Only 9% of the voting visitors thinks every country should have its own Graceland. Our new question is based on the portuguese initiative "Elvis Presley Music for Unesco Intangible Cultural Heritage status".
New QuickpollMay 13, 2011 | Other
burton wrote on May 14, 2011
If you have copies of Graceland in every country you'll only dilute the overall effect that the original has when, and if you're lucky to be able to afford to go. I went & saw the original last year for the first time because it's where Elvis lived & the feeling of being there was something special. I don't know if a copy in whatever country would have the same effect.
Jesse Garon Presley wrote on May 14, 2011
I voted yes for having Elvis on the UNESCO list, and some fans voted no? why? those are probably non-fans.
Beyond any doubt Elvis has been one of the most leading cultural influence all over the world in the last century, lasting even up till now! His name is known all ver the world, even in the smallest hamlets. He even has a Chinese name! His name and image is mentioned in movies, series, advertisement; the statement Elvis has left the building is one of the most well known English phrases. Many people (in particular immigrants in the USA) have learned English through listening to his songs and movies. Though he may not be a leading figure in the present days pop music, his influence is stille seen and acknowledged by many an artist, even those highly popular today. Without him the popular music would not be what it is today. He broke through all barriers. We can go on with this list. So who deserves to be recognised? Elvis, the king of music!
By the way, some people argue about the songs he should not have made, but there is something interesting. The other day I overheard discussion by pop reporters about bob dylan and all the 'great things he did'. One reporter mentioned: yet he also made a lot of rubbish. The reply: yes, but that is something all great stars do. It is part of the proces too. It is normal. And the discussion about this point was closed. Maybe Elvis fans should also consider that.
Yeah the only difference is artists like Dylan/Beatles wrote their material, so if it was sub par they still believed in recording it. Elvis was force fed his bad stuff and his critics say he sold his soul to Hollywood and the almighty dollar so the crappy songs & films lasted for years. Some artists release a bad song and album now & then, but looking over Elvis' total recorded output, I'd day 50% of it is sub par material, with his best & most consistently high output coming in his first 5-6 years.
Well, if they believed in rubbish says a lot more about the disputable value their 'creative' mind, much more than Elvis who was forced to do so. Though I agree with Steve V that FOR ME also the first period is the most attractive to me, later on he did outstanding things too. That is a matter of taste.
Jesse Garon Presley wrote on May 15, 2011
Steve V anyway you look at it, it doesn't change Elvis's influence in the music world today, we can argue about Elvis recording bad songs etc,but he is and was not the only one to record not so good songs,but it didn't hurt his image at all.And spott on Natha!.
Jesse/Natha , that is correct. His influence is second to none, but if you ask any of the artists he influenced , that influence was the Elvis of the 50's. He shaped the world of music, fashion, and pop culture in general in that time. Yes he did some great stuff later on, but his true impact was his 50's explosion. Here in the US that really came to light when we had the US postage stamp vote. The 50's Elvis image totally swamped the 70's Elvis in votes with the 70's Elvis getting dismissed rather uncomplimentary. Well I guess he did influence those horrible jump suited impersonators.
Jesse Garon Presley wrote on May 15, 2011
Ok steve i agree,but i also know singers who are influenced by Elvis in the 60's and 70's as well.. and yes i hate those so called impersonators with an Elvis Jump-suit on,btw did you know The Osmonds did wear Elvis - Like Jumpsuits as well? in contrary to those impersonators, jumpsuits looked better on Elvis then on them.
Yes I knew about the Osmonds & their jumpsuits. To know that Elvis inspired a Vegas act like The Osmonds doesn't do much for me. They looked cool in 1969-72, but after Aloha it was time to retire them. We didn't need to get to The Peacock, Tiger or the Sundial suits. The constant US touring became a rut just like the movie years. To go back to Vegas after Aloha says it all about how uninspired he was. Whoever he influenced in this time period I can't say, but I would bet they are not in the rock and roll hall of fame.
Jesse Garon Presley wrote on May 16, 2011
I know what you r trying to say,first of all not all jumpsuits were terrible,and he not always wore jumpsuits, but anyway it was his image,but the impersonators are making the ridicule out of it..not Elvis,And about how uninspired he was? don't ever forget he was a human being and he has so much personal stuff to struggle with and illness ( i can relate)...that doesn't make life easier,it wouldn't inspire me to do creative things i can tell you that, but the 60's and 70's you cannot dismiss to a non-influencial period, what about'' Elvis Is Back""? 'His Hand In Mine" " " How Great Thou Art" "68" " 69" Aloha, MSG, and his always sold out concerts and the list goes on and on, i know artists and others who are certainly influenced by these certain time- periods in Elvis's career ,no doubt.