal on these issues for years and our general news, reviews, articles and other interviews easily outweigh the more sensational, some might say ridiculous, items on EIN.

As a broad based information site it is important EIN does not engage in political correctness! To cater to the whims or interests of a small, vocal band of fans is not what EIN is about. A democratic ideal is at the center of our charter.

Those who read a Billy Miller interview are a minority, and remember EIN is not a mainstream media outlet influencing the general public. Therein lies a fundamental issue!

Nigel
http://www.elvisinfonet.com

Thu Jul 26, 2007 10:34 am

Rock Legend wrote:I’m surprised to hear those words coming from you, Nigel. With your constant reporting about Elvis impersonators, ‘Elvis is alive’ debates, and interviews with loonies like Billy Miller, you are certainly not doing anything to change that perception.

Ouch!

Thank God you can count on their "in-depth" reviews, though.

Thu Jul 26, 2007 10:49 am

Yes, but why provide a platform for those people at all? It’s so obvious that they are lying through their teeth, like for instance the ‘secret lover’ that you did an interview with. She had no evidence whatsoever, and yet you gave her a chance to promote her bullshit.

Same with all the ‘Elvis Is Alive’ stuff, Elvis Underground, etc. We all know that it’s bogus… so why bother?

And then there’s the Elvis impersonators… like your endless articles about the merits of El Gamble. For Pete’s sake, Nigel… (and I haven’t even mentioned all the Asian impersonators that you seem to enjoy so much).

It’s a free world, and you are entitled to fill your website with as much garbage as you please, but don’t come here complaining about Elvis not being “applauded for his musical catalog”.

Since other Elvis news sites are thankfully ignoring the loonies & the pretenders, EIN now has the dubious position of being the sole platform for these freaks.

Thu Jul 26, 2007 11:24 am

Little Darlin wrote:I think you would be hard pushed to find any other Artist's back Catalogue looked after as well as Ernst has looked after Elvis'.


http://www.brightmidnightarchives.com/ The Doors Music Company
http://www.daggerrecords.com/ Experience Hendrix, L.L.C.
http://www.tbolin.com/ Tommy Bolin Archives

Thu Jul 26, 2007 11:49 am

EIN is interesting as are some of the fringe people they interview. Like it or not they are part of Elvis' legacy and I always felt the fact that there are people like these speaks strongly to how much a cultural impact Elvis really has made. They cover every aspect of Elvis so if you don't like one part of their site don't go.

In the 80's when I became a fan much of Elvis' original LP's were there in every store. They should be there now too. Sadly most fifties artists aren't treated well in this regard, but Elvis especally deserves better. Uneven or not these albums are historically what he put out. He did have some input on the tracklistigs of his album, and what would be singles. The only stuff he had no say so were the comps. His albums as they were are so much more important then any reissue could hope to achieve. The themed releases are improtant too in some cases (ie a good Sun comp is essential in any record collection) but his vision is being lost. Those of you who don't seem to care about it are looking at things with a modern eye. When listening to Elvis that isn't always a good idea. The period feel is important to understanding Elvis' legacy, and that's why I tend to buy vinyl myself.

Thu Jul 26, 2007 2:19 pm

Mike Eder wrote:EIN is interesting as are some of the fringe people they interview. Like it or not they are part of Elvis' legacy and I always felt the fact that there are people like these speaks strongly to how much a cultural impact Elvis really has made. They cover every aspect of Elvis so if you don't like one part of their site don't go.


That’s not the issue at all. I have praised the website on many occasions, and I consider Piers a friend. But the issue is that Nigel writes here that “Elvis continues to be largely viewed as a relic of a bygone age (tinged by overweight, white jumpsuited clones) rather than applauded for his musical catalog”.
An odd statement to say the least, coming from a person who often praises impersonators, including the “overweight, white jumpsuited clones”. If you honestly feel that the fruitcakes and the impersonators are an essential part of the Elvis legend, then there’s no reason questioning / regretting that it’s often these elements that get all the media attention – and not the music.

