Elvis...or Michael?

[mousepod]

All points well made, GD.

An interesting and somewhat depressing aside is that one thing that both Elvis and Michael had in common (other than premature drug-induced deaths) is that neither of them were able to handle the massive amount of wealth that their careers generated. Towards the end, Elvis had to give away all future royalties on his biggest hits for a relatively minor advance, and Michael wound up in so much debt that the Beatles publishing catalog that owned (much to The Beatles' chagrin) went to Sony.

[innerSpaceman]

Breaking up was the smartest thing The Beatles ever did.

[Kevy Baby]

Agreed - otherwise we never would have had The Wings

[€uroMeinke]

I stand by Kraftwerk

[Not Afraid]

Personally, I don't care much for Elvis, MJ OR the Beatles for that matter. They didn't do much to influence my own musical taste and the music I've chosen to follow for the past 20 or 30 years. Bowie or The Stones, they would be high on my own personal list.

As for Chris' Kraftwork post - I'd have to somewhat agree with the general influence role they took. If it wasn't for Kraftwerk, there would be no rap music.

[blueerica]

Back to the original question... I think that they both (and most others mentioned here) had an incredible impact on music (sound, look, related arts, the industry... everything). Whether I particularly enjoy any one over the other, I think, is moot. My opinions weren't asked on musical preference; only, who had the bigger impact on music?

Is impact on something like music even quantifiable? I think that's the problem with these "50 best ever albums/songs/artists" lists. Everyone will have a different one. Some artists, arguably, will find a greater consensus among the people as being 'great' or having a 'big impact'...

Meh, I'm too cranky to be having this conversation in my head. I'll have to revisit this later. I'm cranky with the entire premise. Grr...

[BarTopDancer]

I think Elvis and MJ influenced music and culture in different ways.

Elvis broke barriers regarding dance and music style as well as "decency standards". Without Elvis who knows if MJs dance style (complete with crotch grabbing) would have been accepted and embraced. Or maybe he would have been the one to break them.

I think, by virtue of being around first Elvis and the Beatles laid the ground work for MJ to be as successful and influential as he was.

[mousepod]

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.

[Ghoulish Delight]

Originally Posted by mousepod

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

[mousepod]

Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight

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.