Off Topic Messages

Re: If you thought Elvis fans were narrow minded....

Thu Aug 11, 2011 12:03 am

KingOfTheJungle wrote:
likethebike wrote:Richard was not in any way a formative influence on Elvis but one could argue that the rasp Elvis employed on tracks like "Jailhouse Rock" and "Hound Dog" was influenced by Richard in the way that the Beatles and acts like the Byrds influenced each other back and forth in the 1950s. So one element of Elvis' style was influenced by Richard IMO.

Lonely- I like all your posts but Elvis fans are not any more narrow minded than other fans. Some of it, that you see on this board, seems to come out when some writers feel the need to dump on Elvis in preference of their favorites. And when you do that in a forum that places of Elvis as a favorite, it doesn't play exceptionally well. However, I think what you see on the Richard board and what you see in many of the lesser posts in forums like this is a cultural thing. Many writers do this in their writing. They make the case for one artist or one group of artists or style of artists by dismissing other artists. And also in the need to paint "X" artists as the greatest of all time. In fact the hyperbole of a lot of criticism sets up a model where if an artist isn't "the greatest" than that artist is sh[*][*]. It kind of sets up the idea of pop music as full contact spectator sport. In the tradition of the winner take all sports culture, it also sets up an ideal that completely belittles the value of good work. The way the history is so often framed the legitimate value of a work of a lesser performer like say Ricky Nelson is disregarded simply because Ricky Nelson is not the Beatles, Bob Dylan or Elvis. And it's only worth really talking about the Big Boys.


Great points, ltb. It's almost as if some Elvis fans have battered spouse syndrome. Elvis has been so beat up by the rock critical establishment, they feel the constant need to apologize for this trait or that one. No one needs to apologize for Elvis, just make a case for him plain and simple.

intheghetto wrote:
Lonely Summer wrote: Fats Domino, Chuck Berry, Elvis, Carl Perkins, Bo Diddley, all these guys deserve credit for their contributions, of course I have also heard Richard praise these guys as giant talents, when asked his favorite Chuck Berry song in "Hail Hail Rock 'n' Roll", he says "all of them!" And he also deserves credit for recognizing the talent in people like James Brown, Jimi Hendrix and Billy Preston, all of whom worked in his band at one time or another.


Totally agree. I guess the question has always been why did Elvis get the lion's share when it came to 'the king of rock and roll' stuff? The obvious points are that he was probably the most "camera ready" of the bunch. By today's standards he would be a GQ model no question. I also think it's because Elvis was, for lack of a better definition, the most animated performer and made a huge impact with that. He played a little guitar, but his music didn't rely on it. He left that to Scotty, Bill, and DJ. Elvis wasn't tied down to an instrument the way Chuck Berry and Richard or Fats were. Jerry Lee Lewis did a good job of moving around on stage, but Elvis probably had the most freedom out of all of them. The other thing that kept Elvis at the forefront of all his 50s contemporaries was that his music evolved over the years. It may not have been what the fans wanted necessarily, but his material did change. He may have done all of his 50s hits when he performed '69 through '70 but he still had a well of current stuff to draw from. Little Richard fans, Chuck Berry fans, and the rest of them went to see them play to hear the original 50s songs. Unlike Elvis, and as great as they were/are, they were trapped in the era that made them legendary.


Good points all, but I want to add an essential one (that gets overlooked by alot of critics) in terms of both presentation and vocal performance, Elvis was the most overlty-sexualized performer of the era. This made him both the most attractive to repressed teenagers, and the biggest lightening rod to parents and critics. There seems to be a school of thought that Elvis's movements were simply mimicking what black performers were doing at the time, but they never got to do this on TV because of their race. I don't buy this. None of the post-1956 video that exists on Richard, Berry, Diddley, etc would suggest anything akin to the "bump and grind" that was so despised by critics from Elvis's 1956 Milton Berle appearance. Alanna Nash makes a persuasive case that the Presley moves were just as influenced by the sexy nature of female dancers/strippers as they were black performers or (the oft cited) pentecostal church way of worship.

But it wasn't just his stage moves or his good looks, it was also vocal delivery. Richard had the gospel fervor, Berry and Domino were excellent songwriters with an infectious delivery, but Elvis was almost singular in his ability to communicate sex vocally. When he sings "the things that we two could share, would make my dreams come true", the way he sings it makes let's you know exactly what he's talking about. Then you have the blatant onomatopoeias such as the "Stay -ay-aaayyy" in Any Way You Want Me, or the "ooh" "ahh" call and response at the end of Such A Night. Elvis's catalog is filled with examples of this, and that's one of the reasons he was described as "one great big hunk of forbidden fruit".