Thu Jul 26, 2007 2:50 pm

Greg Nolan - In no way did I "dismiss" Elvis' albums nor was I trying to talk people into dismissing Elvis' albums. Perhaps this is your interpretation. I was pointing out a fact that Elvis came from an era when popular music was a singles-based medium and people recorded individual songs for the singles market, not for long playing records. This affected the quality of his LP's since they were put together by the Colonel (the artwork and the mix) although Elvis did some of the song selection. By 1966 & 1967, the market shifted to more of an LP format, thanks in large part to such albums as Pet Sounds, Revolver and Sgt. Pepper. However, many artists from the previous era did not make that shift until later, if at all. My argument was that since Elvis' focus was on individual songs, it is not relevant to keep a lot of those same albums in print just because they were out when he was alive. The marketplace is different now than it was when these albums were out and they don't appeal to the mainstream marketplace anymore. They tend to appeal to the collector.

There is a lot of Elvis' material that should be available and I do think some of his stronger LP's should be left alone but there aren't too many out of 60 LP's. For one thing, the playing time of most of Elvis' albums was around 1/2 an hour, the sequencing of songs is random at best, and the mix on the original albums even infuriated Elvis. Look at the howls of protest when FTD used the original mixes on the early soundtrack releases.

There was no dismissal but an attempt to make a case using logic and reasoning. You don't have to agree but please don't shift the meaning of my words to try and bolster your case. I own several copies of all of Elvis' LP's whether on the original LP format or CD's so it would be hypocritical of me to "dismiss" them.

Thu Jul 26, 2007 3:37 pm

[quote="Rock Legend
That’s not the issue at all. I have praised the website on many occasions, and I consider Piers a friend. But the issue is that Nigel writes here that “Elvis continues to be largely viewed as a relic of a bygone age (tinged by overweight, white jumpsuited clones) rather than applauded for his musical catalog”.
An odd statement to say the least, coming from a person who often praises impersonators, including the “overweight, white jumpsuited clones”. If you honestly feel that the fruitcakes and the impersonators are an essential part of the Elvis legend, then there’s no reason questioning / regretting that it’s often these elements that get all the media attention – and not the music.[/quote]

Rock Legend

You sorely miss the socio-cultural aspects of Elvis' legacy. Without understanding this one does not really understand what Elvis' legacy is. You should read Dr Gary Enders' paper on Political Correctness in the Elvis world[/url]www.geocities.com/elvissymposium/enderscult.htm[url]

While I personally don't have much time for many ETAs I will acknowledge those who are professional. The issue is not that they receive attention, it is that the media lacks effective "balance" in its treatment of things Elvis.

I have never said the fruitcakes, as you refer to them, are an "essential" part of the Elvis legend but they are a REAL part of it! And for some reason they form a more cogent part of it than happens with most other artists. This is very instructive! Rather than deriding these fringe elements we should learn more about Elvis because of them.

Enough said on my part.

Nigel
[/url]www.elvisinfonet.com

Thu Jul 26, 2007 3:57 pm

nigel wrote:
Rock Legend

You sorely miss the socio-cultural aspects of Elvis' legacy.

Nigel


You sorely miss common sense.

You have been caught contradicting yourself, and don’t want to admit it. You are trying to weasel your way out of this discussion, but not very convincingly. How a person on one hand can state that he feels that Elvis’ music is not getting enough attention, while at the same time actively promoting
Elvis impersonators and the ‘Elvis Is Alive’ wackos (and indeed every wacko who got within a five mile range of Graceland) is beyond me. If all that crap are the “socio-cultural aspects of Elvis' legacy” then I wish to live in blissful ignorance. I think I’ll just stick to the records.

Still, I don’t want this discussion to come across as a personal attack, so I will once again repeat my praise for Piers’ articles. This is what I wrote to him in private yesterday while discussing the Pirzada interview: “I think you have done a tremendous job for many years now, and you are doing it for the love of Elvis and nothing else. You are a passionate soul and your reviews are a testament to that”.

