Thankyou, thankyouverymuch

[Dingfod]

Elvis Presley's home, Graceland, now a National Landmark, alongside places of historical significance such as Mount Vernon and Monticello.


/time for a peanut butter, bacon and banana sammich

[livius drusus]

Does the designation mean in anything in practical terms? Like for tax purposes or something?

[Tanda]

Not really an Elvis fan, but we lived in Tupelo, Mississippi for a short time and visited the home where he was born. It was built by his father. There is a museum directly behind his birthplace that houses Elvis memorabilia.

[D. Scarlatti]

Although Graceland contains many, many tacky displays and fixtures, nothing can surpass the copyright symbol on Elvis's gravestone.* That is the absolute height (or nadir, if you will) of tackiness.

* Actually it isn't a stone, but rather one of those flush-mounted bronze slabs.

[Sock Puppet]

Originally Posted by livius drusus

Does the designation mean in anything in practical terms? Like for tax purposes or something?

From the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). The gist is that national landmarks get a protected status so that they can't be torn down to make space for a shopping mall, or otherwise damaged, unless somebody makes a really good case for why it should be done. Not that Graceland is in any imminent danger of being razed, as long as it continues to profit from so much devout pilgrimage.

Another provision provides national landmarks with possible public funding for preservation expenses. Again, not that Graceland needs it.

[D. Scarlatti]

Originally Posted by Sock Puppet

the Code of Federal Regulations

Ladies and gentlemen we have a brand new thread-killin' sumbitch (and a surefire cure for insomnia).

[Sock Puppet]

What's worse is I linked the text version, 'cause I couldn't get the sexier PDF version to load.

[D. Scarlatti]

Wait a minute, I was thinking of the Federal Register. That CFR's some damn good readin'.

[Shake]

CNN.com did a poll about this. I voted against Graceland being a National Landmark. I just don't see the point.

[livius drusus]

Originally Posted by Tanda

Not really an Elvis fan, but we lived in Tupelo, Mississippi for a short time and visited the home where he was born. It was built by his father. There is a museum directly behind his birthplace that houses Elvis memorabilia.

It's tiny! Very neat and clean, though. I'm guessing it's been restored since the days Vern built it with his own two hands.

Originally Posted by Sock Puppet

Not that Graceland is in any imminent danger of being razed, as long as it continues to profit from so much devout pilgrimage.

Another provision provides national landmarks with possible public funding for preservation expenses. Again, not that Graceland needs it.

Yeah, really. The practicalities don't seem to apply much at all. It kinda bugs me, truth be told, because I'm sure there are a hundred historical buildings razed every day, and they don't get the protection when they actually need it.

[Sock Puppet]

If it were running deficits in upkeep, and George Lucas was about to buy it and set up Elvis' corpse to do shows with animitronic implants, I could see granting it landmark status. Well, some people might consider that wrong. But yeah, there's really no point in doing it now.

OT: The Federal Register keeps from boring me by being such an annoying bitch to search. The CFR is much easier to use, and you usually only have to go to one section to figure out what the hell the law is.