Anything about Elvis
More than 30 Million visitors can't be wrong

"Elvis at 70" in American Heritage Magazine

Sat Mar 01, 2014 10:40 pm

The text of the above article by Will Friedwald from the March 2005 edition of American Heritage Magazine is available to read over on Elvis Australia. Is there anyone out there who has the magazine and would be willing to scan in the pages of the actual article please?

Re: "Elvis at 70" in American Heritage Magazine

Sun Mar 02, 2014 2:40 am

poormadpeter wrote:The text of the above article by Will Friedwald from the March 2005 edition of American Heritage Magazine is available to read over on Elvis Australia. Is there anyone out there who has the magazine and would be willing to scan in the pages of the actual article please?


You know who would have hated to see that article? Elvis. And not just because it's written by a Wall Street Journal critic. ;-)

Re: "Elvis at 70" in American Heritage Magazine

Sun Mar 02, 2014 2:55 am

drjohncarpenter wrote:
poormadpeter wrote:The text of the above article by Will Friedwald from the March 2005 edition of American Heritage Magazine is available to read over on Elvis Australia. Is there anyone out there who has the magazine and would be willing to scan in the pages of the actual article please?


You know who would have hated to see that article? Elvis. And not just because it's written by a Wall Street Journal critic. ;-)


Why would he have hated it? It's a remarkable piece of writing by a fine critic that has the balls to think for himself rather than follow the crowd.

Re: "Elvis at 70" in American Heritage Magazine

Sun Mar 02, 2014 3:14 am

Until someone posts it, I don't know what you guys mean. A link?

rjm

Sent From My Phabulous Galaxy Note II Phablet Using Tapatalk 4

Re: "Elvis at 70" in American Heritage Magazine

Sun Mar 02, 2014 3:25 am

poormadpeter wrote:
drjohncarpenter wrote:You know who would have hated to see that article? Elvis. And not just because it's written by a Wall Street Journal critic. ;-)


Why would he have hated it? It's a remarkable piece of writing by a fine critic that has the balls to think for himself rather than follow the crowd.


There's nothing worst than a critic who lacks "balls." And one must need a huge pair to write for the Wall Street Journal. :D

Why would Presley have hated it?

Read the title again, slowly.

Re: "Elvis at 70" in American Heritage Magazine

Sun Mar 02, 2014 3:32 am

poormadpeter wrote:The text of the above article by Will Friedwald from the March 2005 edition of American Heritage Magazine is available to read over on Elvis Australia. Is there anyone out there who has the magazine and would be willing to scan in the pages of the actual article please?


We've had enough of know-it-alls treating Elvis, and rock and roll in general, condescendingly.

Let Friedwald stick to Sinatra.

We'll stick to Elvis, Larry Williams and Chuck Berry.

Sorry for the rudeness, poormadpeter, but that's how I feel.

Re: "Elvis at 70" in American Heritage Magazine

Sun Mar 02, 2014 3:46 am

Mister Moon wrote:
poormadpeter wrote:The text of the above article by Will Friedwald from the March 2005 edition of American Heritage Magazine is available to read over on Elvis Australia. Is there anyone out there who has the magazine and would be willing to scan in the pages of the actual article please?


We've had enough of know-it-alls treating Elvis, and rock and roll in general, condescendingly.

Let Friedwald stick to Sinatra.

We'll stick to Elvis, Larry Williams and Chuck Berry.

Sorry for the rudeness, poormadpeter, but that's how I feel.


You clearly haven't read the article in which he states how wonderful he thinks Elvis is, have you? It might be an idea to read it first, and then judge. It's a highly intelligent piece of writing that doesn't say what you might think.

Finally, in the summer of 2004, I decided to see what all the shaking was about. I got hold of RCA Records' four big Essential Masters boxes. By the time I finished listening to them, I was completely hooked. Seventeen CDs were hardly enough. I was amazed by what I heard. After a lifetime of not getting it, I finally experienced my very own Elvis epiphany, and the mystery of why he is considered one of the great pop performers of all time was revealed to me. (Friedwald)


http://www.elvis.com.au/presley/elvis_at_70.shtml#sthash.QJ4vQ718.dpbs

Re: "Elvis at 70" in American Heritage Magazine

Sun Mar 02, 2014 4:02 am

poormadpeter wrote:
Finally, in the summer of 2004, I decided to see what all the shaking was about. I got hold of RCA Records' four big Essential Masters boxes. By the time I finished listening to them, I was completely hooked. Seventeen CDs were hardly enough. I was amazed by what I heard. After a lifetime of not getting it, I finally experienced my very own Elvis epiphany, and the mystery of why he is considered one of the great pop performers of all time was revealed to me. (Friedwald)


http://www.elvis.com.au/presley/elvis_at_70.shtml


Rather than go to that reprehensible site, I suggest anyone who is interested stay right here and revisit this January 2010 FECC topic from Revelator, who kindly included the entire article in his opening post:

"Elvis at 70" -- A Jazz Critic's Take on Elvis
http://www.elvis-collectors.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=50160

---

As for Friedwald, our Wall Street Journal rock/jazz critic, and his Elvis article, anyone who doesn't see how the advent of Elvis in 1956 changed everything is someone whose opinion, however "positive," is seriously flawed. He spends a lot of time essentially trying to diminish Presley's greatest decade, no surprise for a critic whose sensibilities and preferences exist outside the rock, blues, country, pop and gospel which Elvis draws upon at Sun and RCA in the 1950s.

In many ways, he's just a half-baked Steve Allen, trying to make sense of the Tupelo Flash. Or dismiss his 1950s persona entirely.

Such critics never have, and never will.

Re: "Elvis at 70" in American Heritage Magazine

Sun Mar 02, 2014 4:15 am

drjohncarpenter wrote:
poormadpeter wrote:
Finally, in the summer of 2004, I decided to see what all the shaking was about. I got hold of RCA Records' four big Essential Masters boxes. By the time I finished listening to them, I was completely hooked. Seventeen CDs were hardly enough. I was amazed by what I heard. After a lifetime of not getting it, I finally experienced my very own Elvis epiphany, and the mystery of why he is considered one of the great pop performers of all time was revealed to me. (Friedwald)


http://www.elvis.com.au/presley/elvis_at_70.shtml


Rather than go to that reprehensible site, I suggest anyone who is interested stay right here and revisit this January 2010 FECC topic from Revelator, who kindly included the entire article in his opening post:

"Elvis at 70" -- A Jazz Critic's Take on Elvis
http://www.elvis-collectors.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=50160

---

As for Friedwald, our Wall Street Journal rock/jazz critic, and his Elvis article, anyone who doesn't see how the advent of Elvis in 1956 changed everything is someone whose opinion, however "positive," is seriously flawed. He spends a lot of time essentially trying to diminish Presley's greatest decade, no surprise for a critic whose sensibilities and preferences exist outside the rock, blues, country, pop and gospel which Elvis draws upon at Sun and RCA in the 1950s.

In many ways, he's just a half-baked Steve Allen, trying to make sense of the Tupelo Flash. Or dismiss his 1950s persona entirely.

Such critics never have, and never will.


On the contrary, he never diminished the 1950s, but is willing to spend time looking at the eras that are usual dismissed by rock critics - and there is far more to Elvis than rock. It's rather pleasant to see a light shone on worthy performances such as Almost in Love. What you feel to appreciate is that different people can appreciate different styles of music. That's one thing you have never got. Never have, and never will.

And as for the link to FECC, obviously the search engine wasn't working this afternoon as it didn't show up when searched.

Re: "Elvis at 70" in American Heritage Magazine

Sun Mar 02, 2014 4:53 am

poormadpeter wrote:On the contrary, he never diminished the 1950s, but is willing to spend time looking at the eras that are usual dismissed by rock critics - and there is far more to Elvis than rock. It's rather pleasant to see a light shone on worthy performances such as Almost in Love.


Thank you for proving my point a hundredfold. ;-)

Re: "Elvis at 70" in American Heritage Magazine

Sun Mar 02, 2014 5:05 am

drjohncarpenter wrote:
poormadpeter wrote:On the contrary, he never diminished the 1950s, but is willing to spend time looking at the eras that are usual dismissed by rock critics - and there is far more to Elvis than rock. It's rather pleasant to see a light shone on worthy performances such as Almost in Love.


Thank you for proving my point a hundredfold. ;-)


By admitting a genre other than rock exists? A good job Elvis did too, or we wouldn't be discussing him.

Re: "Elvis at 70" in American Heritage Magazine

Sun Mar 02, 2014 5:07 am

poormadpeter wrote:
drjohncarpenter wrote:
poormadpeter wrote:On the contrary, he never diminished the 1950s, but is willing to spend time looking at the eras that are usual dismissed by rock critics - and there is far more to Elvis than rock. It's rather pleasant to see a light shone on worthy performances such as Almost in Love.


Thank you for proving my point a hundredfold. ;-)


By admitting a genre other than rock exists? A good job Elvis did too, or we wouldn't be discussing him.


