Reading:
- David R. Shumway (1997) “Watching Elvis: The Male Rock Star as Object of the Gaze,” The Other Fifties: Interrogating Midcentury American Icons
- Sue Wise (1984) "Sexing Elvis," Women's Studies International Forum
Listening:
- "Hound Dog," versions by Elvis Presley and Big Mama Thornton
Posting:
- Compare the Presley & Thornton recordings. (Don't worry so much about connecting the recordings to the readings for this one) There is a video of Thornton performing the song above, but I'd prefer you listened to the version posted on Blackboard (which is of higher recording quality). I'd especially recommend that you listen with headphones in a quiet room.
10 comments:
Question:
Most of what we read about Elvis discusses either positively or negatively his appearance and persona, but relatively little is focused on his actual music. From listening, it does not seem far from other artists of the time. Through comparison it also does not seem very original or musically interesting. Have critics since that time viewed Elvis as anything more important to music than an object of transgression and sexuality?
Artifact Discussion:
There is a clear difference between the style of music of Elvis Presley and that of Big Mama Thornton. Those styles manifest themselves in the voice, lyrics, and background music of the two, as well as in the physical styles of the artists themselves. To start, its worthy to mention that Big Mama Thornton’s version inspired Elvis to sing “Hound Dog”. Apart from that the two versions are musically and stylistically very different.
Big Mama’s rendition is a bluesy, sexually charged, musically interesting song, one that today, music critics would appreciate much more. It incorporates features that are much more typical of blues and an African American appeal in the 40’s and 50’s – features like a musical solo with the artist talking to the band. Her lyrics are more sexually explicit as she claims “aww get it” and barks like a dog. She also changes the melody during the verse instead of repeating the same melody throughout the song. Musically Big Mama Thornton’s rendition is much more bluesy and musically interesting. Physically her appearance pushes sexual boundaries but can hardly be described as sexually charged like her lyrics.
Elvis reverses the role of sexuality. His music has been transcribed into a major key and lacks that sultry bluesy quality. The lyrics have also been changed so that they are not quite as sexually explicit. The music is more typical of mainstream music we associate with the 50’s including background singers, clapping, etc. The music is led by the drumbeat rather than by the feeling of the music. It has lost its sexual appeal. However Elvis transfers this sexual appeal into his appearance, messy, gyrating, and pushing boundaries in a way that can still be qualified as sexually charged.
In all we see the reversing of sexuality from the audio to the visual in Elvis’s rendition of the song.
Question:
David R. Shumway claims that Elvis’s dancing and singing were adaptations of black performers’ styles. Elvis learned his style from performers on Beale Street. I think it would be interesting if we could determine if there were any particular colored people that Elvis used as models for his own work. If so, who were those people?
Artifact Discussion:
The renditions of "Hound Dog," versions by Elvis Presley and Big Mama Thornton vary considerably. Elvis’s version seems much more sexualized than does Big Mama Thornton’s version. In the video we watched in class on Tuesday, Elvis danced in a very sexual manner, with pelvic thrusts into the microphone and hip gyrations. Big Mama Thornton, on the other hand, dances and claps a bit, but the movements do not seem sensual; instead, her movements seem like the typical slight dancing that would be expected to go along with the beat of the song.
Elvis’s version of “Hound Dog” moves at a much more lively tempo than does Big Mama’s version. There is also more percussion in Elvis’s version, and since Elvis’s percussionist struck the drum every time Elvis moved his hip, this yet again demonstrates how Presley created an extremely sexualized performance. It is important to note, however, that Big Mama is a large, black woman, and we can detect this both from the video and from the sound of her voice when listening to audio alone. This skews the determination of whether or not her movements are sexual, because as analysts, we have preconceived notions. It was considered more ‘normal’ for colored people to dance, and the fact that Big Mama is overweight makes it hard to view her as a sexual object.
At the same time, though, Big Mama does utilize some techniques that could be interpreted as sexual. For instance, her coarse, raspy voice that practically growls the words could be a method to create this appeal. However, I do not think that is how Big Mama’s rendition of “Hound Dog” comes across; she sounds more condescending, calling the man a ‘hound dog.’
Question:
Would Elvis’s controversial image be as offensive to many if it were confined solely to audio recordings? In other words, although Elvis imbues his music with sexuality, would they be less likely to be considered as “crossing the line” without his visual performance on television? The Shumway article connects the importance of visually seeing Elvis with his image, so I was wondering how much the Elvis's reputation would be altered if his performances could not be televised to the general public.
