The Classic/Retro Pop Culture Thread

It's odd when you think about it. He was a superstar who turned everything upside down and helped kick off the Civil Rights Era and the Sexual Revolution just by existing, but personally he didn't seem to want to ruffle anyone's feathers.

They mention that there are no commercials, so I wonder if they're being paid well for this. Maybe it's like one of those Time-Life infomercials where it's there to sell a new Stooges DVD set or something.

True. Aside from "Walk A Mile In My Shoes," I can't think of any others.

He seems just rather benign on the subject. I think the only time he talked about it was in terms of the origins of his music and he only had nice things to say. I can't remember him ever offering much of an opinion on any of the controversies of the day-- aside from wanting to be Nixon's drug czar or whatever.

 

I would never say he helped kick off the Civil Rights Era. That was already a fiery social (including cultural in terms of entertainment, the popularization of so-called "n****r music") and political matter before Elvis ever came to public attention. Hoover's FBI was already attempting to disrupt the movement before Presley came around because it was a force falsely considered to be a threat to the U.S.

That part in bold is funny...especially when at the same time he was meeting with Nixon, Elvis was abusing everything he could get his hands on, with a liquid form of cocaine (administered with Q-Tips up the nose) at the top of the list.

 

Yeah, the civil rights movement and Elvis' career (and rock n' roll in general), were on two completely separate tracks. Although, I suppose if you wanted to make a big reach, one might argue that the rock connection comes through that music's connection to gospel music (which WAS a very important part of the civil rights movement), whose amalgam with blues formed the genesis of rock n' roll.

But, that is a distant connection and Elvis, I don't think, contributed enough to the actual music to be considered as part of any civil rights/gospel/rock n' roll connection.

 

That's why I said helped. He didn't start it, but he was such an entertainment phenomenon that his influence was disproportionate. Really, you can trace the modern Civil Rights movement back to the 20s.

Yeah, I love that.

An entertaining Rock'n'Roll song with words and phrases in it.

You'd think they'd be bored with producing classics by now.

This is okay.

Also okay.

I love this one.

See?

I didn't say intentionally, I said just by existing.

Exactly. He was a disruptive influence, and a massive one.

 

I wouldn't use the word "substantial", especially when compared to other more direct actions like civil disobedience, voting (and it's related necessities, like enfranchisement and registration etc). Also, I would take issue with the value of listening to recordings they liked by black artists causing much movement in entrenched racism by white rock and roll fans in the 50's in particular. Liking black culture has never negated hatred for black people.

However, rock and roll concerts did provide the opportunity to demonstrate against segregated concerts.

Can you explain how Elvis' mere "existence" had any affect whatsoever on the civil rights movement? Because I'm not seeing it.

I don't think I've ever heard a Johnny Rivers song I didn't like. His "The Poor Side of Town" remains one of the great rock ballads of all time.

 

Well, turnips need trucks and apples just need bushels.

There's actually another instrumental called "Popcorn" that's a bit catchier, if less substantial.

Kind of meh.

Kind of amusing.

Now we're getting somewhere.

Here's a classic.

And another classic.

He probably thought that enforcing the rules would make him exempt from the rules.

I disagree. Art is a defining characteristic of humanity and brings people together and teaches them about each other. It humanizes people that may have seemed strange or different or scary just because they're in a separate place.

As I said, by being a disruptive influence. By making kids think-- not in a painful after-school-special kind of way, but in a this-is-pretty-cool kind of way. This is exactly what happened to my Mother, for one example. She had zero exposure to Blacks when she was a kid, but Elvis and his connection to Black music, plus the bizarre reactions of the establishment, like smashing records on the air, made her aware and sympathetic.

 

You are creating a bit of a straw man. What you write above can be considered to be generally true. But that truth does not necessarily apply to this particular discussion. Your mother's situation may have happened but i anecdotal and cannot be applied generally.

It sounds great, just not a universal truth and certainly not generally applicable to the black experience in America.

Even back in the days of slavery there were plenty of white people who loved watching slaves perform, sing and dance. But I don't think many (any) were able to use it to buy their freedom. Musical forms like the blues and jazz, both known as American "classical" music, were born in the black community and were loved and even imitated by white Americans, yet racism against black people flourished right alongside that "love".