Someone, please help this man. ;-)

Re: "Elvis at 70" in American Heritage Magazine

Sun Mar 02, 2014 5:09 am

You are a strange one, Doc. We get along fine for weeks, and then you act like a buffoon for no apparent reason and then the goodwill that has been built up is tossed out of the window. Perhaps you just like it that way.

Re: "Elvis at 70" in American Heritage Magazine

Sun Mar 02, 2014 7:49 am

poormadpeter wrote:You are a strange one, Doc. We get along fine for weeks, and then you act like a buffoon for no apparent reason and then the goodwill that has been built up is tossed out of the window. Perhaps you just like it that way.

No he just like the "Facts". :wink:

Re: "Elvis at 70" in American Heritage Magazine

Sun Mar 02, 2014 7:53 am

poormadpeter wrote:You are a strange one, Doc. We get along fine for weeks, and then you act like a buffoon for no apparent reason and then the goodwill that has been built up is tossed out of the window. Perhaps you just like it that way.


Oh, come on, man. If you're going to post a topic that solicits opinions, they are not all going to mirror yours. Calling names is schoolyard behavior.

Re: "Elvis at 70" in American Heritage Magazine

Sun Mar 02, 2014 11:25 am

"Perhaps Presley was too nice and civil a guy. Perhaps to stick to your standards in Hollywood, you had to be something of a gangster."

I liked this quote. But somehow the comparison between Elvis and Sinatra in the article seems forced. And it's strange to me that Sinatra mentioned "Elvis never grown as an artist". I think this is a lie, Frank after 1960 appreciated Elvis as an artist.

Re: "Elvis at 70" in American Heritage Magazine

Sun Mar 02, 2014 1:13 pm

I didn't necessarily find it entirely dismissive, but I do think the writer frequently loses focus on his own points. The piece drifts in a variety of directions without supporting a principal argument. He posits the argument, and then undercuts it.

If Elvis is really a crooner at heart, how to explain the blues and gospel? His description of "You'll Never Walk Alone" ruptures his own argument. Or the argument he was attempting. I agree it's very well-written.

And he is, of course, somewhat hobbled by his own disdain for rock music, and so in appreciating Elvis, desires to move Elvis ANYWHERE but in the direction of rock and roll.

In so doing, he cannot account for a later record such as "Promised Land" which is rock and nothing else. Dean Martin couldn't pull that one off.

And like many, he takes Lennon's comment way too literally. We know there was good music before the rock era. But that wasn't what Lennon meant. Before Elvis, he heard nothing that spoke to HIM. He heard nothing that said "this can be a new kind of world, where the old barriers just don't matter anymore." This spoke to youth, who saw possibilities they never before considered. Or, rather, they *heard* those possibilities.

Maybe it's just my perspective, but I think Elvis really DID want to change the world. Because somehow he realized, in his brief but very distinct life experience, that the world into which he was born needed "shaking up." So, because he could, that's what he did.

Among other things.

rjm

P.S. -- To pmp, who seems sad. Look, he's a rocker. A stone rocker. More than me, I guess, because I prefer the Comeback music to the early RCA music, even if it didn't change the world. (Elvis was just better in 1968 and 1969 than in the glory years, for me.) You really love the real old-fashioned stuff. You do. You really like Bing Crosby! (I just picked a name.) Not John Lydon. I can't see how that can change. But "goodwill" can still exist, I think.

Sent From My Phabulous Galaxy Note II Phablet Using Tapatalk 4

Re: "Elvis at 70" in American Heritage Magazine

Sun Mar 02, 2014 1:45 pm

poormadpeter wrote:
Mister Moon wrote:
poormadpeter wrote:The text of the above article by Will Friedwald from the March 2005 edition of American Heritage Magazine is available to read over on Elvis Australia. Is there anyone out there who has the magazine and would be willing to scan in the pages of the actual article please?


We've had enough of know-it-alls treating Elvis, and rock and roll in general, condescendingly.

Let Friedwald stick to Sinatra.

We'll stick to Elvis, Larry Williams and Chuck Berry.

Sorry for the rudeness, poormadpeter, but that's how I feel.


You clearly haven't read the article in which he states how wonderful he thinks Elvis is, have you? It might be an idea to read it first, and then judge. It's a highly intelligent piece of writing that doesn't say what you might think.

