Elvis Presley

WHAT NYMITH SAYS

Cover Critique: I gather this is actually more famous now for the Clash reference but it was a very smart reference. This image of an uninhibited young man strumming and hollering was, in the context of all the covers shown so far, shockingly violent - just as the image of Paul Simonon wielding his bass guitar like Thor's hammer was in 1979. Chalk one up to RCA for their genius capture of "rock and roll" spirit, even though (as with so much 1950s album art) it is rather misleading. The energy level is up to par but, even when taken in a chronological sequence, it toes the line rather than crosses it. However, none of that keeps this classic cover from earning a five star rating from me.

And so, the question of Elvis. Actually a rather complicated question. Short answer: Elvis was rock and roll's great promoter, not an innovator. Elvis was backed by the corporate machine and never stood for true rock and roll. Let's slow down and think about this.

First of all, Elvis had one great innovation that future generations can only be grateful for. In the 1950s there were only two stage styles to pick from: you could stand stock still in the Bing Crosby tradition, confined to small motions (which, depending on your personal charisma, could transform you into a radiant coil of energy a la Peggy Lee or leave you in awkward poses a la June Christy); or you could clown around on stage, working comedy into your show and becoming a wild Louis Prima type entertainer. Elvis was heartthrob material and yet there he was up on stage, moving his legs around. Unheard of? Yes and no. Cab Calloway could upstage him in a second (awesome dancer) but he also had the zany persona and was black, unable to cause the moral uproar of an Elvis Presley.

However, as many points as that earns him, the more important question regards the music. He had a fine singing voice, distinguishing him from the crowd, though someone like Gene Vincent was more than a match for him. He relied on outside songwriters - professionals in the business and up and coming independent rockers such as Carl Perkins and Little Richard. This results in greater diversity for Elvis and if he'd been given or sought out more INTERESTING material, his catalogue would look more impressive to the eye. Give Elvis a good song and he's on top of his game.

The personal charm I find in this his first self-titled LP lies in the fact that the formula is not in place yet. This is a young, pre-fame Elvis given a one-shot chance at making  an album (RCA had little faith in the gamble, believing that there was no market for LPs among immature rock and roll fans) and singing in an excited, sloppy, unrefined manner befitting the occasion. Elvis before he was an institute, before he cleaned up his singing style, before 'It's Now or Never...' Count me happy.

Not that Elvis Presley is a great album. It's a three-way split between great tunes, good tunes and vaguely corny numbers with only sentimental merit for Elvis fans. The smartest move made was sandwiching the entire thing between two unquestionable Elvis classics, 'Blue Suede Shoes' and 'Money Honey,' thus starting AND ending the album on the highest possible note. 'Money Honey' in particular jump-starts the notion of rock and roll as lean, mean and attitudinal. True danger would have to wait for Johnny Burnette and the Rock and Roll Trio, but Elvis made the leap: friendly kids who just like to dance are not as interesting as juvenile delinquents like Burnette and Vincent, from which we got 'Honey Hush,' 'Race with the Devil' and 'Train Kept a-Rollin' before the blues even started the takeover. Though 'Money Honey' doesn't really rock, it has a splendid tone and texture. Elvis' voice was, above all else, a theatrical tool and he had an innate knack for it. Really, it's no wonder he landed in Vegas.

Still, it's 'Blue Suede Shoes' that is the unassailable hit and it goes one further and really rocks! It speeds up Carl Perkins' pleasant original while remaining faithful to its essence, improving it to no end while maintaining respect for Perkins. The "one for the money" countdown eschews cheesiness and Elvis delivers every line with gusto. His backing band don't match Gene Vincent's Blue Caps for energy but they do a fine job here and elsewhere.

Criminally, after raising the energy level to such an exciting pitch, it's brought crashing down already on the second track, the soft, sodden ballad 'I'm Counting on You.' As a rule, I don't like Elvis ballads: they tend to be puffed up and transparently sentimental, a far cry from the uneasiness of 'Heartbreak Hotel' (regrettably not included here, though it was contemporary material). 'I'm Counting On You' has no nuance, no ambiguity and it is poorly placed, robbing Elvis Presley of some deserved momentum. Most of the other ballads are similar. 'I Love You Because' lays on the sentimentality ("I love you for a hundred thousand reasons?") as only a generic country tune can and has a wimpy, un-salvageable melody. Meanwhile, 'I'll Never Let You Go (Little Darlin')' fails to spark any interest - though it briefly picks up the pace and threatens to transform into another, better song right before ending. Oh well.

Amazingly, that leaves 'Blue Moon' and 'Blue Moon' is a TRIUMPH. Elvis' voice is given a heavy echo treatment and the song is carried along by gentle, clip-clopping percussion. It's hushed, intimate and sonically arresting (and he does some great warbling). Followed immediately by 'Money Honey,' it manages to end Elvis Presley on a five star note.

The other six songs are all fast-paced rockabilly and you'll love them more or less depending on your tolerance for rockabilly and your attraction to Elvis as a personality. I'm in the middle ground on both those things, so... I love 'Trying to Get to You.' It's got a loping country rhythm that I find completely infectious and Elvis nails the delivery. On the other end of the spectrum is his horrible rendition of 'Tutti Frutti' (which is, let's admit, a pretty stupid song by any measure). Little Richard had a rough, raucous, masculine voice; exactly the kind that was needed for there to be any hope. He also had a full piano and brass sound. The Elvis makeover is watered-down and effeminate.

As for the others, not a lot to say. They're all fun while playing. 'Just Because' does contain the first of many references to Santa Claus in this man's career while 'One-Sided Love Affair' sounds like Elvis was having way too much fun in the studio that day. I actually find this quasi-drunken mockery of his "normal" singing a hoot but I do know others who find it irritating, so be warned.

In the long run, I can't call Elvis Presley a great album but ignoring most of the ballads and the Little Richard number allows the rest of it to shine as quality entertainment. Also, it sits alongside The Sun Sessions (a few of the tracks were Sun leftovers) as the most "important" Elvis to hear so make sure you get them both to go along with your Best of compilation.

WHAT TICHARU SAYS

OK, maybe I'm not the best person to be reviewing his first record because I'm entirely sure I "don't get it"...

Why was this so popular? It was different? Maybe that was all it needed to be. There certainly wasn't a lot of choice in 1956 if you were looking for something new. Something that wasn't a crooner, wasn't jazz, wasn't an orchestra. Here was this new thing called rock n roll. The Bill Haley record was kinda fun but pretty silly and there were a handful of singles out there getting airplay so you knew what it was. Maybe it's time to try this new artist?

Even my folks had a "rock" record. Blueberry Hill by Fats Domino on a 78. It was almost OK and this Elvis kid is kind of wild but he slurs his words just like Dean Martin, we can relate to that. Some of us more than others for sure.

The record starts off OK, Blue Suede Shoes that's an instant classic but then it nose dives straight into a weepy ballad. You really want to pick and choose those monstrosities of musical morbidity carefully. Just sticking with Blue Moon would have been been a good start. Replacing some of the made-over country songs with better material would also have been good. Getting a better guitar player maybe (yes definitely) and not singing like a drunken farm hand, that would have been good too. I might have really liked this record then.

I think Elvis learned how to use his voice better quite quickly but always suffered from daft arrangements and hopeless material. His voice elevated a handful of songs through his career above all that. Way above all that. A handful of songs I actually like... none of which are on this record.