I know this is also anecdotal, but I think it was and is quite common, there was this ultra racist self professed KKK member who used to be a regular guest on the old Howard Stern Show. He was a typical white supremacist lowlife who enjoyed being who he was. But do you know who his favorite actor was? Eddie Murphy. He loved Eddie and all his movies. But that had NO effect on his overall feelings about black people. It has been written that Thomas Jefferson "loved" a lot of things about Sally Hemmings, with whom he had several children, but he still kept his slaves. In fact his children ith Sally were born into bondage.

Hatred for black people and love for black culture many times exist simultaneously in the same person.

Love for black culture can be, but is no certain panacea for a person's racist feelings towards black people. No doubt this same thing is also true for the person who is anti semitic.

I seriously doubt that any significant number of young white Elvis fans back in the 1950's had any conscious idea that Elvis' performance style owed a heavy debt to black gospel performers who Elvis said he'd seen in his youth.

Now, there has been a significant amount of attention paid to this since the 50's ended, so perhaps in retrospect it seems "logical" to think that white Elvis fans, knowing his influences, would follow that back to black performers. But this was the 1950's, not the 80's or 90's, when following and artist's influences became somewhat commonplace. But even in the 80's, I shudder to think of the number of white Blues Bros fans who needed to be told about the incredible Stax/Volt catalogue from which those guys pretty much pulled their entire act.

But regardless, this was a discussion about Elvis' effect on the civil rights movement and I remain unconvinced that his career had any effect on it at all, despite your mom's curiosity about black music after hearing Elvis.

 

I never said it was universal, just that it was significant because of the unprecedented cultural phenomenon that was Elvis.

True, but that's not the same thing as being a celebrity or a teenage heartthrob.

That's very true. It wasn't a magic spell that cured the problem with a wave of the hand. It was one aspect of a long process that upended centuries of cultural inertia.

This is quite a different century and subject. Jefferson lived at a time when his social status and political career could have been destroyed by his relationship with Sally Hemings-- in fact, he did love her and she was essentially his wife for much of his life, but they had to keep it in the closet. But that has nothing to do with the Civil Rights movements of the 20th century (aside from him helping to create a country where it was possible).

No argument there. But bigotry and prejudice and segregation are not always about hatred, either. Very often it's just discomfort or the assumption that a group of people are not as smart or civilized, just because that's what's been passed down.

I think they did, since there were radio stations who refused to play his music and DJs who theatrically smashed his records on the air because it was "n*gger music." Everybody knew what that meant.

Your mileage may vary, of course, and I'm not saying that Elvis was the Jesus of the Hippie movement, but I do think that he helped bridge a gap and that his contribution was magnified by his humongous celebrity. The people who opposed his music because it was Black were meanies who became the enemy and in turn made Blacks more sympathetic to White kids. This is how you make progress: By winning hearts and minds. That's why one Sidney Poitier is worth a million rappers. It's also why the Boomer Generation was an unprecedented success while the Millennial Generation is a catastrophic disaster. So what do you think of Ed Sullivan's contribution to the Civil Rights Era?

I'm not sure I understand how Jim and Artie got caught up in this. It doesn't seem to be an assignment. Did they just agree to help Hazard because they thought he had a genuine beef at first? Or were they trying to expose him from the start?

That's kind of a cop out. What was the purpose of the ruse?

There's an obvious joke here that I will not stoop to.

True enough.

I saw a very weird episode of Sea Hunt yesterday that involved Lloyd Bridges being called in by a friend to investigate a sea monster. It scared whales, nearly upset boats, and tore through fishing nets-- and when Lloyd went down to investigate, it tossed him around like a cork. But nobody ever really got a good look at it. It turned out to be an "underwater satellite," of unknown origin, and did indeed look a lot like Sputnik. It had no visible means of propulsion and was about the size of a medicine ball, yet was able to speed through the water at incredible velocity, causing shock waves and tearing through nets. At the end, it was taken away for examination by Lloyd's friends in the Navy. I'm not really very familiar with Sea Hunt, but this was strangely Sci-Fi B-Movie-ish, and quite different from other episodes I've seen.

 

No, different century but same subject. The point I was trying to make had nothing to do with thinking Jefferson should have 'come out' with his relationship with Sally. I probably didn't make myself clear. My point in bringing up Thomas and Sally was to give an example of a white person having positive feelings for things "about" a particular black person while still feeling hatred for black people in general (as well the feeling that blacks aren't fully human).

