JPF Home Page Forums General Messages General Message Forum Bigger than the Beatles and Elvis?

I've always thought Elvis was extremely over-rated and never liked him, even as a kid. The Beatles are certainly on a different level than Elvis ever was aside from sheer pop hype status. I listen to the Elvis #1's and they do nothing for me. Pop fluff all the way. I absolutely see no more depth there than I see in either Madonna or Mariah. And the fact that Elvis inserted his name on songs he didn't write makes him and his puppeteer manager a villain, just as those artists who do it today are in my mind.

If you subtract George Martin from the Beatles equation, they wouldn't be the nearly the iconic group that they are either. He was the difference maker. He brought real musicianship and arranging to pop music and then psychedelic music. Had they continued with the 4 piece lineup and guitar arrangements they'd just be another Rolling Stones or (insert many other pop/rock 60's bands). Martin made them immortal. But what the Beatles DID have were great melodic pop songs and the rare freedom to us their pop notoriety to give them the freedom to do ground breaking things that few artists today short of a Madonna, have ever been allowed to do. On that front, Madonna has been just as groundbreaking. She's revinvented herself over and over and over in ways that the Beatles might have if they'd stayed together. She did it at odds with the music industry of the last 25 years who rarely allow anyone any creative growth or diversity at all. And though she didn't have a George Martin in her corner, she was smart enough to hook up with a lot of ground breaking producers who gave her relevant and groundbreaking arrangements of her own to boost what she was doing. Rather than having a long term songwriting partner like Lennon and McCartney, she instead co-wrote with a lot of her producers. You have to think that in some respects, since Lennon/McCartney didn't really co-write a lot of their hits, that they really were similar as a more Lennon/Martin and McCartney/Martin collaboration similar to what Madonna has done.

Mariah Carey has been far more like Elvis in that she's had a more straight down the middle career with less diversity than the Beatles or Madonna but much the same as Elvis. I think she's a far more talented singer, but Elvis was probably a more charismatic performer. Today, when a young Disney kid is more charisma than talent people make fun of them. For Elvis for some reason, it was okay. It's a generational thing.

Elvis is likely to be mostly forgotten in relevent music discussion in our lifetime. The Beatles won't be simply due to their songwriting and the fact they were even more present in the expansion of media where everyone had a TV which wasn't as common in early Elvis days. Something else to keep in mind, that Mariah and Madonna are competing in a day and age where ANYONE with a few hundred dollars and some talent can put out a good album and have it available for distribution around the world. Back then, the competition was limited and the fix was in even more than today in radio and other media. Newspapers of the day were all too happy to print the propaganda being served up by the hucksters. Though it still happens to a point today, there's also far more scrutiny against popular figures than ever before due to the unregulated internet. Imagine the scandals that would have roared about many early pop stars if they existed today?

I think all of them have talent and I find it humorous that old folks want to tell young folks that their music isn't as good. It's the oldest and most worn out cliche come to life once again. And so it goes.

Brian