The only performer that comes close to matching Elvis in this area is Jerry Lee Lewis, and as you pointed out, his stage performance (being tied to a piano) limited what he was able to do. I think it was Lester Bangs (someone correct me if I'm wrong) who once wrote that "Elvis promised every woman in America a good orgasm...and he delivered". That, more than any other reason, is why Elvis became both the lightning rod and the "King".
I completely disagree with Alanna Nash's assumption that Elvis danced like a female dancer/stripper. If a woman ever danced like that I'd wonder what was wrong with her, if she was mentally imbalanced or having a massive seizure. I also don’t see how his singing voice is sexual either.

Not everything about Elvis was sexual. I think that was the fantasy, the label that the public slapped on him because they just couldn't picture him as a normal guy who loved music and women. The female side of the public likes to place specific guys on a pedestal, ones who are making a lot of money, good looking, popular and difficult to obtain without fierce competition. Women love the idea of Elvis, but their fantasy is truly unrealistic and does not define Elvis. The media also kept shoving down the public’s throat that Elvis was an overly sexualized punk corrupting girls and that's the only thing people saw. They constantly prejudged Elvis because they didn't know him and they had nothing better to do with their time. I don't see how Elvis' dancing is sexual and not all of his songs are flirtatious, only a small piece of his catalog contains flirtation. There is nothing sexual or flirtatious about the many songs of love, loss of love, missing someone and separation. It was the public that labeled Elvis something that he wasn't, not Elvis himself. He always had to defend himself and constantly tell people to stop with the labels, but of course people label what they don't understand so they never stopped. His words went through one ear and out the other. They even labeled him "King" or "King of Rock n' Roll" and other entertainers were jealous, which I find to be absurd because Elvis wasn't the one who made up those labels.

There seems to be a school of thought that Elvis's movements were simply mimicking what black performers were doing at the time, but they never got to do this on TV because of their race. I don't buy this.


I not only completely disagree with you, but I think your statement is absurd. Elvis was heavily influenced by blacks at the hot spots of Memphis where he would go with his friends. He was also heavily influenced by blacks in the entertainment business. That being said, you won't find all of his influences in the entertainment business, but on the streets where he was always noticing what went on. Memphis was a goldmine for music, musical influence, dance influence and the clothing styles Elvis picked up. He wasn't stupid. He experienced so much on the streets that we don't know about. But he has said on many occasions that he had many influences and even gave examples that were just from well known entertainers. Blacks weren't as well received; they weren't always taken seriously, especially when you watch old footage where black entertainers were performing for an all white audience. That was as much of an embarrassment as Elvis singing to animals. Granted, most of the audiences danced and looked like they were having a good time, but that's not the point. They were being entertained by court jesters and tried way too hard to be cool because they were being recorded.

Re: If you thought Elvis fans were narrow minded....

Thu Aug 11, 2011 1:23 am

KHoots wrote:
brian wrote:...That doesn't mean Little Richard was an influence. All it means was Elvis needed songs to fill an album and he like Richard's music enough to cover it...


That reasoning is a little simplistic. If he liked Richard enough to cover the songs, it stands to reason he had some influence on him, don't you think?


No.

It doesn't necessarily mean that.

Re: If you thought Elvis fans were narrow minded....

Thu Aug 11, 2011 3:55 am

brian wrote:
KHoots wrote:
brian wrote:...That doesn't mean Little Richard was an influence. All it means was Elvis needed songs to fill an album and he like Richard's music enough to cover it...


That reasoning is a little simplistic. If he liked Richard enough to cover the songs, it stands to reason he had some influence on him, don't you think?


No.

It doesn't necessarily mean that.


So Little Richard had no influence on Elvis....who did then force Tutti Frutti, Rip It Up,Long Tall Sally and Rready Teddy down his throat. Even performing two of them on TV. Performing a filler song on Ed Sullivan...pull the other one.

Elvis recorded more hits by Little Richard than hits by any other artist in the 50's

More songs than Crudup....are you saying he had no influence?

Re: If you thought Elvis fans were narrow minded....

Thu Aug 11, 2011 11:26 am

KiwiAlan wrote:
brian wrote:
KHoots wrote:
brian wrote:...That doesn't mean Little Richard was an influence. All it means was Elvis needed songs to fill an album and he like Richard's music enough to cover it...


That reasoning is a little simplistic. If he liked Richard enough to cover the songs, it stands to reason he had some influence on him, don't you think?


No.

It doesn't necessarily mean that.


So Little Richard had no influence on Elvis....who did then force Tutti Frutti, Rip It Up,Long Tall Sally and Rready Teddy down his throat. Even performing two of them on TV. Performing a filler song on Ed Sullivan...pull the other one.

Elvis recorded more hits by Little Richard than hits by any other artist in the 50's

More songs than Crudup....are you saying he had no influence?


I'm saying just because you cover someone's songs doesn't mean they are a influence on you beyond your liking of their songs.

For example Elvis liked those Olvia Newton John songs that he covered but she wasn't a musical influence on Elvis.

