BTD's comments just made me remember that MJ called himself the "King of Pop" because Elvis was "The King of Rock 'n' Roll" and then he married Elvis' daughter.

Nope*. Liz Taylor called him the "king of pop, rock and soul" in 1989, 5 years before he married Lisa Marie.





* I'm reading your post as saying that marrying Lisa Marie was why he called himself the king of pop. Don't know for sure that's how you meant it

You read me wrong. I said "then" as in "and then time passed". And actually Michael Jackson's publicist Bob Jones claims to have invented the title "King of Pop" for Michael Jackson. Liz Taylor called him "king of pop, rock and soul" publicly at an awards show, so she sometimes gets the credit. Either way, he latched on to the name and used it himself in his own publicity.

It's like asking, which is better, Herman or the Hermits? One doesn't exist without the other.


(Pic related -- it's the Freddie)

I find MJ to be a lot more inspiring than Elvis. Although, Elvis certainly has a kitschiness that seems to be on-goingly popular.

And, I'll confess... I can't stand the Beatles, except for "Ob La Di", and the Beatles "tribute" film, "Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band". :p

Funny you bring that up today as it is the anniversary of their marriage.

Ultimately, time will tell, but Jackson gets props as an influential and innovative songwriter, which Elvis never tried to be.

I'm not a student of music history (obviously) but is it not true that Elvis may be at a handicap in the song writing arena in that he came to fame in an age where it was relatively uncommon for performers to regularly write their own stuff? One question I'd have is, to the extent he wasn't writing his own stuff how involved was he in selecting what he'd perform?

Pretty much so, Alex. Elvis came to prominence in a time much like our own, when pop talent was groomed for looks, style, marketability (though at least back then they really tried to find artists with their own unique sound, unlike the extruded and Auto-tuned acts that are so much with us at present.) The whole singer/songwriter thing came pretty quick on the heels of Elvis' glory days, and I sometimes get the impression he didn't have much use for those artsy-fartsy types. I have no idea how much input Elvis had on what material he wanted to perform, but given his massive success, I'm sure he had a pretty good say in it. It's a good enough question to make me want to read up on it.

Conversely, ever since The Beatles, I've had little respect for artists that don't write all or the vast majority of their own music. I respect vocalists as artists, but I don't accord them the same level of admiration or even legitimacy in the modern musical world as I do bands and artists that compose their own stuff.


Where does MJ fall on that scale?