I don't deny Elvis' talent. The man had a great voice. But even that was bitten from Jackie Wilson, technique-wise. The vocals were bitten. The songs were bitten. The moves were bitten.

Elvis was the archetype. The progenitor of all things Eminemian and Timberlakian. I don't deny their talents -- but I balk at the suggestion (and frequent implication) that they're the standard-bearers of rock music.

Here are some corrections for the people in this thread who have not done their homework. If they did, it would benefit them greatly.

1. Elvis chose not to write songs, his friends have said this. It did not interest him.

2. He was good at piano and guitar, there is footage available as proof.

3. Elvis did not die on the toilet, he died on the floor. Jimi Hendrix died in a big pool of vomit though, That's worse.

4. John Lennon and Jimi Hendrix are dead and sell nowhere near as much as Elvis. it has more to do with than being dead.

5. Let's see proof of him being a big assh*ole. Because he had his picture taken with Nixon? Puhlease.

6. Summertime blues? One good song. Elvis had 100's.

7. Elvis creatively peaked in 1969/1970 area. Listen to his 1969 sessions in Memphis. Berry and Richard were longtime hasbeens by then.

8. Anybody who says that Elvis made only crap after 1958, haven't listen to much of his music. Do your homework.

9. Elvis was known and doing his thing before he was ever into Jackie Wilson. Homework time.

My dog ate my Elvis homework. it made him sick, too.

DreamInWs said:

elvis had great charisma. lennon should know about "shitty," he did some pretty goofy stuff w/ yoko.

Spats said:

Spats, one minute you're saying "do your homework" and the next minute you're making comparisons to Hendrix & Lennon. Practice what you preach.

Elvis's musical abilities were limited to rhythm guitar but he had a great voice. End of it.

"Hendrix died in a big pile of his own vomit" - Were you there? To compare two different artists because they're both dead is ignorant.

Sales of albums mean that he attracted the masses, what is your point?

Influence wise, Elvis takes a back seat to most other artists, dead or alive

Elvis was a "thief"...so I've been told. And if it wasn't him, it was his label. We were robbed

Tina (~!~)

OOPS!

Tina (~!~)
[This message was edited Tue Jan 21 11:54:08 PST 2003 by NettieSmiles]

Elvis was Great&He is one of the most Important People in the History of POP Music people need too live with it&let it go.

just a thot... why do people complain about how elvis ripped black music, but never how the stones & the beatles did the same?

... or eric clapton?

DIAMONDGEEZA said:

Elvis was nothing more than a white man that got lucky. He couldn't sing, but his looks and dance moves made him famous. There is nothing special about him, he sucked from the beginning. The media made many people think that Elvis is the best thing ever, but we all know the REAL story...And yes, he is tooo overrated.

BeeTellTheTruth said:

You are really young and stupid (see above)

MightBQueen said:

I do.I dig the Beatles during the LSD Era 66-70.but the stuff they did before that was Crappy takes on Motown IMHO.Cheesy as all hell.the Stones:I respect them but I think they are way overrated&don't feel they have done anything more than what the Ohio Players,P-Funk or EWF&any other Number of R&B bands hadn't done far beter overall.as for Eric Clapton:respect his Playing&Musicianship but He sucks as a Singer&His version of "I shot the Sherriff" is Pure Crap.He doesn't do much for me overall.

DIAMONDGEEZA said:

No.

jnoel said:

Read Albert Goldman's biography. Elvis was as interesting as the people you've mentioned.

jnoel said:

Read Albert Goldman's biography. Elvis was as interesting as the people you've mentioned.

nas3110 said:

I Agree.you can say this or that on Elvis at first but the truth is the Cat had a Legit Career.it wasn't some tack Pat Boone lets be down&Cash in.Elvis was a Real Deal Artist.He had&Has Fans of All Races,Classes&Ages&they all dig the Man's Talent before anything else.