RS : Roughly Stupid

[jeanno]

I don?t know if I can put that here or if it more some TOPIC stuff... Anyway, a few days ago,I was nervous and I needed to shout something. So I wrote that... and send it to Rolling Stone...


?R.S.? mag :
?Roughly Stupid?
b y J e a n ? N o



A few weeks ago was published in the ?rock?n?roll? magazine Rolling Stones (now on R.S.) an article / serial about the ?immortals? of rock music. Always aware of being ?different? and with ?innovative? purpose? (excuse me : I?m laughing! I can?t stop!), R.S. edited a rare top 3 : the Beatles #1, Dylan #2 and Elvis at #3. Waow! They are really outrageous people at R.S.! Rock?n?roll attitude, you know?
Anyway : despite the typical fact of dismissing the ?big bang of rock?n?roll? and overrating ?soft pop? culture (sorry guys, ?Love Me Do?, ?All My Loving? and ?Octopuses Garden? are not rock?n?roll classics) as they always do, there was an original article about Presley written by Bono : that was the best thing of the whole mag.

Now comes the sadest one :
I?ve been living in Spain for 5 years and never bought R.S. Nevertheless, the freaky top 3 was so funny! Moreover, there was that article by U2 Big Boss translated to spanish that was the only thing that was not sh**t, so I did it : I GOT R.S.! (Beware : I didn?t buy it, just got it?) I?ve always been a respectful person, so I read the first two articles dedicated to the 60?s teenage idols and then came the one from The Legend itself : Elvis. Of course, I had read the original english publication. That?s the reason why I was so surprised, amazed, when I saw that part of the original publication had been censored in the spanish edition! Unbelievable but true. And do you know what was that part about? Too easy : Bono explained that what impressed him more was the Vegas showman (?with the Big voice?) from the 70?s. But is it really surprising?

As always, R.S. ?Spanish version? (or whatever other version) dismisses Presley whole heritage and, generally, focuses on the early years (the 50?s) and forgets all the rest. You know, to study a 23 years carreer is too much. It?s clearly not a job for people from R.S. : it?s easier to reduce it to 4 years (1954 ? 1958) and resume all the rest with the pathetic :

?He left to Germany, made 3 movies a year until 1969 and, finally, overweighted live on stage before dying in 1977.? (public domain)

19 years in three lines! A dream come true! OK R.S. ?reporters?, I give you that sentence so you can use it every time you need it. ?Copy? and ?Paste?. So easy to remember? OK, I repeat : first ?Copy? and, then, ?Paste?. No : not the contrary.

Let?s make a poll : how many of you read any article about Elvis? recording sessions between 1966 and 1976? OK, let?s make an easier question : how many did read an article about Elvis there? Still easier : how many read an article in this mag? Well, I tried one time, but I couldn?t finish : it stinks.

Coming back to the King, that?s the way it?s always been : Elvis, the #1 Rock?n?roll legend (I don?t say it : Lennon, Paul Simon, Rober Plant, the ZZ Top, Little Richard, Madonna? say it), his studio work, his enormous influence, remain underrated by the ?rock experts? (ho-ho-ho!) that prefer to give more importance to soft pop tunes makers. They?re still trying to convince us that ?Yellow Submarin? was such an important piece of art. ?In the tooown where I was boooorn?? Art, they say. Sure!?

I can easely imagine the typical 45 years old R.S. writter getting up in the morning listening to his favourit Eminem album and, then, getting wild, ON FIRE, with ?Obla-do, Obla ?da?. He?s never heard pure rock?n?roll (for him, ?Baby let?s play house? is a Barbie set and ?Great ball of fire? some mexican menu). Instead, he will prepare an article about HUGE (in Tarantino?s language speaking) people like Sir McCartney whose rock?n?roll purpose is to sign McCartney / Lennon instead of Lennon McCartney. Several pages for that. So interesting. Rat! Of course, like THE SUN or ?HOLA!, he will use very big photos so he won?t have to write too much. Bigger are the pics, shorter is the text. They like big pictures in R.S.. My 5 years old cousin like them too.

Let me say to you one thing : R.S. mag is, to my point of view, everything but rock?n?roll (except for his name which is the only link to THE culture). Basically, we?re talking about a magazine written by 60?s soft pop tunes suckers (sorry for the bad language) convinced that everything happened between 1964 and 1966.
They may try to change our minds but they can?t change history.

July, 27th 2004
Spain

Visit Jean-No?s website :
Elvis ? STAX SESSIONS ?73
www.geocities.com/yanoyanote

P.S. 1 : At the time I?m writing this article, the ?Aloha from Hawaii? Boxset is still n?1 in Spain (5 weeks).

P.S. 2 : By the way, ?That?s all right? (the song that started it all back in 54, not in 64) was #1 in the US. Do you remember the position of ?Love me do? when they published it (again) to celebrate its 40th anniversary?

