jtfolden said:

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.

Thats because it hasnt been long enough. It took a while before Elvis became the brand he did. Not saying he will reach Elvis level but he has a much higher chance than Madonna ever has.

Arnotts said:

Thats because it hasnt been long enough. It took a while before Elvis became the brand he did. Not saying he will reach Elvis level but he has a much higher chance than Madonna ever has.

I think it's subjective but I just don't see it. I think the level of bad press he's received will over-shadow things to a degree.

jtfolden said:

Arnotts said:

Thats because it hasnt been long enough. It took a while before Elvis became the brand he did. Not saying he will reach Elvis level but he has a much higher chance than Madonna ever has.

I think it's subjective but I just don't see it. I think the level of bad press he's received will over-shadow things to a degree.

I think Michael's musical legacy will always be viewed positively but then there's the other,negative stuff that people won't be able to forget.

jtfolden said:

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.

sure he was ragged on, but Invincible sold 11 million, over 30 million watched MSG, Thriller 25 sold very well around the world, he sold out all those dates for the o2 and had that american idol special...the interest never went away, people were just influenced by the media if they had negative things to say...

alphastreet said:

jtfolden said:

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.

sure he was ragged on, but Invincible sold 11 million, over 30 million watched MSG, Thriller 25 sold very well around the world, he sold out all those dates for the o2 and had that american idol special...the interest never went away, people were just influenced by the media if they had negative things to say...

I also think the 'declinging interest' thing is more often thought by Americans. Worldwide he was still extremely popular as far as his image and celebrity goes. I remember 2002/2003 there being a ton of documentaries about him that caused a media frenzy, then the trial furthered it. It was from 2006 onwards that the frenzy died down but it started picking up again with the concert announcment. Maybe in America these events werent that big but it was on par with political type news in Australia.

Arnotts said:

alphastreet said:

sure he was ragged on, but Invincible sold 11 million, over 30 million watched MSG, Thriller 25 sold very well around the world, he sold out all those dates for the o2 and had that american idol special...the interest never went away, people were just influenced by the media if they had negative things to say...

I also think the 'declinging interest' thing is more often thought by Americans. Worldwide he was still extremely popular as far as his image and celebrity goes. I remember 2002/2003 there being a ton of documentaries about him that caused a media frenzy, then the trial furthered it. It was from 2006 onwards that the frenzy died down but it started picking up again with the concert announcment. Maybe in America these events werent that big but it was on par with political type news in Australia.

I still remember people liking him during the negative times, it was 50-50 I think and I'm from Canada. Things did get very bad, but it was probably worse in the US

SoulAlive said:

I think Michael's musical legacy will always be viewed positively but then there's the other,negative stuff that people won't be able to forget.

Exactly. It's like extra baggage or, maybe, an albatross around his neck.

jtfolden said:

SoulAlive said:

I think Michael's musical legacy will always be viewed positively but then there's the other,negative stuff that people won't be able to forget.

Exactly. It's like extra baggage or, maybe, an albatross around his neck.

some of that "drama" was self-inflicted but let the dead bury the dead.

Elvis Costello made a few good albums, sure, but ultimately Madonna is a multiple Razzie award winner, so yes.

seeingvoices12 said:

midiscover said:

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.

so the fact that she has more top 10 hits then all of them in the US means nada, ok !

SOMETIMES SCIENCE MATTERS....

badujunkie said:

seeingvoices12 said:

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

so the fact that she has more top 10 hits then all of them in the US means nada, ok !

SOMETIMES SCIENCE MATTERS....

Charts don't matter sometimes.

Timmy84 said:

badujunkie said:

so the fact that she has more top 10 hits then all of them in the US means nada, ok !

SOMETIMES SCIENCE MATTERS....

Charts don't matter sometimes.

Yea I mean Mariah has more #1's than Elvis. Does that mean she's bigger? Hell no.

musicjunky318 said:

Timmy84 said:

Charts don't matter sometimes.

Yea I mean Mariah has more #1's than Elvis. Does that mean she's bigger? Hell no.

And there you have it.

Oops how Rayan's cute ass don't get here and see that.

badujunkie said:

seeingvoices12 said:

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

so the fact that she has more top 10 hits then all of them in the US means nada, ok !

SOMETIMES SCIENCE MATTERS....

If that's the case, then James Brown is 2nd to Elvis as far as the Top 100 singles chart goes. So he's ahead of Madonna and everybody else. But JB doesn't get that much recognition in the mainstream, he's just an R&B singer.

MickyDolenz said:

badujunkie said:

so the fact that she has more top 10 hits then all of them in the US means nada, ok !

SOMETIMES SCIENCE MATTERS....

If that's the case, then James Brown is 2nd to Elvis as far as the Top 100 singles chart goes. So he's ahead of Madonna and everybody else. But JB doesn't get that much recognition in the mainstream, he's just an R&B singer.