Discussion:
The versions of “Hound Dog” sang by Big Mama Thornton and Elvis Presley show a great contrast between the styles and motives of the two artists. Big Mama’s version of the song is very passionate and moving – the listener can clearly feel her emotions put into the song through her voice. Her singing does convey some sexuality, but it is not straightforward. She sings about a man personified as a “hound dog” who wines, is not sophisticated (or “high classed”), and does not appreciate her as a woman. Such lyrics combined with her powerful, emotionally charged voice give the song a sexual message against bad, insincere men and portray Big Mama as a wise, strong woman. Also, it is interesting to note that she uses dog howls in the song, which give it an animalistic feel – both literally and figuratively.
In contrast, Elvis performs “Hound Dog” with a sultry, provocative attitude. His voice quavers in pitch and tone at certain instances in the song reminiscent of the rhythmic beats and musical passages that were discussed in class on Tuesday as representative of sexual music. Sometimes he even draws out certain syllables in the lyrics to slow down the words against the fast-paced rhythm of the song itself. This drawing out of tone and words makes this version of “Hound Dog” more directly sexual and more vulgar in the standards of the day. Although the lyrics are the same as the Big Mama version – except for that they are aimed at a woman instead of a man – Elvis’s voice fluctuations give it a more sensual connotation. He does not sing with the same vigor and power as Big Mama does, but it is clear that his rendition puts its power in the direct sexuality of the artist’s vocal performance – Elvis’s manner of singing is “animalistic” in its own risqué way.
What visual aspects distinguish the two artists, Thornton and Presley, as separate and distinctive? What vocal traits do these artists share? Why was Elvis more successful with this song despite Thornton’s obvious talent?
In my opinion, Thornton displays more vocal range and talent than Presley, but she has much less of a performance persona. Like Presley, she moves her hips around, but her band doesn’t base their rhythms on her bodily motions. In contrast, Presley seems to control the rhythm of Hound Dog with the sheer twist of his hips.
In terms of aesthetic style and fashion, Thornton appears to share little of Presley’s concern for outward appearance. While Presley’s hair is perfectly coiffed to achieve his hair-flipping movements, Thornton conceals her locks with a simple, somewhat unflattering hat. She also wears very conservative clothing that hide her dance motions, unlike Presley’s loose-fitting ensemble that sways and ripples with his every movement. His tuxedo outfit also distinguishes him as a member of a class above that of Thornton who wears a simplistic cotton and flannel outfit.
Thorton focuses on the musical component of her performance, but Elvis puts on a show for his audience, joking around with the hound dog to make the audience laugh.
Ironically enough, both artists try to achieve the same raspy and powerful sound with their voices. Thornton’s voice sounds deep and masculine, and Presley achieves a hyper-masculine sound with the same forceful, raspy qualities.
Question:
Elvis clearly changed the sound of "Hound Dog" a lot from Big Momma Thornton's version. I would say this change matches his style very well. However, I can't seem to understand the significance behind the change in lyrics he chose to go with. Do you think there's some meaning behind his change in words?
Artifact Discussion:
There are many sharp changes between Elvis's and Big Momma Thornton's versions of "Hound Dog." To start with Thornton's version, it is very concurrent with the blues music genre of the 40s and 50s. There is a lot of soul and hurt behind the voice alone, displayed by her vibrato singing style. The song is slow and the main instrument used is low strings of the guitar. I would also say that the song is more musically centered, rather than focused on the entertainment aspect, such as in Elvis's version. In Thornton's version, there is a minute long guitar solo with a very bluesy sound while Thornton barks and hums in a scatting sort of way. Between all of these aspects of this version of "Hound Dog," I would say that Thornton conveys this song with a lot more meaning, as if she is telling a personal story about getting hurt by a man.
Elvis's version, on the other hand, seems very anesthetized, in a way. His singing doesn't have the same wide range of pitch that Thornton's does, making the song seem less ardent to him. This could be to try to maintain his cool, masculine image. Also, the tempo of the song is sped up very noticeably, along with heavy use of percussion added, to effect the transition from blues to rock and roll. While Big Mama Thornton uses her voice to accompany the blues aspect of the song, Elvis relies on his dance moves and entertainment value to accentuate the rock and roll. Thus, these two versions of what can be considered the same song have very different and contrasting intended meanings.
Question: Wise discusses how many of her peers have shown surprise that one can be a feminist and still like Elvis Presley. This makes be believe that a lot of Elvis’s persona and appeal was in fact his theatricality and sexual nature, not his music. Do we have any videos or songs of Elvis that showcase his musical talent (songwriting, voice, etc.) rather than his stage presence?