P.S. 3 : I give the Roughly Stupid mag to my 5 years old little cousin so he can use his painting pencils on it. Pretty useful at least.

[Lonniebealestreet]

Jeanno,

I hear what you're saying.

Regarding Bono, I have changed my thinking on him recently. I had the impression of him before that he really only appreciated Elvis's work at Sun and basically thought everything was downhill from there. Then for that Elvis Lives special he said something like "Elvis lost his love for life and became an opera singer," while footage of Unchained Melody from the CBS special archives was playing. I didn't care that much for the rest of his goofy rant either, but that's just my opinion. However that Rolling Stone article seems to reflect a better understanding or appreciation of Elvis throughout his life, not just at the Big Bang.

If a magazine can be an icon, Rolling Stone certainly is one. But Elvis does not lack validation by not topping their lists. I wouldn't let it bother you too much. There are plenty of other unenlightened folks out there.

I think it was George Klein who said something like, "If you get Elvis, no explanation is necessary. If you don't get Elvis, no explanation is possible." (That is or was in somebody's signature, I believe.)

[jeanno]

Lonnie

A better appreciation ONLY if you have the original text from Bono, not the censored one in the spanish version.

Recently, i spoke with a Beatles fan. He told me he like them because they invented Rock'n'roll music. I asked him if he had ever heard about Sun Records, R&B music, Chuck Berry, Blues, King (of Rock) Elvis... NOTHING : for him, 1964 was the beginning of everything. He didn't have any interest for music history and that kills me. We, EP Fans, do know about the origins, the roots of Rock. This guy don't know and don'twant.

[NightRider]

You know this sort of thing has bugged me for many years. Very seldom do we hear praise for anything elvis ever did. you get the occasional peice regarding the 50's of course, but even they are few and far between.

I still strongly believe that the bad press elvis has always recieved ( especially in the uk - so i assume it would be the same in europe too) has dramatically affected the amount of new elvis fans.

If the Beatles release anything...Record Collector do a four page review and rant on about how great whatever it is...is. With elvis, we are lucky to get a couple of lines.

Record collectors views on the new Aloha package were something like this.......( not exact, but i didn't buy it - just from memory )...elvis performing a whole load of songs...most of which he was not known for doing....( forgot Suspicious Minds..Burning Love...Love Me...Blue Suede Shoes...Hound Dog...American Trliogy...A Big Hunk O' Love....then did we ????)...and includes Roy Orbisons Its Over

Do you think that the guy even watched it then ? No is the answer to that question. Aloha is one of the biggest ever live performances by anyone...watched by how many all over the world ? And all we get is a few lines and that feat, as i recall, isn't even mentioned.

I know elvis popularity has risen with releases such as ALLC. Its inclusion in the tv add and films has done elvis proud. But the bad publicity continues and i think that bmg should take a little of the blame for that.

I have never read a Rolling Stone magazine...and from the sound of it probably never will.

[jeanno]

You said it all : totally agree with you!
Still waiting for a nice review of the ALOHA...
If anyone has got any, please post it!

[Elvis42]

NightRider,
Hi I was reading the posts in here and not trying to be a jerk, but

"Record collectors views on the new Aloha package were something like this.......( not exact, but i didn't buy it - just from memory )...elvis performing a whole load of songs...most of which he was not known for doing....( forgot Suspicious Minds..Burning Love...Love Me...Blue Suede Shoes...Hound Dog...American Trliogy...A Big Hunk O' Love....then did we ????)...and includes Roy Orbisons Its Over "

The version of the song It's Over that Elvis did in Aloha was not by Roy Orbison...I collect originals of the songs that Elvis performed. That particular song was done by a singer named Jimmie Rogers (not the famed Jimmie Rogers, the yodling <sp?> brakeman of the 20's, but a Jimmie Rogers from the early 60's)
JCB

[NightRider]

NightRider,
Hi I was reading the posts in here and not trying to be a jerk, but

"Record collectors views on the new Aloha package were something like this.......( not exact, but i didn't buy it - just from memory )...elvis performing a whole load of songs...most of which he was not known for doing....( forgot Suspicious Minds..Burning Love...Love Me...Blue Suede Shoes...Hound Dog...American Trliogy...A Big Hunk O' Love....then did we ????)...and includes Roy Orbisons Its Over "

The version of the song It's Over that Elvis did in Aloha was not by Roy Orbison...I collect originals of the songs that Elvis performed. That particular song was done by a singer named Jimmie Rogers (not the famed Jimmie Rogers, the yodling <sp?> brakeman of the 20's, but a Jimmie Rogers from the early 60's)
JCB

Hi Elvis42,
That is exactly the point i was making - as in the 'review' stated it was Roy Orbisons 'Its Over'.
Of course we know that it was not....which proved to me that the guy who did the review didn't even watch the DVD...because if he did...he would know that it wasn't.