Thu Jul 26, 2007 5:20 pm

Well,

maybe that is the problem with Elvis: there is not a single Elvis, there are many Elvii. While alive Parker somehow managed to reshape and resell his boy as a coherent product. 30 years later we now know so much more about Elvis, his career, his catalogue, his life and his personality that it becomes almost impossible to deal with that as one coherent package.
There is almost a no win situation: giving a too detailed image might scare the newcomers away, promoting a general image of Elvis will for sure create a lot of complaints (and rightly so!) from the hard core.
Hence the solution Ernst/BMG came up with imho: general releases versus FTD. While it most certainly is not an ideal situation, given the circumstances and the very nature of Elvis and his catalogue, this is probably the best situation.
If we want things to change for the better, me must make sure FTD Dcontinues to succeed (boycott bootleggers?!) and 'educate' our near and dear ones.
Boycotting bootleggers will probably not happen, but if i am given a chance to choose between FTD and a bootleg, I know which one I will pick.

Thu Jul 26, 2007 6:06 pm

Swedish wrote:
Little Darlin wrote:I think you would be hard pushed to find any other Artist's back Catalogue looked after as well as Ernst has looked after Elvis'.


http://www.brightmidnightarchives.com/ The Doors Music Company
http://www.daggerrecords.com/ Experience Hendrix, L.L.C.
http://www.tbolin.com/ Tommy Bolin Archives


Cool..
Thanks for the Doors link!! but did these Artists have as many Albums to look after as Elvis did.

Thu Jul 26, 2007 7:56 pm

ronnyg wrote:Greg Nolan - In no way did I "dismiss" Elvis' albums nor was I trying to talk people into dismissing Elvis' albums. Perhaps this is your interpretation. I was pointing out a fact that Elvis came from an era when popular music was a singles-based medium and people recorded individual songs for the singles market, not for long playing records. This affected the quality of his LP's since they were put together by the Colonel (the artwork and the mix) although Elvis did some of the song selection. By 1966 & 1967, the market shifted to more of an LP format, thanks in large part to such albums as Pet Sounds, Revolver and Sgt. Pepper. However, many artists from the previous era did not make that shift until later, if at all. My argument was that since Elvis' focus was on individual songs, it is not relevant to keep a lot of those same albums in print just because they were out when he was alive. The marketplace is different now than it was when these albums were out and they don't appeal to the mainstream marketplace anymore. They tend to appeal to the collector.

There is a lot of Elvis' material that should be available and I do think some of his stronger LP's should be left alone but there aren't too many out of 60 LP's. For one thing, the playing time of most of Elvis' albums was around 1/2 an hour, the sequencing of songs is random at best, and the mix on the original albums even infuriated Elvis. Look at the howls of protest when FTD used the original mixes on the early soundtrack releases.

There was no dismissal but an attempt to make a case using logic and reasoning. You don't have to agree but please don't shift the meaning of my words to try and bolster your case. I own several copies of all of Elvis' LP's whether on the original LP format or CD's so it would be hypocritical of me to "dismiss" them.


Ronnyg, I am inferring or trying to get at the root of what read to these eyes as a dismissal of Elvis' significant and often under-appreciated albums (as LTB points out), to say nothing of being big sellers. It would have been repetitive to directly quote you as my point is to go deeper into your assumptions or views on Elvis' album legacy.

I don't mean to put words in your mouth but it's fair (from my eyes) to boil it down that you have a less-than-glowing feel for Elvis' musical /
cultural impact via albums. Isn't that fair to assume from your comments?
I'm not ridiculing it but just trying to be clear where we stand and I know you have the LPs yourself, etc.

It's funny but plenty of albums were purchased in the '50s, long before any British rockers started teaching Americans to rock at 33 rpm.... :lol: Frank Sinatra, like Elvis a huge popular presence in the '50s, also had big LP sales, which incidentally held together thematically. The album was not born in the '60s, no matter what Jann Wenner tells us.


Pete Dube recently had a good thread called:

Elvis An Album Artist:

http://www.elvis-collectors.com/forum/v ... highlight=

As a quick re-cap of just the '50s alone, we've heard that "Elvis Presley" (1956) was assembled in part from Sun work, but it also comes out of a new RCA session and of course is now considered a rock classic, in part because of its iconic cover. Likewise, his second album "Elvis" (a.k.a. "Rock'n'Roll # 2" in the UK) is acclaimed as a rock classic (by anyone willing to look seriously at music before 1964)and even has thoughtful liner notes that ponder his place in the culture.