Finally, in the summer of 2004, I decided to see what all the shaking was about. I got hold of RCA Records' four big Essential Masters boxes. By the time I finished listening to them, I was completely hooked. Seventeen CDs were hardly enough. I was amazed by what I heard. After a lifetime of not getting it, I finally experienced my very own Elvis epiphany, and the mystery of why he is considered one of the great pop performers of all time was revealed to me. (Friedwald)


http://www.elvis.com.au/presley/elvis_at_70.shtml#sthash.QJ4vQ718.dpbs


I have indeed read the article, poormadpeter, that's why I wrote what I wrote.

The paragraph you have highlighted serves only to underline my thoughts on this guy. He's clearly tongue-in-cheek there. We don't need these people giving their opinions on Elvis. That's why I wrote what I wrote, too. If somebody, at 44, who is a professional music writer, has still not got it, he never will, no matter how many damn box sets he decides to listen to.

He sounds like a bored weirdo who steps out of his Sinatra / Coltrane driven world to look upon the vulgarities some other people spend their entire lives on. He really sounds like that.

Friedwald, get hot or go home !

Re: "Elvis at 70" in American Heritage Magazine

Sun Mar 02, 2014 1:50 pm

Wow!

rjm

Sent From My Phabulous Galaxy Note II Phablet Using Tapatalk 4

Re: "Elvis at 70" in American Heritage Magazine

Sun Mar 02, 2014 1:51 pm

drjohncarpenter wrote:As for Friedwald, our Wall Street Journal rock/jazz critic, and his Elvis article, anyone who doesn't see how the advent of Elvis in 1956 changed everything is someone whose opinion, however "positive," is seriously flawed. He spends a lot of time essentially trying to diminish Presley's greatest decade, no surprise for a critic whose sensibilities and preferences exist outside the rock, blues, country, pop and gospel which Elvis draws upon at Sun and RCA in the 1950s.

In many ways, he's just a half-baked Steve Allen, trying to make sense of the Tupelo Flash. Or dismiss his 1950s persona entirely.

Such critics never have, and never will.


rjm wrote:And he is, of course, somewhat hobbled by his own disdain for rock music, and so in appreciating Elvis, desires to move Elvis ANYWHERE but in the direction of rock and roll.

In so doing, he cannot account for a later record such as "Promised Land" which is rock and nothing else. Dean Martin couldn't pull that one off.

And like many, he takes Lennon's comment way too literally. We know there was good music before the rock era. But that wasn't what Lennon meant. Before Elvis, he heard nothing that spoke to HIM. He heard nothing that said "this can be a new kind of world, where the old barriers just don't matter anymore." This spoke to youth, who saw possibilities they never before considered. Or, rather, they *heard* those possibilities.

Maybe it's just my perspective, but I think Elvis really DID want to change the world. Because somehow he realized, in his brief but very distinct life experience, that the world into which he was born needed "shaking up." So, because he could, that's what he did.

Among other things.


I agree with these opinions, too.

Re: "Elvis at 70" in American Heritage Magazine

Sun Mar 02, 2014 2:55 pm

Good article, although I don't agree wholeheartedly to every single point. There's more than a slight tendency on this forum to praise rock'n roll and r&b, and at he same time display a lack of understanding and tolerance for other music genre. I think maybe that can explain some of the the criticism of the article in this thread.

Re: "Elvis at 70" in American Heritage Magazine

Sun Mar 02, 2014 5:56 pm

drjohncarpenter wrote:
poormadpeter wrote:You are a strange one, Doc. We get along fine for weeks, and then you act like a buffoon for no apparent reason and then the goodwill that has been built up is tossed out of the window. Perhaps you just like it that way.


Oh, come on, man. If you're going to post a topic that solicits opinions, they are not all going to mirror yours. Calling names is schoolyard behavior.


I never solicited an opinion, I asked if anyone had the original article. I'm not quite sure what opening post you were reading?

Re:

Sun Mar 02, 2014 6:01 pm


P.S. -- To pmp, who seems sad. Look, he's a rocker. A stone rocker. More than me, I guess, because I prefer the Comeback music to the early RCA music, even if it didn't change the world. (Elvis was just better in 1968 and 1969 than in the glory years, for me.) You really love the real old-fashioned stuff. You do. You really like Bing Crosby! (I just picked a name.) Not John Lydon. I can't see how that can change. But "goodwill" can still exist, I think.

Sent From My Phabulous Galaxy Note II Phablet Using Tapatalk 4


This has to be one of the condescending, patronising posts I have read on here in a very long time. I seem sad?! And no, I don't really like Bing Crosby, I never have. I do like swing music, though, and jazz - music which is selling by the bucket load at the moment via the resurgence in the genre thanks to Buble, who has just had 4 #1 albums on the bounce in the US. To say jazz and swing is old fashioned is no different to saying rock is old fashioned - its heyday was sixty years ago, but it's still going strong.