I never got that. I don't think you could easily label James. He was more than "R&B" or "soul". The guy could do pop ballads and standards (in his earlier career), then he could change it up, some of his funk numbers had rock elements. His early hits were doo-wop based. So he was pretty diverse. Plus he was always pushing product at a time when artists even to this day don't do that. Then again he also had quality work lol

Haven't read this entire thread yet and I'm not really sure how to answer the question. She's got longevity (she's not done yet) minus the cheese (no Vegas runs so far) in her favor. I also doubt she'll end up dieing young from poor health and/or drugs. I'm not sure her cultural impact, as huge as it has been, had the same affect as Elvis' did, either. Her certainly had more success with movies (even though most of them were pretty silly). I don't think she's as respected musically as he was, either. Will there be a Madonna museum that people flock to thirty years after her death? Like I said, just not really sure how to answer this. But my gut tells me that the answer is no.

Timmy84 said:

MickyDolenz said:

If that's the case, then James Brown is 2nd to Elvis as far as the Top 100 singles chart goes. So he's ahead of Madonna and everybody else. But JB doesn't get that much recognition in the mainstream, he's just an R&B singer.

I never got that. I don't think you could easily label James. He was more than "R&B" or "soul". The guy could do pop ballads and standards (in his earlier career), then he could change it up, some of his funk numbers had rock elements. His early hits were doo-wop based. So he was pretty diverse. Plus he was always pushing product at a time when artists even to this day don't do that. Then again he also had quality work lol

The mainstream public media never really recognized R&B or black performers in general. Nor has the record companies for that matter. Anna Nicole Smith's death got more press (and so did other unknown blond women like Lacey Peterson & Nicole Simpson) than James Brown, Abbey Lincoln, Lena Horne, Lou Rawls, Gary Shider, etc. put together. Even the black media said little about them.

MickyDolenz said:

Timmy84 said:

I never got that. I don't think you could easily label James. He was more than "R&B" or "soul". The guy could do pop ballads and standards (in his earlier career), then he could change it up, some of his funk numbers had rock elements. His early hits were doo-wop based. So he was pretty diverse. Plus he was always pushing product at a time when artists even to this day don't do that. Then again he also had quality work lol

The mainstream public media never really recognized R&B or black performers in general. Nor has the record companies for that matter. Anna Nicole Smith's death got more press (and so did other unknown blond women like Lacey Peterson & Nicole Simpson) than James Brown, Abbey Lincoln, Lena Horne, Lou Rawls, Gary Shider, etc. put together. Even the black media said little about them.

I was actually shocked at how little James' death was covered by our own media considering he was once considered a hero in the community.

MickyDolenz said:

Timmy84 said:

I never got that. I don't think you could easily label James. He was more than "R&B" or "soul". The guy could do pop ballads and standards (in his earlier career), then he could change it up, some of his funk numbers had rock elements. His early hits were doo-wop based. So he was pretty diverse. Plus he was always pushing product at a time when artists even to this day don't do that. Then again he also had quality work lol

The mainstream public media never really recognized R&B or black performers in general. Nor has the record companies for that matter. Anna Nicole Smith's death got more press (and so did other unknown blond women like Lacey Peterson & Nicole Simpson) than James Brown, Abbey Lincoln, Lena Horne, Lou Rawls, Gary Shider, etc. put together. Even the black media said little about them.

Which I found disgusting. Total embarrassment.

Timmy84 said:

MickyDolenz said:

If that's the case, then James Brown is 2nd to Elvis as far as the Top 100 singles chart goes. So he's ahead of Madonna and everybody else. But JB doesn't get that much recognition in the mainstream, he's just an R&B singer.

I never got that. I don't think you could easily label James. He was more than "R&B" or "soul". The guy could do pop ballads and standards (in his earlier career), then he could change it up, some of his funk numbers had rock elements. His early hits were doo-wop based. So he was pretty diverse. Plus he was always pushing product at a time when artists even to this day don't do that. Then again he also had quality work lol

Don't forget that the JB's were one of the hottest bands walkin' the Earth for a time. Definitely underrated. A lot of people only know a few JB catch phrases or the biggest hits, too. The guy has a huge catalog of great music.

Cerebus said:

Timmy84 said:

I never got that. I don't think you could easily label James. He was more than "R&B" or "soul". The guy could do pop ballads and standards (in his earlier career), then he could change it up, some of his funk numbers had rock elements. His early hits were doo-wop based. So he was pretty diverse. Plus he was always pushing product at a time when artists even to this day don't do that. Then again he also had quality work lol

Don't forget that the JB's were one of the hottest bands walkin' the Earth for a time. Definitely underrated. A lot of people only know a few JB catch phrases or the biggest hits, too. The guy has a huge catalog of great music.

Exactly.