Both "Loving You" and "King Creole" soundtrack LPs captured the music of two of his most rockin' movies, with the former adding in a session for good measure. The army-era LPs were place-holders, but usefully gathered loose-ends from across his still short career. Even decades later I found them to be great additions to my building an Elvis collection, as they introduced me to many songs I didn't have elsewhere.

And we'd call them "compilations" now, but his two '50s "Golden Records" sets are pretty classic slabs of vinyl, the first with a "desert island" line-up of his hits to-date and the latter with one of his best sessions ever, coupled with one of the most famous album artwork anywhere.

And on and on we could keep going, but I don't see the sense in assuming all Elvis' albums are some kind of second-rate releases. Since the late '90s and then more recently with the Kevan Budd-remastered versions, we've had the expanded versions with the singles and bonus material, which is just right for the CD era. Do these fly off the shelf? No, but they did once and that's about good enough. "Slow and steady" wins the race, as they say, and other legendary artists from Roy Orbison (recently at least) ,Chuck Berry, Frank Sinatra, have by and large seen much more respect for their masterworks. It can be done. Will it be done at this late hour? It's probably getting too late.

Making Elvis' music do a "strip-tease" to sell itself with duplicative "new" titles like "Love, Elvis," "Christmas Peace," the genre sets and "Ultimate Gospel" is a watering down of his titles that wreak of exploitation, occuring on the death bed of the CD, no less. There is some quality, particularly in the sound and especially if you have one for awhile, but ultimately it's a chipping away of the legacy.

At the very least, we should all agree that between 5 and even 10 original albums essentially deserve continual status in the catalog but that's not the case. At this point, those who even buy CDs are being a rarer breed and to ask for just a smidgeon more respect for the better original titles doesn't see out of line to ask of Sony/BMG, which tends to release titles only marginally more respectful than the worst budget Hayride compilations.

midnightx wrote:
KiwiAlan wrote:Adding new compilations creates new products for retailers to order and display. It also gives scope for printed reviews of each new CD. The more product out there the more potential shelf space.It's a lot easier to sell new product rather than stagnet.

Really? Do retailers display all the new comps that BMG/Sony churns out every year? No, the new themed comps end up on the shelves with little fanfare and little-to-no marketing. Just more clutter on the shelves adding confusion to the consumer. Keep a few long-term comps on the shelves and market the catalogue and they will all move.

The Eagles' "GH Volume 1" never has been stagnet. Casual consumers/fans looking for a taste of The Eagles have that option to purchase. The music is what sells, not endless comps. You don't have:
The Eagles - GH Hits 1
The Eagles - GH Hits 2
The Eagles - Love Songs
The Eagles - A Touch Of Country
The Eagles - The Rock Songs
The Eagles - Ballads
The Eagles - A Touch Of Gold
The Eagles - Live
The Eagles - Live In America
The Eagles - An American Band
etc etc etc

Guess there are many ways to make money selling records. RCA/BMG/Sony moves Elvis product like used car sales men.


And just how uncurrent are the old titles? The old titles and covers are not in Chinese, and anyone buying an Elvis CD knows it's oldies music (that is, classic) and is under know illusion that it's the newly recorded. I think Midnightx makes a great point about the Eagles' legacy not being sliced and diced as Elvis' catalog has been.

Perhaps it still comes down to the fact that Elvis is a visual and cultural icon on a level beyond mere musical legacy, and to the "guardians" at BMG/Sony, it's hard to resist this sales-aspect to his legacy. This is a bit of an albatross, as it tends to encourage yet another title with a new cover, because after all, who could be immune from yet another cover shot of our boy wonder, with his baby blues asking "buy these songs yet again.."? :roll: :lol:

Oh well. Most of us praise the "Classic album" series on FTD but a junior program of some sort would not be out of line for a man who made RCA and it's successors rich many times over. If anything needs shoring up, it's Elvis' musical reputation, what with the "fruitcakes," "loonies," etc. all on annual parade... :lol:

All that negativity aside, I still relish FTD and the ever-powerful import world, thank god.
Last edited by Gregory Nolan Jr. on Thu Jul 26, 2007 8:36 pm, edited 3 times in total.

Thu Jul 26, 2007 7:59 pm

epf wrote:Well,

maybe that is the problem with Elvis: there is not a single Elvis, there are many Elvii.