Re: "Elvis at 70" in American Heritage Magazine

Sun Mar 02, 2014 6:21 pm

Mister Moon wrote:
poormadpeter wrote:
Mister Moon wrote:
poormadpeter wrote:The text of the above article by Will Friedwald from the March 2005 edition of American Heritage Magazine is available to read over on Elvis Australia. Is there anyone out there who has the magazine and would be willing to scan in the pages of the actual article please?


We've had enough of know-it-alls treating Elvis, and rock and roll in general, condescendingly.

Let Friedwald stick to Sinatra.

We'll stick to Elvis, Larry Williams and Chuck Berry.

Sorry for the rudeness, poormadpeter, but that's how I feel.


You clearly haven't read the article in which he states how wonderful he thinks Elvis is, have you? It might be an idea to read it first, and then judge. It's a highly intelligent piece of writing that doesn't say what you might think.

Finally, in the summer of 2004, I decided to see what all the shaking was about. I got hold of RCA Records' four big Essential Masters boxes. By the time I finished listening to them, I was completely hooked. Seventeen CDs were hardly enough. I was amazed by what I heard. After a lifetime of not getting it, I finally experienced my very own Elvis epiphany, and the mystery of why he is considered one of the great pop performers of all time was revealed to me. (Friedwald)


http://www.elvis.com.au/presley/elvis_at_70.shtml#sthash.QJ4vQ718.dpbs


I have indeed read the article, poormadpeter, that's why I wrote what I wrote.

The paragraph you have highlighted serves only to underline my thoughts on this guy. He's clearly tongue-in-cheek there. We don't need these people giving their opinions on Elvis. That's why I wrote what I wrote, too. If somebody, at 44, who is a professional music writer, has still not got it, he never will, no matter how many damn box sets he decides to listen to.

He sounds like a bored weirdo who steps out of his Sinatra / Coltrane driven world to look upon the vulgarities some other people spend their entire lives on. He really sounds like that.

Friedwald, get hot or go home !


Clearly you know sod all about Friedwald, or the majority of his writing.

I find it amazing here sometimes. Here you are on a board where people are decrying the fact that the Grammys don't appreciate Elvis, or that Sinatra didn't like Elvis. Here comes a man who put up his hands and says, "you know what? I was wrong", and you still don't like it.

Musical genres co-exist - why there is such an obsession that one has to be better than the other, or that someone who is an expert in one genre can't give their views on another is a complete mystery. If genres didn't co-exist, Elvis would never have got famous, because he wouldn't have been able to fuse country and rockabilly together to make his sound. And he wouldn't have been able to fuse jazz and pop in order to record Fever.

Who were Elvis's idols? DEAN MARTIN and MARIO LANZA! In some way you seem to think you are "protecting" Elvis in some way from the writing of an expert in a field of music that Elvis adored. Blue Moon was one of the first songs he recorded, for crying out loud! Are You Lonesome Tonight was one of his biggest hits. In the home recordings he sang If I Loved You, Make Believe, Be My Love, Fools Rush In, It's a Sin to Tell a Lie and others. ALL of them associated with singers such as Sinatra, Martin, Fitzgerald and others. If you can't hear an influence of these songs and the singers of the Great American Songbook in Elvis's performances of I Need Somebody to Lean On, Almost in Love, Its Now or Never and others then, frankly, you must be hearing something different to many of us.

Two of Elvis's albums were called Something for Everybody and Elvis for Everyone. That a jazz critic can admit that he can find much to enjoy in the recordings of Elvis shows just how wide Elvis cast his musical net. To attempt to somehow exclude people and writers for the music they like aside from Elvis is ridiculous, petty, and childish. If you want to exclude jazz lovers from writing about and enjoying Elvis, then perhaps I should just pack my bags and go now. OR you can accept that someone more distanced from the rock point of view can bring something unique to the discussion. That's exactly what Friedwald does. He links Elvis with Armstrong, therefore putting him on a pedestal with the other greatest innovator in popular music. That's some accolade. He also refutes the idea that Elvis's important music-making stopped at the end of the 1950s, stating that he continued to develop until the bitter end - give me ONE other writer who has been able and willing to say that and back it up. Jazz is built upon the blues. The blues, along with gospel, were the backbone of Elvis's music-making. There's your link between the two genres right there.

Re: "Elvis at 70" in American Heritage Magazine

Sun Mar 02, 2014 7:12 pm

Elvis singing the great Amrican songbook. Now that would have been something. Anyone know that Doc Pomus song for Ben E King that was mentioned?