This went to my point that just loving black culture is not a sure path to loving black people. Ergo, white people loving Elvis probably would not have led most of them to think anything more positive about black people other than "those people sure can sing and dance". This has been a common refrain among racists for centuries and does continue to this day.

This is a bit off the subject but I think it is something you should be aware of; Sally Hemmings was never "essentially Jefferson's wife." She was literally Jefferson's property for much of Sally's life. The children she bore for Jefferson were also his property until he freed them after they came of age.

And speaking of those children, because Sally lacked the autonomy to refuse to have sex with him, this made Thomas a rapist in addition to being a human trafficker, kidnapper, thief, murderer (likely), and human rights violator. Please don't think Sally and Thomas were some Hallmark fairy tale romance.

Umm, there would not have been a need for a civil rights movement were it not for men like Thomas Jefferson, George Washington and so many others of their ilk.

Most accounts from teenagers at the time, showed they loved Elvis because he was performing a "different" type of music. Not because they knew he was performing music influenced by black people.

He was performing rock and roll, which was brand new to most white kids. The reason given by most DJ's and ministers who railed about Elvis' music was that it was rock and roll, "devil music". It was understood that that style of music was also played by blacks, but that wasn't the reason given when those DJ"s and ministers were questioned about why they didn't want their kids listening to Elvis.

In fact, for many white kids who did like black artists, Elvis was a "palatable" alternative to black artists who performed in similar style. It could be argued that Elvis may actually have actually "led" many white kids away from black artists.

You know, it's like you have this strange idealized view of the 1950's and civil rights movement that has nothing to do with reality, which you keep implying is a matter of opinion. You can have an "opinion" about reality but reality itself is not opinion.

It's like you've somehow smushed together the 50's and 60's. Rock and roll's influence on the civil rights movement and the hippie movement didn't start until the 60's. The modern civil rights movement began in the mid 50's and at that time even prominent black musicians weren't actively involved.

Elvis and his cultural influence (on white kids) was pretty much a non factor in the civil rights movement directly or indirectly. Now, if you have some proof otherwise (other than your opinion), I'd like to see it.

Sounds like you don't know much about rap.

Ed did nothing but exploit black artists for ratings. But because his show exposed many of those artists to an audience who might never have heard their music otherwise (despite Elvis), Ed's interests and those artists were temporarily in alignment. I'm not calling him a racist, he exploited all rock artists he had on his show, but he was certainly no philanthropist hoping to change people's minds about black people.

Not the same feeling about Dick Clark, however, who I believe would have completely integrated American Bandstand many years earlier than he actually did (because of the success of Soul Train), had he been able. Clark had a genuine interest in bringing people together with music. His interviews of black artists on his show were as sincere and respectful as they could be. Clark doesn't get enough credit for what he meant to black musical artists of the day.

 

That's a good one.

If this is the guy I'm thinking of, he later became a regular on Barney Miller as the Gay uniformed officer who was always pestering Barney to make him a detective-- which eventually happened.

Kind of catchy.

Ah, okay, that makes sense.

There was one other where he ran up against an enemy agent planting surveillance equipment or something, but this one was really off the wall.

And, of course, Jefferson didn't hate Sally-- quite the opposite. And it's more often about prejudice than hatred, which is something that can be cured through education.

I never said it was a sure path. I said it was a contributing factor, and a large one because of Elvis's stature.

That was the world they lived in, which I'm well aware of, having studied it most of my life.

No, he was none of those things, and their relationship was definitely a romance. I don't have the time or patience to write a biography of Thomas Jefferson here, but there are a number of good ones available that can serve as an antidote to ideological propaganda. Remember that we live in a world dominated by two extremist conservative ideologies, the Right Wing and the Left Wing. The Right Wing will have you believe that Jefferson would never have consorted with a lowly Black slave, because that's their bigotry; the Left Wing will have you believe that Jefferson was a bigoted misogynist, because that's their bigotry. The truth is much more human.

Hardly. Again, I don't have time to outline the history of civilization or the state of the world in the 1700s, but let it suffice to say that these guys changed the whole direction of humanity.

I never said they liked it because they knew it was Black music; I said they were aware of it.

Both of those reasons were given.