What i mean by musical influence is that Lonely Summer originally suggested that Little Richard had some type of influence on Elvis' own songs or style.

Little Richard covered ''Hound dog'', but Elvis wasn't a musical influence on him.

Re: If you thought Elvis fans were narrow minded....

Thu Aug 11, 2011 12:49 pm

brian wrote:
KiwiAlan wrote:
brian wrote:
KHoots wrote:
brian wrote:...That doesn't mean Little Richard was an influence. All it means was Elvis needed songs to fill an album and he like Richard's music enough to cover it...


That reasoning is a little simplistic. If he liked Richard enough to cover the songs, it stands to reason he had some influence on him, don't you think?


No.

It doesn't necessarily mean that.


So Little Richard had no influence on Elvis....who did then force Tutti Frutti, Rip It Up,Long Tall Sally and Rready Teddy down his throat. Even performing two of them on TV. Performing a filler song on Ed Sullivan...pull the other one.

Elvis recorded more hits by Little Richard than hits by any other artist in the 50's

More songs than Crudup....are you saying he had no influence?


I'm saying just because you cover someone's songs doesn't mean they are a influence on you beyond your liking of their songs.

For example Elvis liked those Olvia Newton John songs that he covered but she wasn't a musical influence on Elvis.

What i mean by musical influence is that Lonely Summer originally suggested that Little Richard had some type of influence on Elvis' own songs or style.

Little Richard covered ''Hound dog'', but Elvis wasn't a musical influence on him.



Have it your way then........no one, but no one had an influence on Elvis Presley. :D

Re: If you thought Elvis fans were narrow minded....

Thu Aug 11, 2011 6:26 pm

Elvisfan10 wrote:I completely disagree with Alanna Nash's assumption that Elvis danced like a female dancer/stripper. If a woman ever danced like that I'd wonder what was wrong with her, if she was mentally imbalanced or having a massive seizure. I also don’t see how his singing voice is sexual either.

Not everything about Elvis was sexual. I think that was the fantasy, the label that the public slapped on him because they just couldn't picture him as a normal guy who loved music and women. The female side of the public likes to place specific guys on a pedestal, ones who are making a lot of money, good looking, popular and difficult to obtain without fierce competition. Women love the idea of Elvis, but their fantasy is truly unrealistic and does not define Elvis. The media also kept shoving down the public’s throat that Elvis was an overly sexualized punk corrupting girls and that's the only thing people saw. They constantly prejudged Elvis because they didn't know him and they had nothing better to do with their time. I don't see how Elvis' dancing is sexual and not all of his songs are flirtatious, only a small piece of his catalog contains flirtation. There is nothing sexual or flirtatious about the many songs of love, loss of love, missing someone and separation. It was the public that labeled Elvis something that he wasn't, not Elvis himself. He always had to defend himself and constantly tell people to stop with the labels, but of course people label what they don't understand so they never stopped. His words went through one ear and out the other. They even labeled him "King" or "King of Rock n' Roll" and other entertainers were jealous, which I find to be absurd because Elvis wasn't the one who made up those labels.


Well, I think if you feel this way, you're just denying reality. There is a certain lithe grace to Elvis's moves that seems akin to a striptease, and I think Nash is on solid ground making the connection. Not only that but one of Elvis's girlfriends in the book (I think Kay Wheeler) tells a story about teaching Elvis some dance moves that he later used, so to deny that there is a certain feminine or androgynous component to Elvis is just overlooking the obvious. This is a guy who wore eye makeup just hanging out after all.

And do you really not hear the sexuality subtly communicated in Elvis' voice even in love songs as seemingly innocuous as Any Way You Want Me and Love Me? Because, let me tell you, it's there. And it's more than just some women fantasizing about it, Nash makes a compelling case (through stories Elvis related to guys like Fike and Lacker) that concepts of sex and music were linked in his mind from a very early age, and I see no real reason to disbelieve them, especially when it's perfectly in keeping with Elvis's public persona in the 50's. It wasn't as if he were trying to corrupt America's youth, it's just part of who he was. Elvis would always affect the humble country boy in interviews, and that part of him is equally sincere, but do you really think he didn't know what he was singing on the Dorsey Brothers show when he talked about the "one eyed cat, peepin' in the seafood store"? The way he sings "I can look at you, tell you ain't no child no more" tells me he did.

There seems to be a school of thought that Elvis's movements were simply mimicking what black performers were doing at the time, but they never got to do this on TV because of their race. I don't buy this.


