NDRU said:

TD3 said:

There's much revisionist history when it comes to Elvis, the USA, and the life and times of that era. I'll leave it at that . . .

These types of pronouncements in my opinion are purely subjective; I don't consider

Elvis or Mandonna to be "historical figures" by any stretch of the imagination but others do. It takes all kinds.

It doesn't actually matter if Elvis invented rock & roll or did anything important (in terms of this question) it only matters if history remembers him, and so far it does

Columbus didn't actually discover America but he is still historical.

A historically inaccuracy and being of historical significance aren't one and the same. A much as Columbus can be given credit for bring the Americas to the attention of Europe. His role for better or worse set off historical changes and shifts that impacted countries, continents, commerce, economics and people. There are people on this earth who don't know anything about Elvis or Madonna or of their existence. Their impact and their importance has been, nominal at best.

TD3 said:

NDRU said:

It doesn't actually matter if Elvis invented rock & roll or did anything important (in terms of this question) it only matters if history remembers him, and so far it does

Columbus didn't actually discover America but he is still historical.

A historically inaccuracy and being of historical significance aren't one and the same. A much as Columbus can be given credit for bring the Americas to the attention of Europe. His role for better or worse set off historical changes and shifts that impacted countries, continents, commerce, economics and people. There are people on this earth who don't know anything about Elvis or Madonna or of their existence. Their impact and their importance has been, nominal at best.

That was exactly my point. I wasn't comparing Columbus' place to Elvis' place, but you raised the issue of "revisionist history" so I mentioned columbus to raise the point that the "truth" did not matter as much as the ultimate impact on history. Maybe I did not understand your point.

But the question is not if Elvis & Madonna are as big as Jesus or Columbus, but if Madonna is as big as Elvis. Everyone has some historical significance, even you & me. I think Elvis has more than Madonna, personally.

But yeah Columbus is still a star after 500 years, so he has a leg up on them.

[Edited 12/8/10 14:56pm]

musicjunky318 said:

When she's gone.

Thoughts???

Not if Diana Ross goes before her. Diana Ross is legendary among many age groups not only as a solo artists but as a member of a group which set the standard of many girl groups that followed. Heck I see a little Diana in Beyoceous.

Also, post-death icon status would depend on when and how Madonna dies. Elvis died of drug overdose while he was still performing and still relatively young. Madonna has already reached her 50s and she's led a drug free life by most accounts and hasn't had anybody claiming to be her long lost child like Elvis did - I think he had a couple folk claiming to be his kid.

Madonna would have to go out like Princess Diana or Heath Ledger in order to reach that level of crazy postmortem Elvis fame. Look at MJ, he's been dead 18 months and although his brand is still making money, people aren't blogging about MJ sightings or breaking into Neverland the way they broke into Graceland. Isn't Graceland still around as a museum or something. Also, consider the many movies made about Elvis. I only know of two television movies made about MJ and only one concert film (pre-concert).

Nah....Madonna won't be bigger than Elvis when she bites it.

TD3 said:

Timmy84 said:

Yeah lol plus even Elvis discredited those "invented rock" bullshit. He often called Fats Domino, Chuck Berry and Little Richard the real inventors.

It's not even about that, it's about the hostility Elvis encountered because of the type of music he was singing.

The FBI was spying on Elvis in his early days because he was singing black music, so "corrupting the youth". That's the real reason he was drafted into the Army, the powers that be figured he was just a fad and his popularity would have died out once his term was over.

wow, a 123 different ways to say HELL to the NO?! well make it 124

^ dizzam.

MickyDolenz said:

TD3 said:

It's not even about that, it's about the hostility Elvis encountered because of the type of music he was singing.

The FBI was spying on Elvis in his early days because he was singing black music, so "corrupting the youth". That's the real reason he was drafted into the Army, the powers that be figured he was just a fad and his popularity would have died out once his term was over.

Then his manager forced him to accept a family friendly image, which he hated. But because he was loyal he couldn't muster up the courage to tell the Colonel no with the exception of his 1968 TV performance, that is.

Timmy84 said:

MickyDolenz said:

The FBI was spying on Elvis in his early days because he was singing black music, so "corrupting the youth". That's the real reason he was drafted into the Army, the powers that be figured he was just a fad and his popularity would have died out once his term was over.

Then his manager forced him to accept a family friendly image, which he hated. But because he was loyal he couldn't muster up the courage to tell the Colonel no with the exception of his 1968 TV performance, that is.

