Talk:Big Mama Thornton

message: Just asking... Demf 15:43, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's Willa on her tombstone. 68.12.189.249 04:07, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

text: There's also this entry in Encyclopedia of the Blues By Edward M. Komara Steve Pastor (talk) 22:31, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Willie Mae or Willa Mae?

message: The elaborate part about her song 'hound dog' is not something an article should start with. It's supposed to start with an introduction, summing up who she was and what she was about, right?
I don't know enough about her to write a good introduction that's to the point, maybe someone else? If there's nobody, I'll do some research myself later on. Key to the city 12:59, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: the first part of this article

message: This is one of those humorously ambiguous sentences that it's a treat to find sometimes (though not in an encyclopedia, free or otherwise):
:  Johnny Otis conducted her funeral services, and she was laid to rest in the famous Inglewood Park Cemetery, along with a number of notable people, including entertainment and sports personalities.
So, okay, was she buried with a lot of other notable people, or did a lot of other notable people attend the services that Johnny Otis conducted, or was she laid to rest alongside a number of notable people (who were, like, already buried there)? There *is* sort of a significant difference, y'know... rowley (talk) 21:17, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Laid to rest with?

message: The description of her as leaving home at 14 in response to just "musical aspirations" is not a trivial inference, and needs at least to be  tagged. Do we know that her "minister" father (those scare quotes mean "was he the principal pastor of a congregation of hundreds, or, say, one of 5 ministers in a congregation that had 10 active families?" If the latter, did he minister primarily by being an example that a hound dog who's fixated on a church-going woman can turn his life around ... as long as she survives?) said "Your voice isn't really right for church work, and i know you're so faithful a Christian that your faith won't be at hazard touring in something called the Hot Harlem Revue"? Could the mother's death have been a stronger factor than the daughter's love of music, e.g. was going on the road professionally her only alternative to prostitution, as a way out of a no longer tenable family life?  I almost satisfied my concern with a fact tag: 
: Thornton's musical aspirations led her to leave Montgomery at age fourteen in 1941, following her mother's death
but the assertion is such an incomplete explanation of her leaving as to be implausible without more detail. If nothing like
: ... which once she ascribed, without further elaboration, to her "musical aspirations" ...
or
: ... which her father consented to, relying on both Sammy Green's interview with him, and his own consultations with Baptist clergy whose parishioners had  worked under Green ...
or
: ... in the care of her father's married sister ....
can be verified -- or at least attributed to a specific person who was there for the event -- the article is better stating the event without pretending that some unidentified person's PoV abt her motivations is verification. (Note she was presumably not yet 26 when "Hound Dog" was written "for her" in 1952 and presumably already had the razor scars that Leiber or Stoller (in the other's presence) describes on her face; facial razor scars, BTW, are IMO prima facie evidence of not knowing as an adult what one's own motivations were at 14 -- hell, i've got no real sense of what my own motivations were at 14, and my youth has to have been a lot simpler than hers.) "Left at 14 by joining the HHR" is a fact that can stand without explanation; "left at 14 for the sake of music" is PoV, and since it is problematically incomplete, failing to clarify whose PoV makes it unsound, and unworthy of inclusion. The work in the ref on that sentence is not on line, but is a library standard around here; i'll try to report back on whether its content is sufficient to repair the sentence. (In any case the citation is probably wrong: Gates is an editor (BTW the second of two) of the 2000-page work; if the article is anonymous, that should be said, and otherwise the title of the article needs to be include, the individual author needs to be, and the editor(s), if at all, cited only as eds of the larger work. In case i get sidetracked, i'm removing the confusing and probably erroneous author )
--Jerzy•t 22:49, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Leaving home 

message: I Have a version of Tom Cat by Willie Mae Thornton from the early fifties which sounds very familiar to Hound Dog does anyone else have this?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.71.8.24 (talk) 23:22, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hound Dog / Tom Cat 