Elvisfan10 wrote:I not only completely disagree with you, but I think your statement is absurd. [b]Elvis was heavily influenced by blacks at the hot spots of Memphis where he would go with his friends.He was also heavily influenced by blacks in the entertainment business. That being said, you won't find all of his influences in the entertainment business, but on the streets where he was always noticing what went on. Memphis was a goldmine for music, musical influence, dance influence and the clothing styles Elvis picked up. He wasn't stupid. He experienced so much on the streets that we don't know about. But he has said on many occasions that he had many influences and even gave examples that were just from well known entertainers. Blacks weren't as well received; they weren't always taken seriously, especially when you watch old footage where black entertainers were performing for an all white audience. That was as much of an embarrassment as Elvis singing to animals. Granted, most of the audiences danced and looked like they were having a good time, but that's not the point. They were being entertained by court jesters and tried way too hard to be cool because they were being recorded.


I think you misunderstand my point. I'm not arguing that Elvis was not influenced by black performers. He certainly was, and that influence is an integral part of what made his style unique. And his style of dress was certainly influenced by Beale Street musicians, as well as James Dean. No doubt about that. I'm arguing that his style of dance has little to do with that influence. There is little evidence to support the idea. I've seen the archival video of people dancing on Beale, and I am a big fan of many of the same black performers Elvis loved, and I can tell you, they didn't move the way Elvis did. They had a very different style. It was their own and it was cool. Look at the 8mm clips of Muddy and Howlin Wolf that were shot in Chicago in the 50's. Nothing like what Elvis was doing. So when critics say he moved like a black performer, I don't think they're on solid ground. Nash provides examples of where Elvis learned to dance, the other argument relies mostly on assumption. I'm not the only one who feels this way, either. Hank Ballard, of the fabulous Midnighters, who I think knows a thing or two about how both black and white Americans in the 50's danced, has said he never saw a black man move like Elvis.

Re: If you thought Elvis fans were narrow minded....

Thu Aug 11, 2011 6:37 pm

i got to agree with you..his moves were just natural and very differant than any others.

Re: If you thought Elvis fans were narrow minded....

Thu Aug 11, 2011 8:07 pm

KiwiAlan wrote:
brian wrote:
KiwiAlan wrote:
brian wrote:
KHoots wrote:
brian wrote:...That doesn't mean Little Richard was an influence. All it means was Elvis needed songs to fill an album and he like Richard's music enough to cover it...


That reasoning is a little simplistic. If he liked Richard enough to cover the songs, it stands to reason he had some influence on him, don't you think?


No.

It doesn't necessarily mean that.


So Little Richard had no influence on Elvis....who did then force Tutti Frutti, Rip It Up,Long Tall Sally and Rready Teddy down his throat. Even performing two of them on TV. Performing a filler song on Ed Sullivan...pull the other one.

Elvis recorded more hits by Little Richard than hits by any other artist in the 50's

More songs than Crudup....are you saying he had no influence?


I'm saying just because you cover someone's songs doesn't mean they are a influence on you beyond your liking of their songs.

For example Elvis liked those Olvia Newton John songs that he covered but she wasn't a musical influence on Elvis.

What i mean by musical influence is that Lonely Summer originally suggested that Little Richard had some type of influence on Elvis' own songs or style.

Little Richard covered ''Hound dog'', but Elvis wasn't a musical influence on him.



Have it your way then........no one, but no one had an influence on Elvis Presley. :D


I didn't say that Alan.

Elvis certainly had musical influences just not Little Richard.

Elvis was influenced by Jake Hess and Roy Hamilton but not Richard.

Re: If you thought Elvis fans were narrow minded....

Thu Aug 11, 2011 8:31 pm

The problem with Alanna Nash and her claims of women teaching Elvis' dance moves is she just takes their word for it and writes it down in her book.

Tura Satana came out of the woodwork after Elvis died claiming that she taught him some of his dance moves, was a close advisor and taught him other things as well.

The problem is Tura claimed to have been so close to Elvis but no one around him recalls them ever meeting much less her being a mentor and romantically involved with him.

Her stories of where she met him and when she taught him these moves are suspect because Elvis was already doing those things when Tura says she met him.

I know Elvis and Kay Wheeler met but it's hard to say if he really learned anything from her as she could be making it up as well.

Alanna Nash had this agenda because her book was about the women in his life and their impact on him.

Alanna Nash wanted to be able to say that there were women that had influence on Elvis' career so she just took the word of two women that have made claims that they did.

Anyone can go up to Alanna Nash and claim to have had a relationship/friendship with Elvis and she'll likely put it in her books.

To me she comes across as an extremely guillible person.

Re: If you thought Elvis fans were narrow minded....

Fri Aug 12, 2011 8:52 pm

brian wrote:The problem with Alanna Nash and her claims of women teaching Elvis' dance moves is she just takes their word for it and writes it down in her book.

Tura Satana came out of the woodwork after Elvis died claiming that she taught him some of his dance moves, was a close advisor and taught him other things as well.

The problem is Tura claimed to have been so close to Elvis but no one around him recalls them ever meeting much less her being a mentor and romantically involved with him.

Her stories of where she met him and when she taught him these moves are suspect because Elvis was already doing those things when Tura says she met him.

I know Elvis and Kay Wheeler met but it's hard to say if he really learned anything from her as she could be making it up as well.

