There is a lovely piece in the Telegraph today about Elvis Presley, who died 30 years ago (Christ I feel old as I type those words). A lot of people get very snooty about the Tennessee lad but I do not.
Johnathan Pearce posting about Elvis at Samizdata. When it comes to Elvis, I'm more inclined to agree with Chuck D's assessment, but that's not why I quote the comment.
I find it odd to call him a "Tennessee lad". I think a more common construction would be something along the lines of 'lad from Tupelo'. By calling him a lad, you would seem to be talking about his early years, and those weren't spent in Memphis.
To manufacture a different case, let's look at Governor Schwarzenegger. He's a Californian now, through and through, he's even the frickin' Governator, but if I were to talk about him I wouldn't describe him as a 'California lad' (nor even a 'California kinder', and we won't even talk about his time as a cop amongst kinder).
I'm certain that Pearce wouldn't ever call John Lennon, that 'New York lad'.
Is it the power of Graceland, or ignorance of Elvis' history?
No comments:
Post a Comment