Garth Brooks vs Elvis Presley
Lately, Garth Brooks is everywhere I look. This guy has really been making the rounds, and I just figured out why. Apparently, he has become the biggest selling solo artist in history, knocking the late Elvis Presley off his throne. Is anyone else bothered by this? I normally wouldn’t bring it up here, but it has been a little over a year since we’ve seen a post in the Elvisiana section and I felt that someone had to stick up for the King.
Okay, sure. I’ll admit to liking a few Garth Brooks songs, perhaps even several. I was introduced to Mr. Brooks many moons ago by a young Mark Petersen, and I know he’s had a pretty good career. But number one of all time? Really? I didn’t know that his body of work was so expansive that he could sell so many albums. Shouldn’t a guy with 10 or more rehashed greatest hits albums at least get an asterix next to his name? I’m not looking for Congressional hearings on this, but c’mon already! As I glance across my office at the King’s velvet likeness, I just can’t fathom that somewhere somebody would display a velvet Garth Brooks painting. If Garth Brooks isn’t a pretender to the throne, someone please tell me what I’m missing.
February 26th, 2008 at 7:33 pm
Of course, Garth Brooks is really a one-trick pony. Sure, he has sold a lot of records, but has he starred in two of the most-watched television specials of all time? Or starred in 30 films, including three in which he plays a singing race-car driver? I think not.
To say nothing of the paucity of pilgrims at Brooks’ home, and the near-total absence of Brooks impersonators in Vegas. Where is Brooks’ answer to my bottle of love-me-tender no-tears shampoo? In fact, can one name any personal hygiene products names for his works? Again, I think not.
So let’s give Garth Brooks his due, as the King would in all his graciousness, but let’s keep his work in perspective.