message: I removed the reference to this compilation, as I can find no release for Big Mama Thornton called 'The Complete Okeh Sessions'; only Big Maybelle (not a pseudonym, but a different person) has a release that matches. Also, there is no evidence that I can find that Thornton recorded for Okeh. A Google search will quickly verify this.
Euchrid9 (talk) 08:55, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Complete Okeh Sessions removed 

message: Is there so little known of her personal life that it's not being included, or is it that people don't find it important enough? I'd like to see some of it, though I myself don't have the knowledge to add relevant points.109.91.98.41 (talk) 23:19, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The text implies that she was a lesbian without confirming either way. With no personal life info we have to assume taht she enver married or had children, but that's not proof.--MartinUK (talk) 20:10, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: She never married and had no children.  There is a discussion of the speculation about her sexuality here.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 20:16, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I would question Halberstam's authority on Thornton (and "Hound Dog") in general, but she is one of many authors to quote Johnny Otis' statement on Thornton's sexuality—which is, basically, that she presented as masculine and so people assumed she was lesbian, but he never saw her engaging romantically or sexually with anyone, male or female. Halberstam assumes Otis is "covering" for Thornton, but he seems to have seen no need to do that for anyone else whom he knew to be gay. It might be more reasonable to draw the conclusion that Thornton was transgender. That she wore men's clothing and affected a masculine demeanor is a matter of record. I think people haven't talked about her relationships because they didn't observe them. All the texts I've seen declaring her lesbian have cited no sources. Beyond that, most of what I've read and heard of her personal life involves health problems, substance abuse, poverty, and some understandable bitterness at her lack of greater success. The article should probably also mention that she was present when Johnny Ace killed himself. Pstoller (talk) 03:05, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  No Personal Life Info? 

message: :::Feminist scholars such as Maureen Mahon often praise Thornton for subverting traditional roles of African American women.[5] She added a female voice to a field that was dominated by white males, and her strong personality transgressed patriarchal and white supremacist stereotypes of what an African American woman should be. This transgression was an integral part of her performance and stage persona.[6]
I find the bolded section quite confusing.  Big Mama is traditionally viewed as a blues artist, and the blues was not a field "dominated by white males" in the 1960s.  A quick glance at citation number 5 suggests that the author is considering Big Mama as a rock-n-roll star, which would explain the comment about white males, though she's never been classified as rock (and for good reason).
I don't know much about Big Mama and I know even less about feminist views of her, so would someone more knowledgeable please fix this? Phiwum (talk) 18:25, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: From Mahon's perspective, the line between being and influencing rock & roll is largely a matter of race and gender: in the '50s and '60s, rock & roll was, or came to be, defined as a white male thing, even though its origins are primarily black and in some cases female (as Elvis Presley and Janis Joplin would have attested). Which is to say, it's not necessarily "for good reason" that Thornton is not typically classified as rock & roll. So long as the paragraph is introduced (as it is now) by identifying it as the viewpoint of feminist scholars, I see no reason to change it. Even if not, I think many musicologists would agree with Mahon that Thornton is no less rock & roll than, say, Chuck Berry or Little Richard, never mind Bill Haley or Buddy Holly. Pstoller (talk) 00:38, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some clarification needed 