Alanna Nash had this agenda because her book was about the women in his life and their impact on him.

Alanna Nash wanted to be able to say that there were women that had influence on Elvis' career so she just took the word of two women that have made claims that they did.

Anyone can go up to Alanna Nash and claim to have had a relationship/friendship with Elvis and she'll likely put it in her books.

To me she comes across as an extremely guillible person.


I have no reason to doubt Kay Wheeler's statements, we KNOW that she knew Elvis at the period she claimed to, and I think you're take on Nash is uncharitable. She doesn't reprint stuff that obviously has no basis, like Goldman, et al did. There are a scant few (maybe two or three at best) stories in her book that I find questionable, but her overall picture of Elvis (and the argument that women played a big role in shaping him, both personally and image-wise) is very solidly argued. Does anyone dispute that THE formative influence in his life was his mother? Or that he cultivated an look that questioned traditional concepts of masculinity? I mean Elvis wasn't a he-man type, and didn't look like a Gary Cooper or Robert Mitchum. His look was more glamorous than rugged. These are things that are readily apparent about Elvis, Nash attempts to explain them. It's not calling him a sissy or saying he was unmanly, just pointing out that - like his music - his personal style was a hybrid of sorts. It's just saying "Hey! This guy is different! Why is that?". Her hypothesis offers a more compelling case for the "why" of Elvis's otherness than any other I have read.

So, I don't think you can call her gullible because she lends perhaps too much to iffy stories that "fit into the picture" as she knows it, just overly zealous. It's not like she was just printing every claim that came along or anything.

Re: If you thought Elvis fans were narrow minded....

Fri Aug 12, 2011 9:59 pm

KingOfTheJungle wrote:
brian wrote:The problem with Alanna Nash and her claims of women teaching Elvis' dance moves is she just takes their word for it and writes it down in her book.

Tura Satana came out of the woodwork after Elvis died claiming that she taught him some of his dance moves, was a close advisor and taught him other things as well.

The problem is Tura claimed to have been so close to Elvis but no one around him recalls them ever meeting much less her being a mentor and romantically involved with him.

Her stories of where she met him and when she taught him these moves are suspect because Elvis was already doing those things when Tura says she met him.

I know Elvis and Kay Wheeler met but it's hard to say if he really learned anything from her as she could be making it up as well.

Alanna Nash had this agenda because her book was about the women in his life and their impact on him.

Alanna Nash wanted to be able to say that there were women that had influence on Elvis' career so she just took the word of two women that have made claims that they did.

Anyone can go up to Alanna Nash and claim to have had a relationship/friendship with Elvis and she'll likely put it in her books.

To me she comes across as an extremely guillible person.


I have no reason to doubt Kay Wheeler's statements, we KNOW that she knew Elvis at the period she claimed to, and I think you're take on Nash is uncharitable. She doesn't reprint stuff that obviously has no basis, like Goldman, et al did. There are a scant few (maybe two or three at best) stories in her book that I find questionable, but her overall picture of Elvis (and the argument that women played a big role in shaping him, both personally and image-wise) is very solidly argued. Does anyone dispute that THE formative influence in his life was his mother? Or that he cultivated an look that questioned traditional concepts of masculinity? I mean Elvis wasn't a he-man type, and didn't look like a Gary Cooper or Robert Mitchum. His look was more glamorous than rugged. These are things that are readily apparent about Elvis, Nash attempts to explain them. It's not calling him a sissy or saying he was unmanly, just pointing out that - like his music - his personal style was a hybrid of sorts. It's just saying "Hey! This guy is different! Why is that?". Her hypothesis offers a more compelling case for the "why" of Elvis's otherness than any other I have read.

So, I don't think you can call her gullible because she lends perhaps too much to iffy stories that "fit into the picture" as she knows it, just overly zealous. It's not like she was just printing every claim that came along or anything.


Well, we just disagree about Alanna Nash being a gullible person because that's how she comes across in the interviews i've read and listened to.

I think it's not all about her being gullible she has an agenda to write a story that is the most interesting to her without care that's it's factual or not.

She's printed more than 3 stories that are questionable in my view and in other people's.

Obviously Gladys had an impact on Elvis' upbringing and shaping who he was as a person as most mothers do.

I was speaking of professionally as in musical influences that all the musical influences Elvis had seem to be men.

I'm positive that Tura Satana was lying and Kay Wheeler could very well be as well.

I find her hypothesis based on Peter Whitmer's twinless twin theory laughable and untrue.

Re: If you thought Elvis fans were narrow minded....

Sat Aug 13, 2011 3:21 pm

brian wrote:
KiwiAlan wrote:
brian wrote:
KiwiAlan wrote:
brian wrote:
KHoots wrote:
brian wrote:...That doesn't mean Little Richard was an influence. All it means was Elvis needed songs to fill an album and he like Richard's music enough to cover it...


