1 edit
Originally posted by darvlayElvis is NOT overated. History takes a long view when it comes to such judgements. We tend to take a "what have you done for me lately" look at music. Can anybody here comment intelligently on music before the 1950's? I doubt it.
Think so? Sure, I think that Elvis was a bit of a hack in the sense that he was the great white hope used and pimped by smart businessmen to bring so-called black music to the mainstream and benefit financially. However, there's no denying that Elvis did what he did very well - all the shaking, slurring, hip shaking and lip raising and so forth. At one ti ut over, but no one can take away how important he was to rock and roll.
/lecture
We make the mistake of judging music decade by decade. Rock and Roll of the 50's, Hippy music of the 60's, Classic Rock of the 70's, New Wave of the 80's, Alternative of 90's, Urban music of the 00's. But it's all junk analysis....
"Classical music" is judged today more or less as one genre yet it spanned centuries. While I'm sure at the time, people could and did break it down into smaller intervals to distinguish different "types" of what we call Classical Music, history makes no such distinction...(musicial scholars and buffs notwithstanding)
And history will not make this modern decade by decade distinction 200 years from now. It will all be classified as Rock and Roll. At best, it will be early Rock and Roll vs Late Rock and Roll. And Elvis Presley and the gang at Sun Records will be seen as the originators and given due credit, even if by our current standards Elvis seems dated.
