BlaqueKnight said:

I git tired of the blacks complainin' bout what folks stole from them! Now, you talking' bout' the KANG!!!! Elbis Presley is the KANG o' rock n' roll and dammit he's gone stay the KANG! You gots Martin Luther Kang; Elbis is the kang o' rock n' roll!!!

This topic started out much bigger than Elvis.
The subject matter is much bigger than Elvis.
Its funny how people talk about the 50s and 60s like most whites weren't outwardly racist as hell and wanted nothing directly to do with black people, black culture or anything dark enough to be considered non-white.
Jimi had to leave the country in order to get props.

The TRUTH is
Elvis's label DID use Elvis as many labels used their white artist to sell music that was stolen or borrowed from black people because America was RACIST. People need to stop trying to re-write or downplay history. It was a marketing technique of the time period. It wasn't equal and blacks in general weren't running around trying to imitate white artists. It was the other way around. Defending Elvis doesn't change the fact that the entire system of how things were done was inherently racist and in different ways, it still is today.

Every major label has used hip-hop and R&B to sell non-black artists to mainstream audiences.
The truth is people like to see a representation of themselves on screen and in their entertainment. The Eminem syndrome is real. Every artist named in that article by the author has used hip-hop and R&B to sell themselves to the mainstream. People are well aware of who today's culture vultures are. Oh, and artists who let their labels do the dirty work are still part of the system, so no passes are given.

Where the author and I disagree is the implied intentional "abuse of urban culture"; that is not exactly true. These execs are trying to sell an image to as many people as possible but their target market is 14-24 year old white females. The intent is to make money. The "abuse" is a byproduct. They aren't sitting in board rooms trying to figure out ways to abuse black culture, they are sitting in those meetings trying to figure out ways to make the most money by doing the least amount of work and spending the least.

I actually do agree.

BlaqueKnight said:

The TRUTH is
Elvis's label DID use Elvis as many labels used their white artist to sell music that was stolen or borrowed from black people because America was RACIST.

No argument w/your other comments but more than a quibble with this.

If you mean Sun, okay, although Phillips, who recorded many black artists, was also trying to combat in some ways that inherently racist response to black music (which was also music Elvis already knew).

However with RCA, where Elvis spent the vast majority of his career recording his other 700+ masters, no. The evidence isn't there in any substantial fashion in either the documents or recordings.

Elvis was signed by RCA's Country A&R who in addition to Elvis recruited Eddy Arnold, The Browns, Hank Snow and Jim Reeves. Elvis recorded by far the most 'black music' when he was more involved in his own song selection and/or outside the RCA bubble such as bringing his own pre-RCA choices, working with non-RCA producer Moman, Binder for the 68 Special, determining his live setlists, or agreeing on cuts that he remembered from older favorite recordings (such as Shake a Hand and Pledging My Love).

Original memos of RCA-suggested songs do exist and don't jibe with your charge. Nor do other existing documents such as the army-era letter checking on Elvis's request by phone from Germany for Like a Baby and Such a Night (which he then recorded immediately post-army) and RCA's own mega-hyped signing releases "In Elvis Presley we've acquired the most dynamic and sought-after new artist in country music today!"

If Parker was interested in using Elvis to "put a white face on black music" he would have gone with Atlantic when Jerry Wexler and Ahmet Ertegun offered "all the money we had" to sign Presley and see that his music stayed "a bit funkier. We wouldn't have gone pop so quickly with him."

Elvis's career illustrates clearly that Parker and RCA cared primarily about not offending the mainstream white family-friendly establishment whose cash they coveted.

Terrib3Towel said:

What do u call Whitney Houston jumping around in a blonde wig? Or falling for a white guy? Or MJ with his long silky hair? Or lightening skin? Or Mariah basically hiding her true ethnicity?

Mariah never hide her ethnicity. Right from the start, she was doing interviews with black magazines and the very first interview I saw of her on BET's Video Soul in 1990, she stated she was part black. And most of her music reflected her R&B roots. So, i'm not sure what more people wanted her to do? Record remake of "We Shall Overcome"? True, she was never in public making a spectacle of herself like a lot of other black(er) women in the business have over the years, but she has never denied being part black.