That reasoning is a little simplistic. If he liked Richard enough to cover the songs, it stands to reason he had some influence on him, don't you think?


No.

It doesn't necessarily mean that.


So Little Richard had no influence on Elvis....who did then force Tutti Frutti, Rip It Up,Long Tall Sally and Rready Teddy down his throat. Even performing two of them on TV. Performing a filler song on Ed Sullivan...pull the other one.

Elvis recorded more hits by Little Richard than hits by any other artist in the 50's

More songs than Crudup....are you saying he had no influence?


I'm saying just because you cover someone's songs doesn't mean they are a influence on you beyond your liking of their songs.

For example Elvis liked those Olvia Newton John songs that he covered but she wasn't a musical influence on Elvis.

What i mean by musical influence is that Lonely Summer originally suggested that Little Richard had some type of influence on Elvis' own songs or style.

Little Richard covered ''Hound dog'', but Elvis wasn't a musical influence on him.



Have it your way then........no one, but no one had an influence on Elvis Presley. :D


I didn't say that Alan.

Elvis certainly had musical influences just not Little Richard.

Elvis was influenced by Jake Hess and Roy Hamilton but not Richard.


There is no way anyone can speak in absolutes about something like this, because there is only one person who could get into the head of Elvis Presley. I won't say Richard was a definite influence on Elvis, but I don't think it's something to which anyone can say absolutely not.

There is as much "evidence" to support that he was.

Re: If you thought Elvis fans were narrow minded....

Sat Aug 13, 2011 7:46 pm

KHoots wrote:
brian wrote:
KiwiAlan wrote:
brian wrote:
KiwiAlan wrote:
brian wrote:
KHoots wrote:
brian wrote:...That doesn't mean Little Richard was an influence. All it means was Elvis needed songs to fill an album and he like Richard's music enough to cover it...


That reasoning is a little simplistic. If he liked Richard enough to cover the songs, it stands to reason he had some influence on him, don't you think?


No.

It doesn't necessarily mean that.


So Little Richard had no influence on Elvis....who did then force Tutti Frutti, Rip It Up,Long Tall Sally and Rready Teddy down his throat. Even performing two of them on TV. Performing a filler song on Ed Sullivan...pull the other one.

Elvis recorded more hits by Little Richard than hits by any other artist in the 50's

More songs than Crudup....are you saying he had no influence?


I'm saying just because you cover someone's songs doesn't mean they are a influence on you beyond your liking of their songs.

For example Elvis liked those Olvia Newton John songs that he covered but she wasn't a musical influence on Elvis.

What i mean by musical influence is that Lonely Summer originally suggested that Little Richard had some type of influence on Elvis' own songs or style.

Little Richard covered ''Hound dog'', but Elvis wasn't a musical influence on him.



Have it your way then........no one, but no one had an influence on Elvis Presley. :D


I didn't say that Alan.

Elvis certainly had musical influences just not Little Richard.

Elvis was influenced by Jake Hess and Roy Hamilton but not Richard.


There is no way anyone can speak in absolutes about something like this, because there is only one person who could get into the head of Elvis Presley. I won't say Richard was a definite influence on Elvis, but I don't think it's something to which anyone can say absolutely not.

There is as much "evidence" to support that he was.


It's been discussed many times who Elvis' influences were and Little Richard's name is never brought up.

So no there isn't as much ''evidence'' to support that he was.

Little Richard was not. period.

Re: If you thought Elvis fans were narrow minded....

Sat Aug 13, 2011 7:50 pm

Well, I think if you feel this way, you're just denying reality. There is a certain lithe grace to Elvis's moves that seems akin to a striptease, and I think Nash is on solid ground making the connection. Not only that but one of Elvis's girlfriends in the book (I think Kay Wheeler) tells a story about teaching Elvis some dance moves that he later used, so to deny that there is a certain feminine or androgynous component to Elvis is just overlooking the obvious. This is a guy who wore eye makeup just hanging out after all.
No, I was not "denying reality". Alanna Nash isn't the most credible source of information. Elvis' dance moves are not akin to a striptease, at least that's not what I'm imagining when I see footage of him, unlike you. There is also nothing feminine about his dancing. For your imformation, women teach guys how to dance all the time, but that doesn't make those guys feminine just because a woman teaches them to dance. IF the claim is true, which I don't believe is, but IF it is true than he just simply was having fun. I personally believe Elvis over everyone else and no his leeches claims to things Elvis said are not included. Everyone wants to make themselves seem like someone of importance in Elvis' life or an influence or key player in his success, career or life. It's pathetic and sad. Also, a lot of guys where eyeliner or other makeup that isn't gender specific, that isn't something new. Unless you're prejudice.