John Lennon once said that Elvis died when he went into the Army.

MickyDolenz said:

Timmy84 said:

Then his manager forced him to accept a family friendly image, which he hated. But because he was loyal he couldn't muster up the courage to tell the Colonel no with the exception of his 1968 TV performance, that is.

John Lennon once said that Elvis died when he went into the Army.

Yeah he said they "castrated" him.

I think Madonna ruined her chances of ever being that big of an icon by continuing her career after the 'Music' album. Her music and image has just gotten really boring and unappealing to the average person and its lowered her celebrity status and made people forget about her amazing past. And its not even about her music not being successful anymore as both Elvis and Michael werent as successful in their last 10 years either, but they were still seen as uber celebrities, the most exciting men around. No man or woman outshone them. Madonna has been replaced by Angelina as the queen of hollywood, even Britney is a bigger draw on the celebrity meter than Madonna. I remember how amazingly huge and respected she was in the 'Music' era, I was only 12 but viewed her in a way that people view Elvis and Marilyn, she just had such clout around her that I dont see her having anymore. Even if she died I dont think it would be that big a deal. She definitley wouldnt see the frenzy Michael, Marilyn, Elvis or John Lennon did.

[Edited 12/8/10 17:57pm]

badujunkie said:

midiscover said:

No and she won't be as big of a historical figure as MJ. Some of you are giving her way too much to even name her with the ranks of Elvis, The Beatles and MJ.

uh oh the Jan Stan is getting defensive !!!

Just playin i love Janet and Madonna equally.

I remember when Ricky Martin won some pop award and thanked the "heroes of pop...Elvis, The Beatles, MJ and Madonna"

if there's any girl who belongs in that boys club, it's Madonna...

[Edited 12/7/10 17:42pm]

Me being a fan of Janet has nothing to do with Madonna not being on the same level as Elvis, MJ and The Beatles and using Ricky Martin as an example is a pity

Once again I repeat - Madonna is NOT on the same level as Elvis, MJ and The Beatles nor will she ever be.

Arnotts said:

I think Madonna ruined her chances of ever being that big of an icon by continuing her career after the 'Music' album. Her music and image has just gotten really boring and unappealing to the average person and its lowered her celebrity status and made people forget about her amazing past. And its not even about her music not being successful anymore as both Elvis and Michael werent as successful in their last 10 years either, but they were still seen as uber celebrities, the most exciting men around. No man or woman outshone them. Madonna has been replaced by Angelina as the queen of hollywood, even Britney is a bigger draw on the celebrity meter than Madonna. I remember how amazingly huge and respected she was in the 'Music' era, I was only 12 but viewed her in a way that people view Elvis and Marilyn, she just had such clout around her that I dont see her having anymore. Even if she died I dont think it would be that big a deal. She definitley wouldnt see the frenzy Michael, Marilyn, Elvis or John Lennon did.

[Edited 12/8/10 17:57pm]

I disagree with almost everything here. I would agree that Madonna is not that interesting after her "American Life" (not "Music") album but in the end of the day after so many years which huge star is? The Rolling Stones? Elton John? Janet? Duran Duran? Cyndi? Whitney? George Michael? I do find Prince interesting still but the public at large would probably disagree... Does this matter? Not really, all those people are recognized as legends of various degrees and that is not changing.

I don't know about Elvis but MJ prior to his death was definitely not seen as one of the most exciting men around and he was owing most of his latter-days celebrity to all the wrong reasons. I would say that Madonna's celebrity status right now is higher than MJ before his death. Of course his death changed that.

Madonna was never the queen of hollywood, Julia Roberts and Sandra Bullock were and if you seriously think that Britney is a bigger draw than Madonna, then think again. She definitely isn't.

If Madonna dies the same way as Elvis, MJ, Marylin or John Lennon you can bet it will be a big deal because tragedy always sells. But because she probably won't, her place in history will be considerably lower than those.

I am not saying that Madonna is on the same level as Elvis, I am a Madonna fan, I am not an Elvis fan so I can't judge. But everyone's place in history has to do with many things besides talent and a lot of those things are random.

[Edited 12/8/10 19:09pm]

Presley was also in the army which helps him tremendously, especially in America. It's perhaps the biggest asset he has against the Beatles, Michael, and Madonna. All three.

You'll see when she does Die Another Day it will be Like A national Holiday

Graycap23 said:

JoeTyler said:

so?