Did I miss it or why didn't this article mention Eminem? Now, this is a white dude who took a music 100% associated with black culture, made it his own and became a billionaire while black artists in that same genre (with more talent and better material) who were in the business years before he was, have not sold even a small fraction of what he has sold.

kitbradley said:

Mariah never hide her ethnicity. Right from the start, she was doing interviews with black magazines and the very first interview I saw of her on BET's Video Soul in 1990, she stated she was part black. And most of her music reflected her R&B roots. So, i'm not sure what more people wanted her to do? Record remake of "We Shall Overcome"? True, she was never in public making a spectacle of herself like a lot of other black(er) women in the business have over the years, but she has never denied being part black.

Mariah never hid her ethnicity. Never. She tried to play politically correct and market herself in such a way that she appealed to all races but she never hid. As a matter of fact, IMO, it was her adherence to contemporary R&B and hip-hop that caused a decline in her popularity for a bit there. When she was having every rapper and his homie guest on her records, her pop fans strayed away from her.

As to Elvis, his biggest FAST SONG hit was Hound Dog and Don't Be Cruel was close behind it. (Its now or never is a slow song, so don't even bring that up. Elvis was not a ballad artist). He is known as the king of rock and roll - which was "race music", so trying to detatch Elvis from culture vulturing is futile. Its not a slight on his personality as he was known to generally be a nice guy and he himself actually loved black music.

Dude was known for his moves and his looks. His moves came from black folk. That is undeniable and there is too much evidence to back that up.

I'm done on Elvis. This topic is bigger than "the Kang".

similarly I think it's time we call out electronic artists for exploiting sci-fi culture. A neon line has to be drawn somewhere

[Edited 5/14/12 8:59am]

Eileen said:

Cinny said:

This kind of article belongs in the 1950s.

"These individuals conveniently adopt the styles of their peers without a true appreciation of the music."

What does this writer think Timberlake and Aguilera actually listen to?

I wouldn't say that's never the case. But neither can I agree the article more "belongs in the 1950s."

Someone like Pat Boone covering Little Richard, for example, wasn't "adopting the styles" of Little Richard or Berry. He was recording and performing those songs in the same traditional pop vocal style he used for everything. Nobody was listening to the radio and saying, geez I can't tell, is that Pat Boone or Little Richard? He changed nothing about himself to "adopt the style"of another.

Someone like Presley, well to argue at this point that he didn't have a true appreciation of the music he was performing would be just blinkered. Your same point is apt re: "actually listen to?"

I understand your point about not adopting (ie. stealing) a style, but Pat Boone was covering his contemporaries, his colleagues, and was in his own lane prior to that.

Once black music was in the mainstream (even gospel styles), white babies were influenced as children a lot more honestly than people seem to think.

R. Kelly didn't want to "write hits" for Justin but he had no problem writing for Britney? Pshh...

musicjunky318 said:

The only piece I agree with is the success argument but to call it abuse isn't exactly correct. I know a lot of people that want to blame Elvis for his status but it wasn't him, it was just the era. Any fan that really studied Presley would know he had a great appreciation for African-American music and called out numerous influences by name. Would he have been as popular if he was black? No, but that's not his fault. That's just the way it was. People need to stop with this.

SchlomoThaHomo said:

R. Kelly didn't want to "write hits" for Justin but he had no problem writing for Britney? Pshh...

But she was a girl

kitbradley said:

Did I miss it or why didn't this article mention Eminem? Now, this is a white dude who took a music 100% associated with black culture, made it his own and became a billionaire while black artists in that same genre (with more talent and better material) who were in the business years before he was, have not sold even a small fraction of what he has sold.

I heard somewhere he outsold 2pac, don't know how true it was, but I don't think he was ok with how he was getting accolades, is that true?

kitbradley said:

Did I miss it or why didn't this article mention Eminem? Now, this is a white dude who took a music 100% associated with black culture, made it his own and became a billionaire while black artists in that same genre (with more talent and better material) who were in the business years before he was, have not sold even a small fraction of what he has sold.

Hip Hop wasn't 100% black, there was some Latino influence in the beginning (especially with tagging/graffiti/breakin'), but it tends to be ignored now.

MickyDolenz said:

kitbradley said:

Did I miss it or why didn't this article mention Eminem? Now, this is a white dude who took a music 100% associated with black culture, made it his own and became a billionaire while black artists in that same genre (with more talent and better material) who were in the business years before he was, have not sold even a small fraction of what he has sold.

