Comments on: Nerds report increase in tail: blame Hollywood http://georgetownvoice.com/2009/11/19/nerds-report-increase-in-tail-blame-hollywood/ Georgetown's Weekly Newsmagazine Since 1969 Thu, 18 Mar 2010 18:37:41 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: Jim Burrows http://georgetownvoice.com/2009/11/19/nerds-report-increase-in-tail-blame-hollywood/comment-page-1/#comment-6960 Jim Burrows Thu, 19 Nov 2009 06:04:58 +0000 http://www.georgetownvoice.com/?p=9842#comment-6960 The problem does not always arise when the wrong people make money off of others’ creations. The problem is when writers are misinformed. Assuming Elvis was the wrong man to do it, then this, in addition to disqualifying any other white american to have taken his place, would necessarily lead to us expecting that someone other, ostensibly an African American, would have had to make a career of singing African-American blues, and rock music, and make it really palatable to the masses. But this had been tried before, for years, decades before Elvis, so is the writer of the article suggesting that we should have waited 50 years so that someone, say, an African American today, would act as a catalyst bringing the blues, rock, soul, raggae, r&b, and rap, all rolled into one, as if Presley's fusion of R&B and Country, which created rockbilly, one of the four major styles in early rock, had never existed? Wishful thinking, in reverse, I say. Or, is the writer suggesting that someone as James Brown, a fully developed artist, by 1956, when he electrified the Apollo, or any of the Chicago greats, like Berry and Didley, or the Genious himself, Mr. Ray Charles, or Fats Domino, in New Orleans, could have galvanized public attention, and forced people to focus on rock, as a way of life, like Elvis did? If that was the case, that he did it because he sang African american songs, why then Pat Boone, and not Elvis, or why did Rick nelso, not Elvis, galvanized the world when the former attempted to sing every Little Richard song, on national television, whilst the latter did also, in his parent' television show, in which he always appeared? And, moreover, is the writer suggesting that the concerts that some of these early rockers gave, in far away places, could even begin to mean as much to people the world over, including inside the Iron Curtain, as a siongle event in Presley's lufe made possible, his Army stint produced, and this without him ever stepping on a single stage in Europe? Come on, get over criticizing Presley who was, luckily, the one who naturally loved the blues from the word go. First in Tupelo, in the poorest state in the Union, with African American neighbors, as poor as he was. And then, as of age 12, in Memphis, the home of the delta blues, in the second poorest state in the Union. At the crossrods of American music, that's where he was. The above notwithstanding, the unvarnished truth is that of the 18 number ones he had in the singles charts, 16 were written by white americans, the remaining 2 from the pen of one African American, the great Otis Blackwell, who wrote both "Don't be cruel" and "All shook up". Or is the writer of the article unaware that "Hound Dog" and "Jailhouse Rock" to givetwo examples, were written by Leiber and Stoller, two jewish "kids" form New Jersey? Which brings me back to the sentence that stated it all. Presley did not build on a career that co-opted African-American blues and rock music and made it palatable to the masses. He built on a career that included the above, but he had a tremendous palette of other colors to go with it. Or are we to suggest that "Heartbreak Hotel", "Love me tender", his first and fifth number ones, or "It's now or never" and "Suspicious Minds", his 13th and 18th, his last, were blues inspired? The man had the knack, as they say in Britain, and he was the complete package, from the start. And in 1856, no singer was expected to be a songwriter. The problem does not always arise when the wrong people make money off of others’ creations. The problem is when writers are misinformed. Assuming Elvis was the wrong man to do it, then this, in addition to disqualifying any other white american to have taken his place, would necessarily lead to us expecting that someone other, ostensibly an African American, would have had to make a career of singing African-American blues, and rock music, and make it really palatable to the masses. But this had been tried before, for years, decades before Elvis, so is the writer of the article suggesting that we should have waited 50 years so that someone, say, an African American today, would act as a catalyst bringing the blues, rock, soul, raggae, r&b, and rap, all rolled into one, as if Presley’s fusion of R&B and Country, which created rockbilly, one of the four major styles in early rock, had never existed? Wishful thinking, in reverse, I say.

Or, is the writer suggesting that someone as James Brown, a fully developed artist, by 1956, when he electrified the Apollo, or any of the Chicago greats, like Berry and Didley, or the Genious himself, Mr. Ray Charles, or Fats Domino, in New Orleans, could have galvanized public attention, and forced people to focus on rock, as a way of life, like Elvis did? If that was the case, that he did it because he sang African american songs, why then Pat Boone, and not Elvis, or why did Rick nelso, not Elvis, galvanized the world when the former attempted to sing every Little Richard song, on national television, whilst the latter did also, in his parent’ television show, in which he always appeared?

And, moreover, is the writer suggesting that the concerts that some of these early rockers gave, in far away places, could even begin to mean as much to people the world over, including inside the Iron Curtain, as a siongle event in Presley’s lufe made possible, his Army stint produced, and this without him ever stepping on a single stage in Europe?

Come on, get over criticizing Presley who was, luckily, the one who naturally loved the blues from the word go. First in Tupelo, in the poorest state in the Union, with African American neighbors, as poor as he was.

And then, as of age 12, in Memphis, the home of the delta blues, in the second poorest state in the Union.

At the crossrods of American music, that’s where he was.

The above notwithstanding, the unvarnished truth is that of the 18 number ones he had in the singles charts, 16 were written by white americans, the remaining 2 from the pen of one African American, the great Otis Blackwell, who wrote both “Don’t be cruel” and “All shook up”.

Or is the writer of the article unaware that “Hound Dog” and “Jailhouse Rock” to givetwo examples, were written by Leiber and Stoller, two jewish “kids” form New Jersey?

Which brings me back to the sentence that stated it all. Presley did not build on a career that co-opted African-American blues and rock music and made it palatable to the masses. He built on a career that included the above, but he had a tremendous palette of other colors to go with it.

Or are we to suggest that “Heartbreak Hotel”, “Love me tender”, his first and fifth number ones, or “It’s now or never” and “Suspicious Minds”, his 13th and 18th, his last, were blues inspired?

The man had the knack, as they say in Britain, and he was the complete package, from the start. And in 1856, no singer was expected to be a songwriter.

]]>