I think you misunderstand my point. I'm not arguing that Elvis was not influenced by black performers. He certainly was, and that influence is an integral part of what made his style unique. And his style of dress was certainly influenced by Beale Street musicians, as well as James Dean. No doubt about that. I'm arguing that his style of dance has little to do with that influence. There is little evidence to support the idea. I've seen the archival video of people dancing on Beale, and I am a big fan of many of the same black performers Elvis loved, and I can tell you, they didn't move the way Elvis did. They had a very different style. It was their own and it was cool. Look at the 8mm clips of Muddy and Howlin Wolf that were shot in Chicago in the 50's. Nothing like what Elvis was doing. So when critics say he moved like a black performer, I don't think they're on solid ground. Nash provides examples of where Elvis learned to dance, the other argument relies mostly on assumption. I'm not the only one who feels this way, either. Hank Ballard, of the fabulous Midnighters, who I think knows a thing or two about how both black and white Americans in the 50's danced, has said he never saw a black man move like Elvis.
Alanna Nash is someone who would write in a book that she held Elvis' hand when he had to go to the restroom. She claims to know him better than he knew himself. The fact is, nobody knew/knows Elvis better than Elvis and he isn't talking anytime soon. You're also contradicting yourself big time so no, I didn't misunderstand your ridiculous claim that there is little evidence suggesting that Elvis wasn't influenced by others as far as dancing. You obviously know nothing about dancing. Nobody dances the same way, they move the way their body naturally moves and Elvis always said that he did whatever felt natural to him. That being said, of course his style was unique, that's what dancing is about in the first place. You have influences, but it's ultimately you who chooses what to do with those influences and I think that's what Elvis did.

Overall, you all can sit here debating who he was influenced by or you can listening to interviews or things Elvis has said about his influences because he was the only one able to answer questions about who or what influenced him.

Re: If you thought Elvis fans were narrow minded....

Sat Aug 13, 2011 8:13 pm

Elvisfan10 wrote:You obviously know nothing about dancing. Nobody dances the same way, they move the way their body naturally moves and Elvis always said that he did whatever felt natural to him. That being said, of course his style was unique, that's what dancing is about in the first place. You have influences, but it's ultimately you who chooses what to do with those influences and I think that's what Elvis did.


You seem to be making a lot of authoritative comments on dance, are you or were you in the business? I suspect not.

Re: If you thought Elvis fans were narrow minded....

Sat Aug 13, 2011 9:46 pm

JaneTLC wrote:
Elvisfan10 wrote:You obviously know nothing about dancing. Nobody dances the same way, they move the way their body naturally moves and Elvis always said that he did whatever felt natural to him. That being said, of course his style was unique, that's what dancing is about in the first place. You have influences, but it's ultimately you who chooses what to do with those influences and I think that's what Elvis did.


You seem to be making a lot of authoritative comments on dance, are you or were you in the business? I suspect not.
Funny how you assume what I do or don't do :roll:

Re: If you thought Elvis fans were narrow minded....

Sat Aug 13, 2011 10:28 pm

Elvisfan10 wrote:
JaneTLC wrote:
Elvisfan10 wrote:You obviously know nothing about dancing. Nobody dances the same way, they move the way their body naturally moves and Elvis always said that he did whatever felt natural to him. That being said, of course his style was unique, that's what dancing is about in the first place. You have influences, but it's ultimately you who chooses what to do with those influences and I think that's what Elvis did.


You seem to be making a lot of authoritative comments on dance, are you or were you in the business? I suspect not.
Funny how you assume what I do or don't do :roll:


It's not hard, reading your posts, especially one that starts with, "You obviously know nothing about dancing".
I'm pretty damn sure I know more than you.

Re: If you thought Elvis fans were narrow minded....

Tue Aug 16, 2011 5:05 am

JaneTLC wrote:
Elvisfan10 wrote:
JaneTLC wrote:
Elvisfan10 wrote:You obviously know nothing about dancing. Nobody dances the same way, they move the way their body naturally moves and Elvis always said that he did whatever felt natural to him. That being said, of course his style was unique, that's what dancing is about in the first place. You have influences, but it's ultimately you who chooses what to do with those influences and I think that's what Elvis did.


You seem to be making a lot of authoritative comments on dance, are you or were you in the business? I suspect not.
Funny how you assume what I do or don't do :roll:


It's not hard, reading your posts, especially one that starts with, "You obviously know nothing about dancing".
I'm pretty damn sure I know more than you.
If you want to continue dreaming, that's on you.

Re: If you thought Elvis fans were narrow minded....

Tue Aug 16, 2011 9:41 am

Brian’s point is that just because Elvis recorded the songs of a particular artist does not mean that artist was an influence on the way he performed. Elvis recorded songs by many artists that doesn’t mean that he was influenced by them. He may have enjoyed the material. And also in terms of the sheer volume of Richard songs that may be attributable to the way rock n’ roll albums were recorded in that era. They were near current hits and it was common place to pad out albums with recordings of the hits of other artists, particularly current hits. This made the album tracks more familiar for fans deciding whether or not to spend that $3.98 which was a ton of money for a teenager in those days. I disagree with his specific point as that rasp seems to be a Richard influence, but liking an artist and being influenced by him/her are two different things.