So now u KNOW. I don't give a rat's azz about madonna.

If you "claim" you don't give a "rat's ass" about her then why are you on like all Madonna related posts???

jiorjios said:

Arnotts said:

I think Madonna ruined her chances of ever being that big of an icon by continuing her career after the 'Music' album. Her music and image has just gotten really boring and unappealing to the average person and its lowered her celebrity status and made people forget about her amazing past. And its not even about her music not being successful anymore as both Elvis and Michael werent as successful in their last 10 years either, but they were still seen as uber celebrities, the most exciting men around. No man or woman outshone them. Madonna has been replaced by Angelina as the queen of hollywood, even Britney is a bigger draw on the celebrity meter than Madonna. I remember how amazingly huge and respected she was in the 'Music' era, I was only 12 but viewed her in a way that people view Elvis and Marilyn, she just had such clout around her that I dont see her having anymore. Even if she died I dont think it would be that big a deal. She definitley wouldnt see the frenzy Michael, Marilyn, Elvis or John Lennon did.

[Edited 12/8/10 17:57pm]

I disagree with almost everything here. I would agree that Madonna is not that interesting after her "American Life" (not "Music") album but in the end of the day after so many years which huge star is? The Rolling Stones? Elton John? Janet? Duran Duran? Cyndi? Whitney? George Michael? I do find Prince interesting still but the public at large would probably disagree... Does this matter? Not really, all those people are recognized as legends of various degrees and that is not changing.

I don't know about Elvis but MJ prior to his death was definitely not seen as one of the most exciting men around and he was owing most of his latter-days celebrity to all the wrong reasons. I would say that Madonna's celebrity status right now is higher than MJ before his death. Of course his death changed that.

Madonna was never the queen of hollywood, Julia Roberts and Sandra Bullock were and if you seriously think that Britney is a bigger draw than Madonna, then think again. She definitely isn't.

If Madonna dies the same way as Elvis, MJ, Marylin or John Lennon you can bet it will be a big deal because tragedy always sells. But because she probably won't, her place in history will be considerably lower than those.

I am not saying that Madonna is on the same level as Elvis, I am a Madonna fan, I am not an Elvis fan so I can't judge. But everyone's place in history has to do with many things besides talent and a lot of those things are random.

[Edited 12/8/10 19:09pm]

No none of those people are interesting anymore, but none of those people are being compared to Elvis either or will be as legendary as him. I'm not denying Madonna is a legend, she is and that will never change, but she had the potential to be the next Marilyn Monroe, thats passed though and shes more a Liz Taylor. Michael Jackson was always seen as the most exciting star at any event. The way people reacted to him never changed, he always made top news, I remember it well. He stopped going to events in recent years though which might be why he made news less. But even the press conference for This Is It made international news and was an exciting event. I remember they played it on every news chanel repeatedly. Madonna used to be like that but the last time she had one of those moments was the 2003 VMA kiss. And I'm in total agreement Michael made news for all the wrong reasons but thats what made his legacy so iconic in the same way Elvis's was.

When I say queen of hollywood I mean the town, the celebrity culture, not the Queen of movies/film or I would of said that. Her time has passed for that kind of death frenzy. sure the media will make a deal over it but I dont think it will effect the people in the same way.

[Edited 12/9/10 0:10am]

BurnMyLipsSlowly said:

Graycap23 said:

So now u KNOW. I don't give a rat's azz about madonna.

If you "claim" you don't give a "rat's ass" about her then why are you on like all Madonna related posts???

This is a "discussion" forum isn't it?

Arnotts said:

jiorjios said:

I disagree with almost everything here. I would agree that Madonna is not that interesting after her "American Life" (not "Music") album but in the end of the day after so many years which huge star is? The Rolling Stones? Elton John? Janet? Duran Duran? Cyndi? Whitney? George Michael? I do find Prince interesting still but the public at large would probably disagree... Does this matter? Not really, all those people are recognized as legends of various degrees and that is not changing.

I don't know about Elvis but MJ prior to his death was definitely not seen as one of the most exciting men around and he was owing most of his latter-days celebrity to all the wrong reasons. I would say that Madonna's celebrity status right now is higher than MJ before his death. Of course his death changed that.

Madonna was never the queen of hollywood, Julia Roberts and Sandra Bullock were and if you seriously think that Britney is a bigger draw than Madonna, then think again. She definitely isn't.

