Greatest Musical Entertainer of the 20th Century

[Jenvenza]

The only reason Frank Sanatra is not on my list is because I can only name one of his songs, "New York, New York" and I know a lot of teens that havent heard of Sanatra at all. His music just isnt standing up to the test of time

I think a lot of people would disagree with you with that statement.

 

[saratogadreamin09]

I think a lot of people would disagree with you with that statement.

And I would say most of those people are older then 20,25,30. My generation jsut doesnt know Sanatra, but my generation does know MJ,Elvis,Billy Joel, Celion Dion, The Beatles, and Queen

 

[bicker]

Yes, so it is perhaps best to restrict any "Greatest Entertainer" label to a more limited span of time, perhaps 25 years.

 

[HelenePA]

I think a lot of people would disagree with you with that statement.

I would be one of them but I'm sure he was one of the best in his era

 

[saratogadreamin09]

Yes, so it is perhaps best to restrict any "Greatest Entertainer" label to a more limited span of time, perhaps 25 years.

IMO, to be a great entertainer you have to have longevity. But thats just how I feel

 

[Jenvenza]

And I would say most of those people are older then 20,25,30. My generation jsut doesnt know Sanatra, but my generation does know MJ,Elvis,Billy Joel, Celion Dion, The Beatles, and Queen

Well, I am 30 and my generation knows who Sinatra is. And if your generation knows who Elvis is, they should know who Sinatra is.

It is all a matter of opinion though.

 

[saratogadreamin09]

Well, I am 30 and my generation knows who Sinatra is. And if your generation knows who Elvis is, they should know who Sinatra is.

It is all a matter of opinion though.

Im 14, and I said most people over about 25 would know Sanatra better. And most people I know, know Elvis and not Sanatra. I think its just because a lot of Elvis i still heard today and a lot of artist still do covers of Elvis' songs.


I dont know, I cant explain why a lot of people know Elvis but not Sanatra

 

[HelenePA]

Im 14, and I said most people over about 25 would know Sanatra better. And most people I know, know Elvis and not Sanatra. I think its just because a lot of Elvis i still heard today and a lot of artist still do covers of Elvis' songs.


I dont know, I cant explain why a lot of people know Elvis but not Sanatra

I would guess more people your age know elvis more than sanatra because their styles of music are very different how about dean martin and the rest of the rat pack?

 

[HelenePA]

I am shocked no one said the who or pink floyd their music has with stood the test of time so far I am not a fan of either but my brother is

 

[saratogadreamin09]

I would guess more people your age know elvis more than sanatra because their styles of music are very different how about dean martin and the rest of the rat pack?

I think dean Martin might be the only other member of the rat pack Ive heard of, and I cant even tell you one of his songs

 

[Jenvenza]

Im 14, and I said most people over about 25 would know Sanatra better. And most people I know, know Elvis and not Sanatra. I think its just because a lot of Elvis i still heard today and a lot of artist still do covers of Elvis' songs.


I dont know, I cant explain why a lot of people know Elvis but not Sanatra

Well, at 14, I can understand why you don't know Sinatra very well!

 

[saratogadreamin09]

I am shocked no one said the who or pink floyd their music has with stood the test of time so far I am not a fan of either but my brother is

I was thinking someone would say Pink Floyd, and ACDC, and Lynard Skynard, and Led Zepplain

 

[NotUrsula]

Michael Jackson
Luciano Pavarotti
Hank Williams
Elvis Presley
Bob Marley
Frank Sinatra

Good start, but if we're talking about the Twentieth Century here, and sticking only to those with musical talent, how about we add a few more candidates from the early years, and even a later one or two:

Al Jolson
Josephine Baker
George M. Cohan
George Gershwin
Benny Goodman
Cole Porter
Irving Berlin
Bing Crosby
Fred Astaire
Richard Rodgers
Louis Armstrong
Paul Robeson
Judy Garland
Jerry Lewis
Doris Day
Nat King Cole
Tony Bennett
Bobby Darin
Sammy Davis, Jr.
Burt Bacharach
Jimmy Webb
Barbra Streisand
Carole King
John Williams

... and those are just the Americans.

I think that to be considered among "greatest entertainers", you have to have more than one "entertaining" talent, you have to make money at entertaining, your work has to reach across generations and national boundaries, and perferably your work has to have some historical significance to it, too, in terms of being the first to do something, or in particularly influencing a style or a genre.

Singers who are composers, singers who are dancers, singers who are actors, composers who are conductors, actors who can sing -- people whose work turns up again and again in the fabric of our lives, even if they have been dead for decades.

If I had to choose just one, I think I would pick Sinatra. He was a gifted singer, had mesmerizing stage presence, and was a talented actor as well. He was also an innovator who did many new things with phrasing and arrangements that would change popular music in a lot of ways for decades after his peak popularity. He essentially invented the Vegas style (whether you like it or not, you have to recognize that it was innovative.)

Also, I'd personally like to throw out the idea that the "Greatest Entertainer of the 20th Century" just may have been a comic. Appreciation of music is always highly coloured by what style one likes, but comedy is less so (except of course for the issue of whether or not blue humour or insults are funny.)

 

[bicker]

IMO, to be a great entertainer you have to have longevity. But thats just how I feel

But, depending on what you use as your measuring stick for longevity, no one is "great".

 

[Sir Robin Hood]

he was 21st century

I don't know why I thought that was back in '99. I'm getting too old.

Bruce Springsteen and The Temptations would have to be in my top-5 somewhere.

 

[NotUrsula]

IMO, to be a great entertainer you have to have longevity. But thats just how I feel

Ahem. Longevity. Just to compare ...

Elvis was a professional performer for 24 years, from 1954 until his death in 1978. He had 18 #1 hits and 38 Top Ten hits, most of them in the periods between 1956-1960 and again between 1968-70. He really wanted to make it as an actor, but he was lamentably bad at it. Most of Elvis' music other than the religious pieces is very period-specific -- you know it's early rock and roll or 70's easy listening.
Ironically for this discussion, his last lifetime Top Ten hit was a cover of a Sinatra classic: "My Way."

Sinatra cut his first record in 1939, and his last in 1997 (a year before his death), for a career span of 57 years. He was not as successful with chart-topping singles as Elvis was, but his album sales were huge. He also was nominated for two Oscars as an actor and won one for Best Supporting Actor. Quite a few of Sinatra's best known songs are now considered American Pop Standards; they are covered by more and more artists every year.

Do yourself a favor. Go rent the original "Manchurian Candidate", "From Here to Eternity", or "The Man with the Golden Arm." You'll understand what made Sinatra the more well-rounded performer.

 

[LuvCuteBoys]

Wow... when I first read the title of the thread, the first person who popped into my head was Paul Newman and then I immediately thought of George Lucas and Steven Spielberg.

I didn't really think of it as being simply a musical thing.

And as soon as I saved this post, John Wayne popped into my head.

 

[luvsJack]

Never even heard of this person before....

Don't feel bad, a lot of people haven't. He probably was not the most famous person of the century but that doesn't take away from the ability he had to entertain. The man was a true entertainer.

 

[bicker]

The longevity that matters, as far as I'm concerned, isn't a matter of how long someone performed, IMHO, but rather how long after they're dead that their contributions are still considered relevant. Figure historians never try to write true histories until long after the events they're covering are long past, so that they can analyze them in proper perspective.

 

[saratogadreamin09]

The longevity that matters, as far as I'm concerned, isn't a matter of how long someone performed, IMHO, but rather how long after they're dead that their contributions are still considered relevant. Figure historians never try to write true histories until long after the events they're covering are long past, so that they can analyze them in proper perspective.

same here