Please contact a doctor (or at the very least an optician) immediately.

If we want things to change for the better, me must make sure FTD Dcontinues to succeed (boycott bootleggers?!) and 'educate' our near and dear ones.

Why not start by educating yourself? If you do some research you will find that bootleg titles do not merely offer simple duplication and boycotting them will only deprive you of a lot of good material which will NEVER be released by the FTD label.

Boycotting bootleggers will probably not happen, but if i am given a chance to choose between FTD and a bootleg, I know which one I will pick.

From your post above, it obviously won't be an informed choice.

Thu Jul 26, 2007 8:37 pm

IMO< I love everything on the EIN website.

And Ernie, all in all, we Love You, Babe! 8)

Thu Jul 26, 2007 8:57 pm

Greg Nolan -
To answer your question, you are incorrect in assuming that I have a "less-than-glowing feel for Elvis' musical / cultural impact via albums." In the singles dominated area when Elvis started, no one had a greater impact (except perhaps Sinatra) during the mid-50s to early 60s era. However, we are no longer in that era and those albums in that format are no longer relevant, in Elvis' case, except to hardcore fans or to those who grew up at that time. It doesn't matter if the content is heard in their original form or via a compilation to the average consumer, whom these compilations are targeted towards.

Thu Jul 26, 2007 9:05 pm

Each time you defend yourself against the charge, but then you turn around and state matter of factly that :we are no longer in that era" (what does that mean when one is discussing oldies??
:lol:

and those albums in that format are no longer relevant, in Elvis' case, except to hardcore fans or to those who grew up at that time.


No longer relevant? How about as dead as a doornail? Fans understand that Elvis isn't in the army now and tooling around in a '50s convertible, or that he's not "Back!" or "In Memphis" but as dead as can be in a material way.

Elvis had mass populariity and is not just a plaything of collectors. Check out the attics and basements (and hopefully) living rooms of America and your going to find these classic albums, if not there than in garage sales and the Salvation Army and used shops. Why hide a best-selling legacy as if it's shameful?


And how relevant is he to those not alive when he released them? This pining for new fans sometimes is built on a self-burying sense that makes me wonder why it's worth it. This isn't "Asia" or "Gerry & The Pacemakers" - it's Elvis Presley. What he touched turned to gold and that includes his albums. Let the "kids" (?) come to his legacy not the other way around.


It doesn't matter if the content is heard in their original form or via a compilation to the average consumer, whom these compilations are targeted towards


I"m not against all comps (that's a lost cause anyway!) but c'mon! The original form does matter and younger fans need not be coddled. Elvis' first album had him pictured in black & white on the cover. Ancient, huh? Get used to it, kids. :lol:

Thu Jul 26, 2007 9:22 pm

You seem to struggle with the idea of separating the material from the format in which it is enclosed. I am not talking about Elvis' music but the packaging that it came in. It (the original LP's) were valid 40 to 50 years ago but are not anymore. You have your right to disagree but I don't think that a person who heard Mean Woman Blues (for example) and liked it does not care if it is on the original LP. In fact, they may be disappointed by the less than stellar playing time on the Loving You disc, even with the bonus tracks. Put it on a compilation with higher quality tracks, a fancy cover, and slap a DSD sticker on the front and you (may) have a customer. I am not saying I necessarily agree but that is the way it is. The Elvis bins in stores are still full of copies of old CD's that haven't sold yet because they don't appeal to anyone but the hardcore fan (who already has everything several times over).

Thu Jul 26, 2007 9:37 pm

ronnyg wrote:You seem to struggle with the idea of separating the material from the format in which it is enclosed. I am not talking about Elvis' music but the packaging that it came in. It (the original LP's) were valid 40 to 50 years ago but are not anymore. You have your right to disagree but I don't think that a person who heard Mean Woman Blues (for example) and liked it does not care if it is on the original LP. In fact, they may be disappointed by the less than stellar playing time on the Loving You disc, even with the bonus tracks. Put it on a compilation with higher quality tracks, a fancy cover, and slap a DSD sticker on the front and you (may) have a customer. I am not saying I necessarily agree but that is the way it is. The Elvis bins in stores are still full of copies of old CD's that haven't sold yet because they don't appeal to anyone but the hardcore fan (who already has everything several times over).