Hip Hop wasn't 100% black, there was some Latino influence in the beginning (especially with tagging/graffiti/breakin'), but it tends to be ignored now.

reggaeton is another example of this, and I'm sure some rock & roll as well.

BlaqueKnight said:

I git tired of the blacks complainin' bout what folks stole from them! Now, you talking' bout' the KANG!!!! Elbis Presley is the KANG o' rock n' roll and dammit he's gone stay the KANG! You gots Martin Luther Kang; Elbis is the kang o' rock n' roll!!!

This topic started out much bigger than Elvis.
The subject matter is much bigger than Elvis.
Its funny how people talk about the 50s and 60s like most whites weren't outwardly racist as hell and wanted nothing directly to do with black people, black culture or anything dark enough to be considered non-white.
Jimi had to leave the country in order to get props.

The TRUTH is
Elvis's label DID use Elvis as many labels used their white artist to sell music that was stolen or borrowed from black people because America was RACIST. People need to stop trying to re-write or downplay history. It was a marketing technique of the time period. It wasn't equal and blacks in general weren't running around trying to imitate white artists. It was the other way around. Defending Elvis doesn't change the fact that the entire system of how things were done was inherently racist and in different ways, it still is today.

Every major label has used hip-hop and R&B to sell non-black artists to mainstream audiences.
The truth is people like to see a representation of themselves on screen and in their entertainment. The Eminem syndrome is real. Every artist named in that article by the author has used hip-hop and R&B to sell themselves to the mainstream. People are well aware of who today's culture vultures are. Oh, and artists who let their labels do the dirty work are still part of the system, so no passes are given.

Where the author and I disagree is the implied intentional "abuse of urban culture"; that is not exactly true. These execs are trying to sell an image to as many people as possible but their target market is 14-24 year old white females. The intent is to make money. The "abuse" is a byproduct. They aren't sitting in board rooms trying to figure out ways to abuse black culture, they are sitting in those meetings trying to figure out ways to make the most money by doing the least amount of work and spending the least.

The Jacksons.................The Osmonds

New Edition (NE)...........New Kids On The Block (NKOTB)

RUN DMC.......................The Beastie Boys

Hammer...........................Vanilla Ice

Shabba Ranks................Snow

kitbradley said:

Mariah never hide her ethnicity. Right from the start, she was doing interviews with black magazines and the very first interview I saw of her on BET's Video Soul in 1990, she stated she was part black. And most of her music reflected her R&B roots. So, i'm not sure what more people wanted her to do? Record remake of "We Shall Overcome"? True, she was never in public making a spectacle of herself like a lot of other black(er) women in the business have over the years, but she has never denied being part black.

Wrong!

For Mariah's self-titled debut album, then-Sony Music Entertainment record exec Tommy Mottola tried to keep Mariah's racial background a secret to the point of having a few strings of Mariah's hair to block her nose on the album cover. Why? Because everyone knows that when it comes to African-like features, the nose don't lie.

[Edited 5/14/12 21:00pm]

squish said:

similarly I think it's time we call out electronic artists for exploiting sci-fi culture. A neon line has to be drawn somewhere

[Edited 5/14/12 8:59am]

House & Techno were invented by gays & blacks. Whites increase the tempo and turn it into Trance.

The End.

SchlomoThaHomo said:

R. Kelly didn't want to "write hits" for Justin but he had no problem writing for Britney? Pshh...

Britney has a vagina.

TonyVanDam said:

If there is anyone abusing black culture these days, it's white major record label executives, NOT white artists.

TonyVanDam said:

Wrong!

For Mariah's self-titled debut album, then-Sony Music Entertainment record exec Tommy Mottola tried to keep Mariah's racial background a secret to to point of having a few strings of Mariah's hair to block her nose on the album cover. Why? Because everyone knows that when it comes to African-like features, the nose don't lie.

You know it was to try to fool white people. People of color, especially black people always knew Mariah was mixed.

TonyVanDam said:

SchlomoThaHomo said:

R. Kelly didn't want to "write hits" for Justin but he had no problem writing for Britney? Pshh...

Britney has a vagina.

and Britney is not outwardly admitting to exploitation.

Someone who would write a song for Jon B. might not want to write a song for Justin Timberlake.

