[On December
10, 1949, Antoine “Fats” Domino recorded “The Fat Man,” his first
recording at New Orleans’ legendary J&M
Recording Studios and one of the first rock ‘n roll recordings ever made.
So this week I’ll AmericanStudy 50s musical icons—share your own thoughts on
them and any other musical icons and moments for a hard-rocking weekend post!]
On the
differences between influential and interesting, and why even the former can be
problematic.
It seems to me that
you can’t tell the story of American popular music in
the 20th century—and thus the story of American popular music
period—without including Frank Sinatra
and Elvis Presley in prominent roles. Indeed,
given each man’s forays into
acting, entrepreneurship,
and other cultural and social arenas,
I’m not sure you could leave them out of a broader 20th century
history of America either. In their own ways, and in their own particular, most
successful periods (Sinatra’s career extended well into Presley’s, of course,
but he was at his most successful in its first couple decades, between 1935 and
about 1955; Presley rose to prominence in the mid-1950s and was at his peak
from then until about 1970), the two artists dominated
their respective musical genres time and again, leaving
legacies that extend well beyond record sales or awards (although both are
among the most
successful artists of all time as measured
in those ways as well).
So I wouldn’t
necessarily argue with definitions of Sinatra and Elvis as among the most
influential musical artists of all time (although I might, in a moment, argue
that point too). But influential isn’t the same as interesting, and on that
score both artists fall short for me. Partly that’s just about taste and how
there’s, y’know, no accounting for it (de
gustibus, non est disputandum, as our Roman friends knew); I’m not a big
fan of either crooners or rockabilly, and thus likely outside of the ideal
audience for either man’s biggest hits or signature styles. But my point here
isn’t simply about my personal tastes, which I don’t expect are hugely
interesting either—I’m thinking as well about the nature of the men’s mainstream
popularity and prominence. Despite the unquestionable (if, in retrospect, very
silly) controversy
over Presley’s hips, that is, I would argue that both men succeeded as
consistently as they did because they were largely unobjectionable, hitting
cultural sweet spots with regularity in a way that doesn’t seem as interesting
as artists who push the envelope or challenge norms.
Moreover, I’m
not sure that describing these two artists as influential is entirely justified
either. After all, a significant percentage
of both men’s songs were written
by other songwriters or were covers of other artists; clearly their stunning
voices and signature styles played a prominent role in making the songs as
successful as they were, but I don’t know that simply singing and performing
someone else’s songs qualifies an artist as influential. To be clear, I’m not
trying to rehash the old argument about Presley exploiting African American
music; that issue is part of the Elvis story to be sure, but the truth (as I
argued at length in Monday’s post) is that a great deal of early rock and roll,
if not indeed the entire genre, crossed racial and cultural boundaries.
Instead, I’m simply trying to differentiate between what we might call
performers and artists, and to argue that those whom we would locate in the
former category (such as two men whose most consistent successes were as
performers singing others’ words, or similarly as actors reciting others’
lines) might be more important than they were influential or interesting.
Last 50s icon
tomorrow,
Ben
PS. What do you
think? Other musical icons or moments you’d highlight?
No comments:
Post a Comment