Money in the hobby

[btcarfagno]

I am not sure that I understand what is being argued here regarding Elvis/The Beatles etc. Of course much of their music would not hold up for today's generation. Music tastes change. Attitudes change. Most importantly, what Elvis and The Beatles did has been either mimicked or at least partially copied so much over the past 50+ years that it has watered down the original.

Like anything else they need to be viewed in the context of their time. Citizen Kane was a landmark film in 1939 for many many reasons. Those reasons soon became standard film making practice. 75 years later my kids watch it and only see the story and it being "just another film". Without the historical context this is what happens.

Just because the music of Elvis or The Beatles may not "hold up" to today's generation doesn't make them any less important. In some ways, the influence of Elvis and The Beatles permiating every corner of the music industry has led to their own music not "holding up". It has been copied and mimicked so often that it has watered down the content of the original. Until you put them in their true historical context. Like a Citizen Kane.

Tom C

[brian1961]

Originally Posted by btcarfagno

I am not sure that I understand what is being argued here regarding Elvis/The Beatles etc. Of course much of their music would not hold up for today's generation. Music tastes change. Attitudes change. Most importantly, what Elvis and The Beatles did has been either mimicked or at least partially copied so much over the past 50+ years that it has watered down the original.

Like anything else they need to be viewed in the context of their time. Citizen Kane was a landmark film in 1939 for many many reasons. Those reasons soon became standard film making practice. 75 years later my kids watch it and only see the story and it being "just another film". Without the historical context this is what happens.

Just because the music of Elvis or The Beatles may not "hold up" to today's generation doesn't make them any less important. In some ways, the influence of Elvis and The Beatles permiating every corner of the music industry has led to their own music not "holding up". It has been copied and mimicked so often that it has watered down the content of the original. Until you put them in their true historical context. Like a Citizen Kane.

Tom C

Tom, very well articulated, bro. Right on, man! --Brian Powell

[Snapolit1]

Originally Posted by btcarfagno

I am not sure that I understand what is being argued here regarding Elvis/The Beatles etc. Of course much of their music would not hold up for today's generation. Music tastes change. Attitudes change. Most importantly, what Elvis and The Beatles did has been either mimicked or at least partially copied so much over the past 50+ years that it has watered down the original.

Like anything else they need to be viewed in the context of their time. Citizen Kane was a landmark film in 1939 for many many reasons. Those reasons soon became standard film making practice. 75 years later my kids watch it and only see the story and it being "just another film". Without the historical context this is what happens.

Just because the music of Elvis or The Beatles may not "hold up" to today's generation doesn't make them any less important. In some ways, the influence of Elvis and The Beatles permiating every corner of the music industry has led to their own music not "holding up". It has been copied and mimicked so often that it has watered down the content of the original. Until you put them in their true historical context. Like a Citizen Kane.

Tom C

Only point I was making was that while Elvis was a huge act (the biggest probably), I can understand why his memorabilia has fallen off a cliff. I don't think his musical has held up for new generations of music fans. Some rare performers, the Beatles for example, will always convert new generations. Go to a McCartney show and watch 10 year singing every song. Doesn't mean they are better or worse. But they continue to resonate. James Dean continues to be know today despite a very limited career. 1000000s of better actors have lapsed into obscurity.

[btcarfagno]

Originally Posted by Snapolit1

Only point I was making was that while Elvis was a huge act (the biggest probably), I can understand why his memorabilia has fallen off a cliff. I don't think his musical has held up for new generations of music fans. Some rare performers, the Beatles for example, will always convert new generations. Go to a McCartney show and watch 10 year singing every song. Doesn't mean they are better or worse. But they continue to resonate. James Dean continues to be know today despite a very limited career. 1000000s of better actors have lapsed into obscurity.

When you talk about resonating and icons like James Dean you are talking more about their cult of personality than anything that their work might show.

And I am not sure where you see Elvis memorabilia values falling off a cliff. Admittedly I don't follow Elvis memorabilia. Our paths cross only with regard to autographs and movie posters. And these have not dropped measurably in price.

As to the resonance of Elvis' music, there are parts of the country where it remains very popular. In those same areas the music of The Beatles likely seems to not resonate anymore. Just a matter of perspective.

From my perspective, in the collecting areas where I see Elvis items, I do not see what you seem to see.

Tom C

[drcy]

Greta Garbo and Rudolf Valentino memorabilia is still popularly collected, but their values have fallen as their stars have faded over the years.

However, if Mozart was still around he would be making a wealthy annual income from how much his music is played and recorded.

I never understood the singular popularity of Elvis, which is not to say I'm saying he wasn't charismatic and without talent. But, as far as Mozart goes, even his elder Haydn said he was a singular once-in-a-hundred years genius.

[Bored5000]

Originally Posted by Snapolit1

Only point I was making was that while Elvis was a huge act (the biggest probably), I can understand why his memorabilia has fallen off a cliff. I don't think his musical has held up for new generations of music fans. Some rare performers, the Beatles for example, will always convert new generations. Go to a McCartney show and watch 10 year singing every song. Doesn't mean they are better or worse. But they continue to resonate. James Dean continues to be know today despite a very limited career. 1000000s of better actors have lapsed into obscurity.

James Dean's iconic stature is also helped by his death at age 24 and dying at the height of his career. His legacy would be different, perhaps even greater or perhaps he would have drifted into obscurity, if he had made dozens of films and lived into his 70s or 80s.