But wait...according to orgers, black people aren't influencing anyone and if they are, they are being equally influenced by white artists (if not moreso) and Elvis was a musical island who was influenced by no one.

If we all say thats the truth then maybe people will believe us.

BlaqueKnight said:

TonyVanDam said:

Britney has a vagina.

and Britney is not outwardly admitting to exploitation.

Someone who would write a song for Jon B. might not want to write a song for Justin Timberlake.

But wait...according to orgers, black people aren't influencing anyone and if they are, they are being equally influenced by white artists (if not moreso) and Elvis was a musical island who was influenced by no one.

If we all say thats the truth then maybe people will believe us.

You said you were done with Elvis.

rialb said:

BlaqueKnight said:

and Britney is not outwardly admitting to exploitation.

Someone who would write a song for Jon B. might not want to write a song for Justin Timberlake.

But wait...according to orgers, black people aren't influencing anyone and if they are, they are being equally influenced by white artists (if not moreso) and Elvis was a musical island who was influenced by no one.

If we all say thats the truth then maybe people will believe us.

You said you were done with Elvis.

Sorry. That slipped.

TonyVanDam said:

BlaqueKnight said:

I git tired of the blacks complainin' bout what folks stole from them! Now, you talking' bout' the KANG!!!! Elbis Presley is the KANG o' rock n' roll and dammit he's gone stay the KANG! You gots Martin Luther Kang; Elbis is the kang o' rock n' roll!!!

This topic started out much bigger than Elvis.
The subject matter is much bigger than Elvis.
Its funny how people talk about the 50s and 60s like most whites weren't outwardly racist as hell and wanted nothing directly to do with black people, black culture or anything dark enough to be considered non-white.
Jimi had to leave the country in order to get props.

The TRUTH is
Elvis's label DID use Elvis as many labels used their white artist to sell music that was stolen or borrowed from black people because America was RACIST. People need to stop trying to re-write or downplay history. It was a marketing technique of the time period. It wasn't equal and blacks in general weren't running around trying to imitate white artists. It was the other way around. Defending Elvis doesn't change the fact that the entire system of how things were done was inherently racist and in different ways, it still is today.

Every major label has used hip-hop and R&B to sell non-black artists to mainstream audiences.
The truth is people like to see a representation of themselves on screen and in their entertainment. The Eminem syndrome is real. Every artist named in that article by the author has used hip-hop and R&B to sell themselves to the mainstream. People are well aware of who today's culture vultures are. Oh, and artists who let their labels do the dirty work are still part of the system, so no passes are given.

Where the author and I disagree is the implied intentional "abuse of urban culture"; that is not exactly true. These execs are trying to sell an image to as many people as possible but their target market is 14-24 year old white females. The intent is to make money. The "abuse" is a byproduct. They aren't sitting in board rooms trying to figure out ways to abuse black culture, they are sitting in those meetings trying to figure out ways to make the most money by doing the least amount of work and spending the least.

The Jacksons.................The Osmonds

New Edition (NE)...........New Kids On The Block (NKOTB)

RUN DMC.......................The Beastie Boys

Hammer...........................Vanilla Ice

Shabba Ranks................Snow

Well let me fire up the clip from last week where LL Cool J said "without the Beastie Boys, i wouldnt be here, they put me on the map" So the whole "race" shit is exactly that "SHIT" putting labels on music now is worse than it ever was, as i said before, just because now a greater % interracial date and marry doesnt mean that peoples eyes are open wider, they arent, there minds are as closed as ever, i saw more people interracially dating when i was in Highschool later 80's than now, just now its polarized like a carnival side show, then it just was. So we can go back and forth who put who on the map and who is responsible for rock n roll and this and that and the other. As for the Mariah thing, well truth is she was never denying who she was, however she was doing what it took to "SELL", so lets seperate those things, she never denied who she was but early on she was going to whatever path she had to take to sell, which is what this article is accusing the likes of Xtina and Justin and whatever artist. Its a dumb article written by someone with NO credentials whatsoever, and they knew it would stir shit up, just like an artist stirs shit up to sell, so do fake journalists.

TonyVanDam said:

kitbradley said:

Mariah never hide her ethnicity. Right from the start, she was doing interviews with black magazines and the very first interview I saw of her on BET's Video Soul in 1990, she stated she was part black. And most of her music reflected her R&B roots. So, i'm not sure what more people wanted her to do? Record remake of "We Shall Overcome"? True, she was never in public making a spectacle of herself like a lot of other black(er) women in the business have over the years, but she has never denied being part black.