Artifact discussion:
There is an obvious distinction between both the videos of the performance of “Hound Dog” and actual songs between Elvis and Big Mama Thornton. When I first listened to both of them, I realized mid-way through Big Mama Thornton’s rendition of “Hound Dog” that she seemed to have a larger range, huskier voice, and added sound effects to her music. I felt as though she was angry at the “hound dog” that apparently caused her so much emotion. The lyrics also depict more of a woman free of some loathing man. With a more liberating and passionate tone, Big Mama presented a very well sung song.
However, when I heard Elvis sing this song it was very bland. Without his theatricality and stage presence, I was not impressed. This simplicity is further depicted through the lack of depth in the lyrics. I realized that Elvis is singing the same lyrics over the entire songs that constitute a total of two stanzas with a few words. Upon listening to “Hound Dog” again, I found it very repetitive and similar to a ringtone that is purposefully put on replay, so that the owner of the phone will recognize and answer his phone. Yes, Elvis has a pleasant voice and musically, he is not bad. Nonetheless, Elvis’s rendition pales in comparison to Big Mama Thornton’s performance.
As a disclaimer, I am not saying there is not any validity to the music Elvis produced. I believe his music has been overshadowed by his hyper-sexualized performances and emphasis on his fashion taste. From a more traditional perspective, it seems as though Big Mama Thornton put more passion and soul into her music, thus, in this case, performing “Hound Dog” much better.
Question: If the perceptions of Elvis during that time, and the written work on his impact on society were written through a male gaze as the articles talked about, what then was the women’s perspective during the time; what did he actually do for them as a celebrity, a male icon, as a young performer?
What were the reactions to Big Mama as an artist/ performer? Was she seen as being as “transgressive” for the times as Elvis was? As influential? As meaningful? Why or why not? Who was determining whether she was or wasn’t?
Artifact Discussion:
The articles mentioned critics’ perceptions of Elvis’ appeal because of his “animal magnetism”; and because of his overt “sexualized” behaviors, uttered sounds, and dance moves; He was thus, for his time, someone who appealed to and shaped popular (youth culture); His was a name at times associated with the term ‘rebel’.
The question was posed during the last class meeting, “might Big Mama” have been seen as “transgressive”? As breaking some said/ unsaid rule or even in another light, serving society in some way shape or form? Watching her performance of Hound Dog, and listening to her voice recording, I would say in some ways, she can be seen as such. In the beginning of the video, Big Mama hardly lets the man introducing her finish his sentence, it seems. From the moment she steps on to the scene, she commands the attention of the room—dominant, a rather “unfeminine quality”; furthermore, in an environment in which women might be portrayed through various mediums as the object of the male gaze, as a body to display or as a person who’s beauty may have been more highly looked upon while other qualities came next, she entered the scene with a shirt buttoned up to her neck, with a long skirt on, and wearing a hat. The thing to be revealed was in fact her voice.
However, with that said, the recording of the song probably had as much if not more suggestive character as it did when it was sang by Elvis. While Elvis’ version was deemed by critics as sexualized because of his movements, perhaps his syllabic/ slurred pronunciations of the words, his rhythms, the accents of the “dancing music” and his fashion or stylistic decisions that magnified his moves, and suggested a certain freedom, Big Mama’s performance was sensual primarily through sound. She growled certain words as opposed to “sweetly singing them”, talked in her music, encouraged movement and dancing as she says, “do the twist” or “ahhhhhh, get it, get it, get it”, sings words metaphorically associated with intimate relationships, and barks and howls mockingly in the middle, and at the end of her song. The “animalistic” qualities are still included in performances by both artists, but evoked through different means, one primarily auditory, and the other, notably through the aid of visual mediums.
To further contrast their music styles, Elvis’ took on more a more upbeat dance sound, with claps and different words, while Big Mama’s was more emotional, and told more of a story and resolution of boundaries that might have been seen as empowering even for women and people in general.
I am not sure of the role Big Mama played in society at that time, or what others said of her contributions to music/ to society; with the knowledge of artists such as Big Mama though, I can only imagine that in the racial and gender climate of the times Elvis was an acceptable “bringer of change” to popular culture, but that others were both shaping and reflecting societal changes in their own spheres as he made breakthroughs as a more visible artist.
Question:
It is difficult to think of masculinity without thinking about femininity as well, seeing as one must exist in order for there to be the other. Elvis was obviously an icon who emphasized a different definition of what it meant to be a man, leading many other males to copy him. However, was Elvis’s style really a sexualization of the male figure or was he actually a medium through which the female desire for sex could be reflected? Sure, Elvis is the one making the suggestive movements on the stage, but it’s women who are in the audience screaming and showing their approval. In a time when a woman wasn’t encouraged to either enjoy and/or tell that she enjoyed sex, could it be argued that Elvis helped establish the woman, more so than the man, as a sexual creature?