If Madonna dies the same way as Elvis, MJ, Marylin or John Lennon you can bet it will be a big deal because tragedy always sells. But because she probably won't, her place in history will be considerably lower than those.

I am not saying that Madonna is on the same level as Elvis, I am a Madonna fan, I am not an Elvis fan so I can't judge. But everyone's place in history has to do with many things besides talent and a lot of those things are random.

No none of those people are interesting anymore, but none of those people are being compared to Elvis either or will be as legendary as him. I'm not denying Madonna is a legend, she is and that will never change, but she had the potential to be the next Marilyn Monroe, thats passed though and shes more a Liz Taylor. Michael Jackson was always seen as the most exciting star at any event. The way people reacted to him never changed, he always made top news, I remember it well. He stopped going to events in recent years though which might be why he made news less. But even the press conference for This Is It made international news and was an exciting event. I remember they played it on every news chanel repeatedly. Madonna used to be like that but the last time she had one of those moments was the 2003 VMA kiss. And I'm in total agreement Michael made news for all the wrong reasons but thats what made his legacy so iconic in the same way Elvis's was.

When I say queen of hollywood I mean the town, the celebrity culture, not the Queen of movies/film or I would of said that. Her time has passed for that kind of death frenzy. sure the media will make a deal over it but I dont think it will effect the people in the same way.

"she had the potential to be the next Marilyn Monroe,that's passed though and she's more a Liz Taylor"

This is actually a good thing.I'm more impressed with celebrities who,despite all their fame and money,still manage to live a long life without self-destructing.Liz Taylor is one of those people and so is Madonna.Marilyn was amazing but she became a victim of her own fame and eventually she crashed and burned,as did Elvis and Michael.I'm glad that Madonna didn't go that route.

...

[Edited 12/9/10 6:46am]

SoulAlive said:

Arnotts said:

No none of those people are interesting anymore, but none of those people are being compared to Elvis either or will be as legendary as him. I'm not denying Madonna is a legend, she is and that will never change, but she had the potential to be the next Marilyn Monroe, thats passed though and shes more a Liz Taylor. Michael Jackson was always seen as the most exciting star at any event. The way people reacted to him never changed, he always made top news, I remember it well. He stopped going to events in recent years though which might be why he made news less. But even the press conference for This Is It made international news and was an exciting event. I remember they played it on every news chanel repeatedly. Madonna used to be like that but the last time she had one of those moments was the 2003 VMA kiss. And I'm in total agreement Michael made news for all the wrong reasons but thats what made his legacy so iconic in the same way Elvis's was.

When I say queen of hollywood I mean the town, the celebrity culture, not the Queen of movies/film or I would of said that. Her time has passed for that kind of death frenzy. sure the media will make a deal over it but I dont think it will effect the people in the same way.

"she had the potential to be the next Marilyn Monroe,that's passed though and she's more a Liz Taylor"

This is actually a good thing.I'm more impressed with celebrities who,despite all their fame and money,still manage to live a long life without self-destructing.Liz Taylor is one of those people and so is Madonna.Marilyn was amazing but she became a victim of her own fame and eventually she crashed and burned,as did Elvis and Michael.I'm glad that Madonna didn't go that route.

...

I just wish she could find a real man to finally settle down with, and not these brainless and fame-hungry 25 years old models/dancers ...

VenusBlingBling said:

Since Elvis became the first worldwide Superstar with a capital S/entertainer I don't think any artist will ever become more iconic than Elvis.

Nope. Frank Sinatra was the 1st true SUPERSTAR (in the sense we're talking about) and he did it in WW2 when his ability to tour and sell internationally was quite limited. Frank was big almost every place the Americans went.That he did this during a time when communications were so limited (you couldn't even buy records much then) is astonishing to me.

LOL...remember Elvis went on Frank's show, not the other way 'round.

Frank was a true icon internationally for most of his career despite the lean Ava years. To my mind, he's the 1st true iconic popular singer-actor in the modern sense of the word. He started his career 70+ years ago and had been dead nearly 20 years and STILL he's getting fans.

musicjunky318 said:

Presley was also in the army which helps him tremendously, especially in America. It's perhaps the biggest asset he has against the Beatles, Michael, and Madonna. All three.

In terms of international stardom...I don't think helps much!, in fact it probably hurts a bit I don't think most people have any expectations about Madonna (or any female star) for not having served!

Timmy84 said:

MickyDolenz said:

The FBI was spying on Elvis in his early days because he was singing black music, so "corrupting the youth". That's the real reason he was drafted into the Army, the powers that be figured he was just a fad and his popularity would have died out once his term was over.