Wrong!

For Mariah's self-titled debut album, then-Sony Music Entertainment record exec Tommy Mottola tried to keep Mariah's racial background a secret to to point of having a few strings of Mariah's hair to block her nose on the album cover. Why? Because everyone knows that when it comes to African-like features, the nose don't lie.

But, she never hid it though. Despite all of those attempts. Hell, it was HER who discloused that information about Sony trying to "white wash" her.

TonyVanDam said:

For Mariah's self-titled debut album, then-Sony Music Entertainment record exec Tommy Mottola tried to keep Mariah's racial background a secret to to point of having a few strings of Mariah's hair to block her nose on the album cover. Why? Because everyone knows that when it comes to African-like features, the nose don't lie.

IDK if that's really true. I remember watching those early interviews as a kid and definitely remember her mentioning her ethnic background right from the jump. And it was pretty plain to see, even on the record cover, that she wasn't Wonder bread. That tiny little wisp of hair didn't exactly cover up her nose. She had a surgeon take care of that later. I think the hair blowing was just Mariah being in love with her wind machine.

SchlomoThaHomo said:

R. Kelly didn't want to "write hits" for Justin but he had no problem writing for Britney? Pshh...

Britney never tried to to gain acceptance from Urban audience like Justin Timberlake has.

neonlights said:

SchlomoThaHomo said:

R. Kelly didn't want to "write hits" for Justin but he had no problem writing for Britney? Pshh...

Britney never tried to to gain acceptance from Urban audience like Justin Timberlake has.

Maybe not on that level...but if I recall correctly, along with the Kelly track, she did have a song featuring the Ying Yang Twins on that album as well as a few that Tricky and Dream worked on.

alphastreet said:

MickyDolenz said:

Hip Hop wasn't 100% black, there was some Latino influence in the beginning (especially with tagging/graffiti/breakin'), but it tends to be ignored now.

reggaeton is another example of this, and I'm sure some rock & roll as well.

I don't know anything about reggaeton other than all of the few songs I've heard sound alike and that Gasolina song that people were playing over and over at work.

Everybody take a look.

lastdecember said:

TonyVanDam said:

The Jacksons.................The Osmonds

New Edition (NE)...........New Kids On The Block (NKOTB)

RUN DMC.......................The Beastie Boys

Hammer...........................Vanilla Ice

Shabba Ranks................Snow

Well let me fire up the clip from last week where LL Cool J said "without the Beastie Boys, i wouldnt be here, they put me on the map" So the whole "race" shit is exactly that "SHIT" putting labels on music now is worse than it ever was, as i said before, just because now a greater % interracial date and marry doesnt mean that peoples eyes are open wider, they arent, there minds are as closed as ever, i saw more people interracially dating when i was in Highschool later 80's than now, just now its polarized like a carnival side show, then it just was. So we can go back and forth who put who on the map and who is responsible for rock n roll and this and that and the other. As for the Mariah thing, well truth is she was never denying who she was, however she was doing what it took to "SELL", so lets seperate those things, she never denied who she was but early on she was going to whatever path she had to take to sell, which is what this article is accusing the likes of Xtina and Justin and whatever artist. Its a dumb article written by someone with NO credentials whatsoever, and they knew it would stir shit up, just like an artist stirs shit up to sell, so do fake journalists.

Chuck D also mention that it was The Beastie Boys that inspired Public Enemy to step their game up when it came to the live stage performances. But you also notice that Professor Griff will NEVER publicly co-sign on Chuck's statement.

NEVER!

And you know why? Because Griff & Chuck knows that RUN DMC was first. So there.

Harlepolis said:

TonyVanDam said:

Wrong!

For Mariah's self-titled debut album, then-Sony Music Entertainment record exec Tommy Mottola tried to keep Mariah's racial background a secret to to point of having a few strings of Mariah's hair to block her nose on the album cover. Why? Because everyone knows that when it comes to African-like features, the nose don't lie.

But, she never hid it though. Despite all of those attempts. Hell, it was HER who discloused that information about Sony trying to "white wash" her.

Tommy Mottola downplaying Mariah's background.............FAILED!