The point is, if a casual fan hears Mean Woman Blues on one of the many compilations out there, they should be able to explore the catalogue further and check out the Loving You disc. That is what many hits and compilation packages do for most artists. It is a nice starting point and if the music is highly intriguing and the casual fan wants to dive deep into the catalogue, they can do so. With BMG/Sony, they aren't really giving the consumer that option unless the consumer wants to fork out the cash for FTD product. Back catalogue available on the shelves is not for hardcore fans that already have the material, back catalogue is a representation of the artist, a way for music fans to explore a particular artist's work that goes deeper than well-known hits and comps. That is the way it is for a lot of artists, Elvis' catalogue should be no different. He has one of the most influential and important bodies of work in music history, there is no reason to have it mostly available on compilations.

Thu Jul 26, 2007 9:51 pm

I think some of the back catalogue is there for those who wish to explore. Elvis Presley, Elvis, Loving You, the Gold Records series are there at a reduced price. It is a shame that Elvis Is Back, From Elvis In Memphis, Elvis
Country are not available (it can't be they sold that well when they were reissued with bonus material several years ago) but I think if someone wants to explore, the compilations that are there (such as the genre series from last year) have enough different material to keep someone going. Certainly those compilations contain stronger material than (in this case) some of the songs on the Loving You soundtrack. Also, a person could always download other material which is where things are going anyway. I agree that it would be nice if all of the original albums were out there and people bought them but the name of the game is to sell product. I think we are lucky that we have someone like Ernst to cater to those of us with the FTD label and keep the mainstream catalogue going for regular consumers.

Thu Jul 26, 2007 11:56 pm

Mike S wrote:Please contact a doctor (or at the very least an optician) immediately.

No need. You are the one seeing things not clearly, opting for a literal interpretation instead of the intended meaning.

Why not start by educating yourself? If you do some research you will find that bootleg titles do not merely offer simple duplication and boycotting them will only deprive you of a lot of good material which will NEVER be released by the FTD label.

Again, you seem to be the one not reading properly as i did not state that i boycott the bootleggers completely. I am well aware of the fact that trough the bootleggers things have come to us that otherwise would not have seen the light of day. Please read carefully before advising someone else to visit an optician. But i know you mean well and i largely agree.

From your post above, it obviously won't be an informed choice.

Again, read well before advising an optician. Besides, on a forum like this we can meet and discuss and learn. Without getting personal preferably.

Fri Jul 27, 2007 12:23 am

Why do car manufacturers produce new models every year.

To sell more cars and make profits.

Imagine if Ford or GM or whoever froze all new models and designs at 1977 and only made slight improvements?

Why, that would be like RCA never issueing a new Elvis album beyond 1977 and only make slight (DSD) improvements as the years roll by.

Yep that wouild make loads of money for RCA and their retailers.

Fri Jul 27, 2007 3:17 am

Rock Legend

You & I will have to agree to disagree.

All the best.

Nigel
http://www.elvisinfonet.com

Fri Jul 27, 2007 6:45 am

Rock Legend wrote:
Mike Eder wrote:EIN is interesting as are some of the fringe people they interview. Like it or not they are part of Elvis' legacy and I always felt the fact that there are people like these speaks strongly to how much a cultural impact Elvis really has made. They cover every aspect of Elvis so if you don't like one part of their site don't go.


That’s not the issue at all. I have praised the website on many occasions, and I consider Piers a friend. But the issue is that Nigel writes here that “Elvis continues to be largely viewed as a relic of a bygone age (tinged by overweight, white jumpsuited clones) rather than applauded for his musical catalog”.
An odd statement to say the least, coming from a person who often praises impersonators, including the “overweight, white jumpsuited clones”. If you honestly feel that the fruitcakes and the impersonators are an essential part of the Elvis legend, then there’s no reason questioning / regretting that it’s often these elements that get all the media attention – and not the music.


It's the music that matters most, but I personally think it is interesting that Elvis has become almost a Johnny Appleseed as far as the stories told about him. Elvis has become bigger then life, but if he wasn't actually as talented as he was he would have been forgotten years ago. The people that look down at Elvis never like his music anyways.