message: In your article concerning Mama Thornton’s famous hits you state:
"However, her success was overshadowed three years later, when Elvis Presley recorded his more popular rendition of "Hound Dog".[4] Similarly, Thornton's "Ball 'n' Chain" (written in 1961 but not released until 1968) had a bigger impact when performed and recorded by Janis Joplin from 1967."
What is missing are the reasons why Presley and Joplin received more recognition than Thronton for her songs. It had little to with Presley’s and Joplin’s talent, (both of whom imitated African-American musical dance and style),  as it had to do with the structural racism/Apartheid system, in which African-American artists were not allowed to display their various talents in many major venues, thus, limiting their ability to gain national and international acclaim for their talent.  They were also not given fair music contracts and royalties.
I am a product of this era, and know first hand how difficult it was for African-American artists to even appear on major TV shows or have their music played on the radio.  Their music was often limited and confined to African-American radio shows and Juke-Joints.  Mediocre talented whites, who could successfully imitate African-American talent, were always given broad and international wide venues, and generous contracts/royalties to deliberately overshadow and profit from African-American talent. Just as it pretty much remains today.    
This article is somewhat deceptive because of this historical omission. It is important to include some historical narrative on how institutional and structural racism limited African-Americans from benefiting from their own intellectual and creative talents. It would also shed correct light as to why Thornton’s songs, (who is clearly a far superior talent than either Presley or Joplin), did not gain the national recognition they deserved, until these two white artists sang them. As it stands, this article reads as if these two artists were somehow superior in talent, which is a total misrepresentation of history, and does a disservice to Thornton’s enormous talent and legacy. 2600:1700:E90:9410:C470:99E9:F705:5CE1 (talk) 18:55, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: The article addresses your points in the Recognition section, though in a manner that is arguably too little, too late. It's as questionable to declare Thornton "clearly a far superior talent than either Presley or Joplin" as to imply the opposite: none of these artists wanted for talent. Suffice it to say that Thornton was a magnificent singer who has still not gotten her due, and that racism was/is a major factor in that. Given the success of other Black artists before, during, and after the period in which Thornton worked, it's reasonable to conclude that other factors were also at work—sexism, alcoholism, and exploitation amongst them. But, if other editors agree with you that the article implies the later recordings of "Hound Dog" and "Ball 'n' Chain" were more successful because they were better, then it should be amended to eliminate that implication. I don't think either Presley or Joplin thought they had topped Thornton. And I can attest that Leiber & Stoller always believed Thornton's recording of "Hound Dog" was not only the best version of that song by far, but one of the best records they, or anyone, ever produced. Pstoller (talk) 05:10, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: While agreeing with the points already made, I think a more fundamental question is whether statements of that sort should be in the lede at all.  This article is a biography of Thornton, who was a successful recording artist and performer in her own right.  The fact that two of the songs she recorded were later re-recorded and made more palatable to a mainstream white audience by others, is not of sufficient importance to an article about her life that it should dominate the opening paragraphs in the way it does in the current draft.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 10:39, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with Ghmyrtle that keeping references to more popular remakes (along with any discussion of why they were more popular) out of the lede is the best approach. Pstoller (talk) 09:44, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: A compromise version might be something like: She was the first to record Leiber and Stoller's "Hound Dog", in 1952, which became her biggest hit, staying seven weeks at number one on the Billboard R&B chart in 1953 and selling almost two million copies; the song was later a hit for Elvis Presley. Thornton's other recordings included the original version of "Ball 'n' Chain". Ghmyrtle (talk) 10:54, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Better, though I'm not sure it needs to be stated in the lede that "Hound Dog" was later a hit for Presley. That could be moved to somewhere in the body of the article, perhaps accompanied by a brief summary of the relevant issues covered in the article on the song. Pstoller (talk) 09:14, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: No problem.  I've implemented your suggestion and if necessary we can tweak it further if necessary. Ghmyrtle (talk) 09:52, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

text: Omitting them is its own form of editing and reframing, though, too. "Made more palatable" is just another way of saying "not recorded by someone who didn't look like them." We're talking about something well-documented in the blues industry at the time. It doesn't need made a focus, but it deserves mention in some way to keep historical context. - Bluejeansouth 172.6.90.117 (talk) 20:44, 25 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Presley and Joplin's Version of Thornton's Songs More Popular? 

message: There is a Willie Mae Rock Camp referred to in the article as part of her legacy. The website of the Encyclopaedia of Alabama lists her as Willie Mae "Big Mama" Thornton. Should the page title be changed? Alison hunter (talk) 18:52, 23 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Willie Mae or Big Mama Thornton? 

