Yesterday, at his memorial, Michael Jackson was eulogized by Berry Gordy by saying “He is simply the greatest entertainer who ever lived.” My first response was that is a bit of a stretch, but on further reflection and considering what was said on the great performer thread, I began to think otherwise. # of albums sold, contributions to race relations, almost everybody knows his songs, Often performed amongst other greats, Humanitarian, MJ had all the qualities mentioned on the other thread.
is/was Michael Jackson the greatest entertainer ever? does weirdness or allegations take away from those other qualities of greatness? If not MJ then who? why?
hard to say, he sure seemed to be tho. watch some old MJ concerts. People screaming to the point of passing out and being carried away. he seemed to know hoe to make himself bigger then life. One thing i always liked about him was the the massive array of musical sytles he used. if you look at it, im not sure he missed any lol
I would learn to accept it as I have learned to accept all my many other physical and mental imperfections. Pyschotherapy at the age of 13 probably saved my life - a huge part of my counselling was aound my self-image and family issues.
Please don't write me off as a Jackson hater. I think "Off the Wall" is one of the greatest dance records ever made, and one would be a fool not to acknowledge his brilliance as a performer.
What I think is truly tragic about MJ is that as a result of his fame and one-time wealth he was surrounded by sycophant leaches who did not confront him and say "enough is enough" when there was still time to save him. Instead they allowed his insecurities to manifest into personality disorders. Liz Taylor tried, but far too late - and only to address his drug issues.
You don't have to be a psychologist to see that Jackson had an acute case of body dysmorphic disorder and serious mental health issues around his own age identity. He was trapped in a body he hated because it reminded him of his own father. A complete waste of a huge talent.
However... and this is directly addressing the thread. I think for the last 20 years or so, Jackson's music has been very poor. He has survived on past glory and the huge media circus that fed off his mental frailty and the allegations of improper conduct.
Elvis was even bigger and dominated more forms of media. Elvis was also far more influencial as one of the original molders of rock n' roll.
Elvis had his own style of wierd, we all know, although it would be kind of cool to be with Elvis when he was shooting AKs in a hotel room... or shooting a TV everytime Robert Goulet came on.
a few weeks ago if you mentioned MJ no one would give a fuck an say hes a child molester, hes got no nose, he raises his kids all messed up. now that hes dead every one says they love him so much etc. etc... its what happens every time a musician dies. as for the greatest "entertainer"? hell no. that all depends on what entertains you. he was an amazing singer an dancer, but i think i would be more entertained by some one in a cage fight with a lion. and theres a good handfull of musicians out there that can put on a more entertaining show then him. im not an MJ hater. i grew up listening to him. im just not jumping on the bandwagon that every one else in the world is doing by pretending to love him so much now that hes dead. artist become icons when they die unexpectedly. jim morrison, jimi hendrix, elvis, kurt cobain, that guy from sublime, an now MJ. johnny cash died of old age, he gets one news report, and a cd box set. if he would have died from the drugs or the flipped tractor he would be anouther icon for the world. kurt cobain said "its better to burn out then to fade away". all these icons burnt out. cash faded away. if MJ lived to be 83 he would have faded away. im a bit off topic here but i gotta bitch some where.
I agree with much of what's been said above. I never bought one of MJ's albums or attended a concert, but I've got ears. MJ could sing, at age 10, in an unreal way. A child prodigy, like Stevie Wonder. And in the early 80s, when "Thriller" came out--well, anybody who was alive then surely remembers just how big that was. I believe the album spent 35 weeks at #1 on the pop and R&B and rock charts.
MJ was a universal pop star between 1980 and the early 1990s. That's when the phrase "king of pop" was invented, if I'm not wrong, and it was quite explicitly trying to place him in an advantageous place vis a vis Elvis.
Elvis never had much of a black audience, although he did have SOME black audience, especially in the early days in Memphis. (See Brian Ward's JUST MY SOUL RESPONDING for that.) And for obvious reasons, Elvis has been a somewhat polarizing figure for African Americans. This is why MJ's success--his universal, black/white/asian/world success--is something that black entertainers, among others, play up. Berry Gordy is an example. The implicit argument is: MJ is a pop phenomenon we can ALL embrace, where Elvis is not. I'm not endorsing this argument, or disputing it. I'm just reporting it. It's what's going on under the surface. Elvis's career will always, in African American minds, be connected with the so-called "cover phenomenon," since some of his best known early hits--"That's Allright Mama," "Hound Dog"--were written and/or previously performed by black artists. (Note: Thornton didn't write "Hound Dog"; a pair of white guys did. Note: "Hound Dog" isn't a cover, since covers were released by white artists almost directly on the heels of the original black versions; Elvis's version came 4-5 years after the original, so Thornton's record had plenty of time to work the charts, accrue profits, etc.)
But here's something nobody is talking about right now: African Americans were NOT happy, during the late 1980s and 1990s, by MJ's repeated skin-lightenings and cosmetic surgeries. Go back and look at the contemporaneous commentary. Many black commentators, and black folk in the street, felt that he was trying to "deny his blackness." And it's hard not to look at him in his later days and not feel a mixture of pity and...what? Horror? Disgust? He ended up looking like a guy who had had much too much plastic surgery. He looked nothing like his Jackson brothers. He was other-worldly. At some moments he looked like an extra-terrestrial.