Then his manager forced him to accept a family friendly image, which he hated. But because he was loyal he couldn't muster up the courage to tell the Colonel no with the exception of his 1968 TV performance, that is.

It's fair to say that Elvis definitely sought a more conventional, wide reaching fame after the service. Given what happened w/ other early popular singers (think Bing/Frank/Fabian/Ricky Nelson/etc), it was a logical business move from the Colonel's standpoint tho I don't think it worked so well for him in general.

IOW, he went Frank Sinatra or at least TRIED to. Unlike Frank tho, he didn't have acting talent and/or get good roles....so I think his acting career affects his overall legacy in a negative way. That said, many of his films were popular when they were 1st released.

Timmy84 said:

MickyDolenz said:

John Lennon once said that Elvis died when he went into the Army.

Yeah he said they "castrated" him.

I'd say Colonel Parker did that, not the military.

I like Madonna, but ELVIS Is ELVIS. He changed alot of things back then and his influence shows on alot of Artists now. Maybe I'm bias, but Elvis really changed alot of things. Back up, Back up just my opinion. Hey even Prince did an Elvis song at his concerts.

MickyDolenz said:

Timmy84 said:

Then his manager forced him to accept a family friendly image, which he hated. But because he was loyal he couldn't muster up the courage to tell the Colonel no with the exception of his 1968 TV performance, that is.

John Lennon once said that Elvis died when he went into the Army.

It's true. He had his moments, but he lost the edge that made him great.

He is so much like [adult] Michael Jackson in that they both had long careers, but something affected them quickly once they got to their peaks, and it was never quite the same afterward.

[Edited 12/9/10 13:56pm]

no way, madonna is too polarizing, plus she is a woman and she is seen by alot of people as a marketing creation. elvis was white america's idol, madonna was more gay america's idol. she didnt cross cultural and generational lines like mj, i doubt you will hear any 2 year olds singing madonna songs.elvis original fans are either dead or very old now but they passed his music down to their kids and his legacy keeps going, i know some young white boys who love elvis like they were there when he came along. elvis, the beatles, and michael jackson are in a league of their own, alive and dead.

^ in death Elvis has become very much a marketing creation. He's been reborn so to speak. There are countless vids/cds/posters/plates/coins bearing his image. You've got countless imipersonators.

I'm just saying....being a marketing creation is not necessarily a bad thing and it's a sure fire way to reach large masses of people and keep your image alive generation after generation. You'd be well on your way to icon status.

midiscover said:

badujunkie said:

uh oh the Jan Stan is getting defensive !!!

Just playin i love Janet and Madonna equally.

I remember when Ricky Martin won some pop award and thanked the "heroes of pop...Elvis, The Beatles, MJ and Madonna"

if there's any girl who belongs in that boys club, it's Madonna...

[Edited 12/7/10 17:42pm]

Me being a fan of Janet has nothing to do with Madonna not being on the same level as Elvis, MJ and The Beatles and using Ricky Martin as an example is a pity

Once again I repeat - Madonna is NOT on the same level as Elvis, MJ and The Beatles nor will she ever be.

Exactly, funny how they put hagdonna on the same level , that's wrong.

DesireeNevermind said:

^ in death Elvis has become very much a marketing creation. He's been reborn so to speak. There are countless vids/cds/posters/plates/coins bearing his image. You've got countless imipersonators.

I'm just saying....being a marketing creation is not necessarily a bad thing and it's a sure fire way to reach large masses of people and keep your image alive generation after generation. You'd be well on your way to icon status.

True.

DesireeNevermind said:

^ in death Elvis has become very much a marketing creation. He's been reborn so to speak. There are countless vids/cds/posters/plates/coins bearing his image. You've got countless imipersonators.

I'm just saying....being a marketing creation is not necessarily a bad thing and it's a sure fire way to reach large masses of people and keep your image alive generation after generation. You'd be well on your way to icon status.

Exactly. In fact, has any singer/entertainer in America been "commercialized" to the degree of Elvis Presley? I don't think so.

I'm not sure Madonna can surpass that BUT she's not dead yet and that's really the difference.

Though, I don't think MJ will be anywhere near them when it comes right down to it. His death certainly revived interest in him but prior to that he had become popular for everything BUT his career. Post-death, I'm not really seeing the "transformation" that took place with people like Elvis, John Lennon, etc, either.