message: "Similarly, Thornton originally recorded her song "Ball 'n' Chain" for Bay-Tone Records in the early 1960s, "and though the label chose not to release the song... they did hold on to the copyright"—which meant that Thornton missed out on the publishing royalties when Janis Joplin recorded the song later in the decade." Everything about this claim is false. In the video Gunsmoke Blues, available on youtube at 13:20 Big Mama talks about Ball and Chain, and that she gets a check from "her Ball and Chain" and check "for Janis" "from BMI." (I don't know the time index for the DVD version) She also talks in that video about Elvis and Hound Dog, and not getting anything, and him even refusing to play with her when the producers tried to set up the show. That is presented for comparison in the video. It is just a slander on Janis Joplin, something that would break Big Mama's heart.71.63.160.210 (talk) 02:54, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: The claim about the copyright is made explicitly in this book, pages 3-4, which is the source used in the article and meets WP:RS.   But, there does seem to be uncertainty about whether that applied only initially and was later reversed.  Our article on Ball and Chain (Big Mama Thornton song) says:According to Gaar, Thornton originally had recorded the song for Bay-Tone Records in the early 1960s, although the label did not issue it.  Gaar adds that "[Bay-Tone held] on to the copyright—which meant that Thornton missed out on the publishing royalties when Janis Joplin recorded the song later in the decade." However, Thornton's (and Big Brother/Joplin's) releases list "W.M. Thornton" as the songwriter, as well as the performing rights administrator BMI. By another account, Thornton signed an agreement with Bay Tone which caused problems with later releases. In a 1972 interview, Thornton acknowledged giving Joplin permission to record the song and receiving royalty payments from its sales.Sporke 2014, p. 70.  It would be best to use a similar (but shorter) wording here, though I don't have all the sources.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 08:00, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

text: Now clarified in this article. Ghmyrtle (talk) 14:58, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ball and Chain 

message: So I'm reading along and in the middle of the section "Later career and death" I encounter this strange non-sequitur: "In the early 1970s, Thornton's sexual proclivities became a question among blues fans". Sentence comes out of the blue, a propos of nothing, and goes nowhere. Proclivities? uhhh, like what? Lesbian? Younger men? BDSM? What and or why do we need to know about BMT's "sexual proclivities" late in her career? Unless someone knows something about this, explains how it's important to Wikipedia readers, and is willing to expand on the statement I'm going to remove it. Classicfilmbuff (talk) 19:13, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: There is some context in the book used as a source - here.  It is not explicit, but states that "In later life, she openly dressed as a man onstage", and then: "It wasn't till the early 1970s that Thornton's and Ma Rainey's sexual proclivities became common knowledge among blues lovers."   The fact that this became public knowledge in the 1970s is of no consequence to Thornton's biography, and I agree that it should be removed.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 19:43, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well LGBT history is notoriously challenging, often impossible, to document for many reasons. I'm all in for deep dives that attempt to bring to light the "hidden," or closeted, lives of historically important ppl who happened to be lgb or t etc. I spent years working on the Greta Garbo WP article and had to walk through all kinds of fire to get at the truth about her sexuality (from exhaustive research, through agonizing pains about wording, straight through obstinate readers and editors whose life goal seemed to be protection of their image of Garbo as heterosexual.) But in BMT's case, I'm guessing that at this pt, we lack sufficient information to say much about her "proclivities." (Dreadful word.) So, best to remove it until a scholar at some point figures out how to get to the bottom of "it" if "it" even exists. So unless that person emerges on this talk p. in the next month or so, I think it's best to get rid of a sentence that now only serves to confuse readers and diminish the article.Classicfilmbuff (talk) 02:58, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Sexual proclivities" become a question in 1970s 

message: Listed as 'Live' on Wiki but I don't think it is. There's no audience noise or applause. Studio album. 51.6.240.244 (talk) 11:43, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sassy Mama 1975 Vanguard LP