smoe.org mailing lists
ivan@stellysee.de
| From | "Stewart Mason" <craigtorso@verizon.net> |
| Subject | Re: Clear Channel Does Not Own Elvis |
| Date | Fri, 17 Dec 2004 23:49:52 -0500 |
[Part 1 text/plain iso-8859-1 (1.5 kilobytes)]
(View Text in a separate window)
----- Original Message -----
From: "John L. Micek" <jlmicek@comcast.net>
> Fine -- don't weep for Lisa Marie. Fret for the fact that the
> potential for Elvis' historical legacy to get
> further polluted more than likely expanded by an order of magnitude.
So this means plans are afoot for a remastered triple-disc version of
HAVING FUN WITH ELVIS ON STAGE with a bonus DVD, I guess.
> I'm surprised no one else is worked up over this ... I figured we
> had more rock/pop historians in the bunch.
The fact that we're historians is *why* we're not worked up about
this, I guess. Elvis -- and the people around him -- never cared a
damn for the idea of his "historical legacy," and as noted, Elvis
Presley Enterprises has already done all it can to cheapen the image.
(I had forgotten about the absurd Elvis wine until Jaimie brought it
up -- I guess Merck never called EPE's marketing department back about
their pitch for the special commemorative Quaaludes.) They've already
done so much in this direction that as the generations that remember
him as more than a sad and tacky joke die off, the main things that
will be remembered are the Jungle Room at Graceland and the
Valentine's Day cards at CVS that play a tinny synth melody of "Love
Me Tender" when you open them. How any corporation can do a more
thoroughly piss-poor job keeping up the integrity of the brand name
than Elvis Presley Enterprises already has is beyond me.
S
For assistance, please contact
the smoe.org administrators.