Timmy84 said:

MickyDolenz said:

The mainstream public media never really recognized R&B or black performers in general. Nor has the record companies for that matter. Anna Nicole Smith's death got more press (and so did other unknown blond women like Lacey Peterson & Nicole Simpson) than James Brown, Abbey Lincoln, Lena Horne, Lou Rawls, Gary Shider, etc. put together. Even the black media said little about them.

I was actually shocked at how little James' death was covered by our own media considering he was once considered a hero in the community.

And the little they did say was mostly mess and gossip like JB's adult children kicking his wife and young son out of the house, the body being missing, and so on, but not about his contributions to music. Then Michael Jackson's death was not really taken seriously at all anywhere, people making jokes, the press writing negative stories, etc. I'm pretty sure Frank Sinatra & George Harrison didn't get the same treatment.

MickyDolenz said:

Timmy84 said:

I was actually shocked at how little James' death was covered by our own media considering he was once considered a hero in the community.

And the little they did say was mostly mess and gossip like JB's adult children kicking his wife and young son out of the house, the body being missing, and so on, but not about his contributions to music. Then Michael Jackson's death was not really taken seriously at all anywhere, people making jokes, the press writing negative stories, etc. I'm pretty sure Frank Sinatra & George Harrison didn't get the same treatment.

Yeah. The only positive press I saw was from JET and EBONY magazine.

MickyDolenz said:

Timmy84 said:

I never got that. I don't think you could easily label James. He was more than "R&B" or "soul". The guy could do pop ballads and standards (in his earlier career), then he could change it up, some of his funk numbers had rock elements. His early hits were doo-wop based. So he was pretty diverse. Plus he was always pushing product at a time when artists even to this day don't do that. Then again he also had quality work lol

The mainstream public media never really recognized R&B or black performers in general. Nor has the record companies for that matter. Anna Nicole Smith's death got more press (and so did other unknown blond women like Lacey Peterson & Nicole Simpson) than James Brown, Abbey Lincoln, Lena Horne, Lou Rawls, Gary Shider, etc. put together. Even the black media said little about them.

If u are looking 4 mainstream media 2 cover issues related 2 Black folks..................I'd suggest that u are looking in the WRONG place.

Graycap23 said:

If u are looking 4 mainstream media 2 cover issues related 2 Black folks..................I'd suggest that u are looking in the WRONG place.

I don't expect them to cover Cambodian, Indian, or Puerto Rican news either. But just saying, at least James and Lena should have had more recognition. They hype Jimi Hendrix, Bob Marley, Miles Davis, and Tupac, why not them?

Considering how her career is now longer than his, and she's showing no signs of stopping, I would say that it's a good probablility that in the FUTURE, Madonna may be looked back as a bigger "historical figure" than Elvis.

badujunkie said:

seeingvoices12 said:

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

so the fact that she has more top 10 hits then all of them in the US means nada, ok !

SOMETIMES SCIENCE MATTERS....

Yeah , Means Nada .....

And the U.S is not the whole world, you have to look at the bigger Picture, Madonna is nowhere near the other acts , and putting her on the same level with them cultural infulence -wise or talent-wise is just PLAIN WRONG.....She belongs somewhere else

PurpleJedi said:

Considering how her career is now longer than his, and she's showing no signs of stopping, I would say that it's a good probablility that in the FUTURE, Madonna may be looked back as a bigger "historical figure" than Elvis.

The Beatles as a group only recorded 7 or 8 years, but that hasn't affected their popularity. B.B. King has released records way before The Beatles (or The Quarrymen ) existed and still records and tours today, but he is not as popular as them. So has Tony Bennett, Johnny Mathis, and many others. I don't think that length of career is that much of a factor.

Graycap23 said:

MickyDolenz said:

The mainstream public media never really recognized R&B or black performers in general. Nor has the record companies for that matter. Anna Nicole Smith's death got more press (and so did other unknown blond women like Lacey Peterson & Nicole Simpson) than James Brown, Abbey Lincoln, Lena Horne, Lou Rawls, Gary Shider, etc. put together. Even the black media said little about them.

If u are looking 4 mainstream media 2 cover issues related 2 Black folks..................I'd suggest that u are looking in the WRONG place.

Yeah you'll never get that.

MickyDolenz said:

PurpleJedi said:

Considering how her career is now longer than his, and she's showing no signs of stopping, I would say that it's a good probablility that in the FUTURE, Madonna may be looked back as a bigger "historical figure" than Elvis.

The Beatles as a group only recorded 7 or 8 years, but that hasn't affected their popularity. B.B. King has released records way before The Beatles (or The Quarrymen ) existed and still records and tours today, but he is not as popular as them. So has Tony Bennett, Johnny Mathis, and many others. I don't think that length of career is that much of a factor.

It is certainly a factor when combined with continued mainstream popularity. It really all depends on how the rest of her life/career goes...