It may be true that some kids found Elvis an alternative-- or, more likely, some radio stations found Elvis an alternative-- but I doubt if many White kids would have found Black music without Elvis to lead them astray.

Not at all. I just understand that there's a process to historical change and that there are a lot of contributing factors with a greater or lesser degree of synergy involved. The modern Civil Rights movement, along with Women's Lib and the Sexual Revolution, which were all intertwined, began in the 20s, but were interrupted by the Depression and the Second World War. It resumed in the 50s, with the rise of protests and marches and incidents like Rosa Parks. Part of this was the mainstreaming of Black music, and Elvis was a part of that. Nothing happens in a vacuum. The 50s primed the country for the revolution of the 60s.

And I'm not saying he did it deliberately. But large swaths of America saw Sullivan, on a weekly basis, treating Black artists with the same courtesy and common decency that he treated White artists. Again, the psychological effects of this cannot be underestimated.

Yes, I agree. Dick Clark is another great example of this aspect of cultural change in the 50s and 60s.

 

The unctuous Officer Carl Levitt was played by Ron Carey.

The gay cop, Officer Zatelli, was played by Dino Natali.

 

Who said he hated Sally? But the feelings he did for her, the "love", if you will, was similar to the "love" one has for a favorite pet. You don't keep a person for whom you feel real love, in bondage. As I said, Sally was his property, the same as his horses, dogs, chickens, etc. Perhaps you don't quite get the concept of "slavery"?

Prove it. At least provide a cite where you might have picked up the bizarre notion that Elvis was a "large contributing factor" in the civil rights movement.

Surely you aren't saying that because this was the "world they lived in", that made it acceptable, right?

You have no idea of what you're talking about. There are two indisputable facts here; Jefferson was a slave owner (who "owned" Sally Hemmings among others), and he fathered children with Sally. The descendants of Thomas and Sally live today. Even Jefferson's side of the family acknowledges them as Thomas' descendants.

Those two facts mean that Jefferson was a rapist, because Sally lacked the ability to consent to sex. He was a human traffcker because he bought and sold humans. He was a thief because he stole freedom from his slaves. He was a kidnapper because he paid to have people stolen from their homeland and brought to the US. He was a human rights violator, because of the torture he used on his slaves, starvation, forced labor, psychological torture, and a thousand other things. I just assume because he was a slave owner he probably killed or allowed one or more to die because the cost of medical treatment was more than the value of the slave.

The only one of the aforementioned "crimes" Washington may not have been guilty of was possibly rape. I know that what I've written here goes against what you've been taught about Jefferson and Washington, but believe me, I was taught the same BS about them.

If you believe any of what I have just written is in any way untrue, please explain why you feel that way and if you have any cites that support your belief. And considering Jefferson was a slave owner, please explain to me how he could NOT be, at the LEAST, a bigot.

They changed the "whole direction" for white American humanity in a positive way. Washington and Jefferson changed nothing for black people, who stayed slaves even after Thomas wrote "all men are created equal". The "whole direction" in which they, and others, changed for blacks, is an entirely different, and very sad and sordid story.

That laughing icon is perfectly placed. As I have been requesting, please provide some type of cite that might support this ridiculous notion. You had to have gotten this stuff from someplace. Or I don't know, maybe someone has been feeding it to you.

The modern civil rights movement has roots going back even further than the 20's. The Harlem Renaissance played a much bigger role than the Women's Movement in the 20's.

Howver, Rosa Parks was the person whose actions in 1954, sparked the most significant part of the civil rights movement. That set off MLK's non violent civil disobedience method of affecting change which led to significant changes in America.

These events would have occurred if Elvis had never even been born. He was as irrelevant to the movement as one human could possibly be. Again, give me a cite, any cite, where you picked this stuff up.

Maybe you never saw the Sullivan show, but he treated most rock artists on his show with the same perfunctory greetings and "banter". But Ed did at least present black artists on his show ,and even this meager contribution dwarfs anything Elvis did.

 

Well, I'll be darned. I could have sworn it was Levitt. I don't even remember the other guy, even after seeing his picture.

It seems like there were a few people who we know as actors and talk show hosts who started out as stand-up comics.

I don't think you realize that all of these people were human beings.

Bloody Hell.

All righty then. We've digressed enough. Enjoy the Internet.