It’s a mistake to downplay the sexual impact of Elvis because you miss a lot of his influence in those days. I recently spoke to Linda Ray Pratt and she remembered her dad saying Elvis did “a bump and a grind” on the Milton Berle show. And you see a lot of that in the contemporary press accounts as well. One of the reasons there was such a huge backlash against Elvis was the fact that people were threatened by the idea that he was a male instigating an overt sexual reaction in females rather than a female initiating that reaction in males. In fact Debra Paget appeared on the Berle in a very tight dress and did a suggestive jiggle to, as Elvis commented at the time, no adverse reaction. Yet the media went into frenzy when Elvis did it. Watch the girls in all the crowds when Elvis is performing. They are not swooning. For many male fans, the intense sexual reaction many females found in Elvis was as big a reason for them to get into the music as the excitement of the music itself.

I think there are tracks like “Love Me Tender” that are straight romanticism, however, the moans and groans on a hit like “Love Me” are kind of like an early Barry White.

Although Elvis never stated on the record that the strip tease was an influence on his act, that was DJ’s background as a drummer, and he has stated it was his most valuable
influence in backing Elvis. It wasn’t all stripper moves. Elvis himself said that he took much of his movements from Pentecostal preachers.

And while it may be common place for men to wear eye liner etc. today, in no way was it common place in 1956. In fact many people who met Elvis back in those days commented in interviews that they were surprised by it. It just wasn’t done.

On Elvis and the black influence, as King noted it had a tremendous impact on Elvis and through Elvis it was the first time many Americans had experienced a lot of those elements. Additionally, because Elvis was white he was so able to gain access to television and radio stations that would not play a black performer under any circumstance. However, those who see Elvis as an R&B performer in white face are off base.

The country influence is often played down in assessments of Elvis’ early impact despite its importance. When a Steve Allen was dismissing Elvis it was above all because he was, in Allen’s view, a hick. Additionally, many of the segregationist in the audience did not like the implication that black and white cultures could cling so close together with a result that was nothing but positive for listeners. The fact the best of parts of the two outside cultures came together made it that much more appealing for the previously ignored teen audience. Elvis’ youth, his talent, his personal intensity, his charisma (an incredibly important factor), the break of his skin color, the marketing savvy of RCA and to be fair Tom Parker, and most importantly his mix of all the strands of the new culture is why he was the biggest of all. Other white performers came along with Elvis or in Elvis’ wake but none of ever touched his impact or prestige. It wasn’t just the break of getting on the air. It was the ability to get on the air with the right combination and put it over.

Re: If you thought Elvis fans were narrow minded....

Fri Aug 19, 2011 9:31 pm

Elvisfan10 wrote:
JaneTLC wrote:
Elvisfan10 wrote:
JaneTLC wrote:
Elvisfan10 wrote:You obviously know nothing about dancing. Nobody dances the same way, they move the way their body naturally moves and Elvis always said that he did whatever felt natural to him. That being said, of course his style was unique, that's what dancing is about in the first place. You have influences, but it's ultimately you who chooses what to do with those influences and I think that's what Elvis did.


You seem to be making a lot of authoritative comments on dance, are you or were you in the business? I suspect not.
Funny how you assume what I do or don't do :roll:


It's not hard, reading your posts, especially one that starts with, "You obviously know nothing about dancing".
I'm pretty damn sure I know more than you.
If you want to continue dreaming, that's on you.


Huge LOL. I have nothing to prove to you.

Re: If you thought Elvis fans were narrow minded....

Sat Aug 20, 2011 7:42 am

JaneTLC wrote:
Elvisfan10 wrote:
JaneTLC wrote:
Elvisfan10 wrote:
JaneTLC wrote:
Elvisfan10 wrote:You obviously know nothing about dancing. Nobody dances the same way, they move the way their body naturally moves and Elvis always said that he did whatever felt natural to him. That being said, of course his style was unique, that's what dancing is about in the first place. You have influences, but it's ultimately you who chooses what to do with those influences and I think that's what Elvis did.


You seem to be making a lot of authoritative comments on dance, are you or were you in the business? I suspect not.
Funny how you assume what I do or don't do :roll:


It's not hard, reading your posts, especially one that starts with, "You obviously know nothing about dancing".
I'm pretty damn sure I know more than you.
If you want to continue dreaming, that's on you.


Huge LOL. I have nothing to prove to you.
And you honestly believe that I have anything to prove to you? I don't think so!

Re: If you thought Elvis fans were narrow minded....

Tue Jul 16, 2013 2:41 pm

04.JPG


From the Elvis The King Revealed magazine 2013 and advertised as available only at Graceland.