Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums

Johnny Cash


Recommended Posts

Just a side note regarding Elvis.

My uncle, he's mom's brother-in-law and now 90 years old, tells me stories about Elvis.

See his brother was Elvis's pastor.

Elvis used to come home and play touch football with my oldest cousin and his friends too.

He was down to earth and real friendly, but he didn't ever trust the press or media if you will.

One day at a county fair, Elvis hugged my uncle's brother (his pastor mind ya') back stage at a performance he was doing.

A woman from the local paper took a photograph and tried to turn the story into Elvis being gay.

How stupid.

She tried to bring shame to a pastor of an Assymblies of God Church and to Elvis.

It didn't work. The local folks saw it for what it was and what it wasn't.



back to some Johnny Cash.



That's lame.

Elvis was an amazing artist.


I guess it was a slow news day or something haha.


Nothing against the press, just THAT particular story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He was human. He was flawed. He was real. He was a sinner who often tried to be a saint, but never quite made it.

Great post.


I get what you mean, but I just wanted to point out that he DID make it as far as being a saint. I would even say he is the best example that fits the definition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think I can understand folks not caring for his material, though. It tended after he got rid of the 1950s sorta trumpet and orchestral background to get back to the basics that aren't at all fancy.


As I look back at the 50s and 60s, I'll say this: I think that era had a great advantage over today in that people were indeed looking for different sorts of sounds.


Much as I love swing, I think in ways it had two things going against it, economics of a big band, and secondly that the concept was kinda tapped out.


So... there was a retrenching of music in general. The big outfits didn't travel much and basically there were long-term gigs but without the degree of "stars" in bands. Bands like Lawrence Welk's was among the tail-enders, and note they had some television, some dance hall-theater style. It was run almost like a variety show with variations in music styles and soloists. Decreasing numbers of venues could support that.


There were lots of places that had and wanted live music, but the customers had been in a WWII environment with lots of styles. Getting into music they, and then their children could get into meant a lot of individuality among various sorts of groups.


I think we really need to judge the stars that came out of that era by the standards of the time and place.


A few kept at it and Cash is one of the few who managed to keep new enough to not only hold old audiences, but to gain new audiences. That shows there was something in what he did that was quite special whether one particularly cares for it or not.


Honestly, I don't think any "new" folks post 1990 or so ever will have the kind of stardom enjoyed by prior groups, especially pre 1980.


That has nothing to do with talent, really. It has to do with available media and media saturation. In the 1950s and into the 1960s, everyone across age groups "knew" about the stars in just about every "popular" style of music. Variations became elevator music.


Now? There is so much fracturing that I for one couldn't tell you who's who among the "top" stars of any style of music. Part of that is because I tend to listen to variations of "stuff" I already know, and that's a huge "book," and part of it is because where would I look to find "new stars" that aren't so teen oriented that there's an intent to alienate the older generation? (Just as "teen music" has done at least since the 1890s.)


Talent? Yup. There's double the population and certainly double the musicians. But the media options are perhaps thousands of times greater than they were in the 1950s, hence actually a lesser opportunity for a "general" audience.



Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't know Cash. Met him once, but I have some close, close friends that knew him well and toured with him back in the early days. He was a real practical joker in those days. I think he was a very complex individual. He knew he was not the greatest singer in the business. He made some poor decision in his personal life. He was not perfect. But he embraced his imperfections and turned them into songs that we could all relate to. He was one of us. He was all of us.


Link to comment
Share on other sites


This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Create New...