Artifact Discussion:
The differences between Big Mama Thornton’s version of “Hound Dog” and Elvis’s are obvious. For starters, one version is coming from a woman, while the other is from a man. Thus, the lyrics had to be changed a bit. Big Mama Thornton’s seems to imply she’s been scorned by a lover whom she decides never to see again, while Elvis’s seems to be from a man who was let down or fooled by another man (perhaps a friend or relative). This then takes away the romantic element from the song, leading it to seem less emotional already from the words alone. This lessened romanticism is also portrayed, and perhaps even emphasized, by the difference in delivery. Big Mama Thornton has a raspy, thick voice that sounds like it’s coming from a deep place of hurt and disappointment; even if she were singing in a different language, one could tell she was singing about something painful. Elvis, on the other hand, sounds more like he’s mocking someone. His changes in pitch and use of vibrato almost sound like musical laughter or teasing; one can tell his focus is not so much on his sad emotions but rather on insulting the subject of the tune.
The orchestration of the two versions is also very important. Big Mama Thornton is only backed up by guitar and handclaps, which puts the audience’s focus on her voice and the lyrics. What she wants the listener to take away from this tune is the message and the emotion; that’s the point of her song. With Elvis’s version, while there is emotion in it as well, it is masked by the full band that’s playing in the background. The listener isn’t made to pay attention to the words or the vocals as much as the beat and the fun, danceable melody of the tune. Like with all dance songs, what the lyrics are about is not as important as how easy it is to dance to its beat. Perhaps this is part of the reason why Elvis’s version became so much more popular than Big Mama Thornton’s: his song was a commercially-friendly one that made people want to get up and move, rather than sit down and reflect on some woman’s broken heart.
Question:
Was it typical for songs to be passed back and forth between artists at the time? Did any of Big Mama’s R&B listeners listen to Elvis?
Artifact Discussion:
Big Mama Thornton starts off with a bang. The first word “you” is yelled with a booming low note before the drums and guitar begin in the background. Elvis begins his version by singing the same line without background music. But it is not to the same effect. His voice is not as loud in my headphones and his voice cannot reach the same raspy low depth as Big Mama. In fact his song lacks the depth that Big Mama’s version does all the way throughout. His song has one or two lines of lyrics that are repeated over and over again. On the other hand, she provides imagery of a “snooping” man in between deep, scratchy bellows. She may only have four or five different lines but her version lack the repetitiveness of Elvis’ because the cool noise noises and howls around 1:20, which change up the story. She also changes volume and timbre whereas he sounds almost monotonic. Also the guitar in her version has an explosive bluesy sound to it whereas in Elvis’ version it lies flat. I personally feel the background music in Elvis’ song is more important to the flow of the song because it is not his voice that indicates a chance of pace. Rather it is the rapid drum roll and guitar solos. Big Mama’s song has those aspects but her voice is the focal point. I am not arguing that Elvis’ version is bad; rather that it lacks the pop and explosiveness of Big Mama’s. His dance moves are what add that extra excitement.
Question:
When thinking about what I've seen from Elvis it seems to me that everything surrounding his music career is based on seeing him perform live. When listening to Elvis with no visual aid I don't find it as appealing as when I watch his video's. Is this just because as a society we have moved forward with technology and are spoiled with different types of entertainment or do you think people in the 1950's felt the same way about listening and seeing Elvis perform?
Discussion:
I'm still puzzled at how Elvis was able to change Big Mama Thornton's "Hound Dog" song into his own. It seems to me that Thornton's song had more meaning (emotionally), while Elvis rather used it as a way to combine his explicit movement with lyrics that to mean made little or no sense at all.
In the article "Sexing Elvis" the author talks about Elvis as two separate beings, the butch god and the teddy bear. In comparison to the "Hound Dog" clip we watched in class I remember seeing Elvis show both of these beings. His stage presence and the way the rest of the band followed his lead gave him power. He was essentially the leader and anything that he wanted to happen would happen. The movement in this particular clip reminded me of the teddy bear side of Elvis. It seemed like Elvis was seeking crowd reaction with his movement and particularly reactions from the female audience. In my eyes this brought out Elvis' soft side although, having the most ladies is associated with masculinity I think the way Elvis went about it was in a feminine or less masculine way.
Post a Comment