Several excellent academic studies were written about him--and specifically about his slow transformation from a guy with what would probably have been called solid brown or medium brown complexion into somebody who resembled nothing so much as an understudy for the movie WHITE CHICKS, directed by the Wyans Brothers.
As for the child-molestation charges: I honestly don't know what to think about all that. If nothing else, what he did was amazingly foolish, Promethean in its attempt to pretend that America was other than it was. Assume for the sake of argument that all he did was exactly what he claimed he did: invite pre-teen boys over to his big fun estate so they could sleep in his big soft bed. Touching and hugging, perhaps, but no sex-play. That's what he CLAIMED he did, not what he was accused of doing. (He was accused of doing all that, plus plying the boys with drinks, I believe, and engaging in sexual touching, however one defines that. And please correct me, if I'm wrong.)
America is hysterical and hypocritical when it comes to sexuality. Some world civilizations see nothing wrong with older men marrying 15-year old girls. In American, that's jail bait--although advertisers and clothing and makeup and underwear manufacturers are busy trying to sell those girls, and their juniors, the tart-look. Look, but don't touch. Encourage the girls to sexualize themselves, though.
But the moment they reach 18--hey, anything goes. Put 'em on porn channels, marry 'em.
In any case, Michael may have been something of a cosmopolitan, but even he must have realized that the pre-pube-boy sleepovers, innocent as they may actually have been, were playing with fire, especially in light of his status as a prime candidate for blackmail.
So what he did there was foolish. The fact that he got brought up on charges, twice, is now part of the story, whether his fans want it to be or not. The celebrity scandal-mill is pretty equal opportunity. When you're that famous--the king of pop--and that rich, and sex-with-minor charges are tossed into the mix, of COURSE you become a big story, and of course that story sticks with you.
Still, for me it all comes back to "Thriller" in the early 80s. MJ defined the sound of that era. And when "Bad" came out--more, more, more. Throw his extraordinary dancing into the mix--everybody wanted to do those moves--and his brilliance as an icon of style (the white glove, the sleeves pulled up to mid-forearm, etc.) and you've got the reason why the world stopped for a couple of hours during yesterday's memorial. He was that good. He had the genius, worked it very very hard (everybody acknowledges that), and--let's not forget--gave away more money to charity than any other celebrity in history.
That's quite a record. He ain't going away, and he deserves whatever afterlife he enjoys.
Last Edited by on Jul 08, 2009 11:04 AM
Well Johnny Cash may have died of old age, but he didn't exactly fade away. He was and always will be an icon and one of the giants of country music!
The three biggest names known by most people in the world for country music are Dolly Parton, Johnny Cash and Patsy Cline.
Sadly the most common thread that runs through the lives of great musicians is drug and/or drink abuse. They either get over it or it kills most of them.
The list of musicians who have had some kind of substance abuse problem in their lives is simply staggering.
Michael Jackson, Elvis, Billie Holiday, Ray Charles, Johnny Cash, The Beatles, The Rolling Stones, Jimi Hendrix, Janis Joplin, Jim Morrison, Ozzy Osbourne to name just a few.
The pressures that are put on "stars" by the media especially are extremely difficult for even the most balanced individual to deal with. When you couple this with addictive, obsessive personalities who are for the most part hugely insecure as well, then you have a recipe for disaster.
Aussiesucker. I checked some stats online and they are all over the place some say Elvis some say Eagles some say MJ. Guess like any statistic its all in how you count it. He Has been nicknamed King Of Pop since the early 90 like Elvis was nicknamed the King. And I think you are using a short ruler to say he was a long way from the top.
BTW your RIAA stat is for sales in the U.S. not worldwide
Last Edited by on Jul 08, 2009 6:13 PM
SCS> My understanding is that RIAA stats covers the export sales made by these artists as well ie my interpretation and understanding would be 'worldwide'. If however as you say they were only applicable to U.S. then it is such a massive market overshadowing the rest of the world. It would be inconceivable that a U.S. artist listed at No 17 in the US having a much higher worldwide rating. Also are not all the claims and hoo hah about MJ being generated from the US?
Of course there are statistics and statistics which all are misused, misquoted and bent to suit whatever! But industry stats usually are correct.
For my money MJ is not really in the same league as the official top 3 ie Beatles,Elvis and Garth Brooks. And if you take these industry stats as actual sales then both the Beatles & Elvis would be light years ahead in sales as a % of the actual population back then ie 30 - 40 years ago and when vinyl was the only media.
My intention is not to drag MJ down but to place some accuracy into the argument. It is only some peoples opinion that MJ was simply the greatest performer who ever lived as the facts really prove otherwise. If the statement were made about The Beatles or Elvis being the greatest entertainers who ever lived then it just might be irrefutable.
Interestingly, Garth Brookes, unless one is an avid country enthusiast is completely unknown in Australia. We have very few country music stations & most capital cities have none. Normal radio never plays him and most music stores don't stock any of his CDs. It's a shame & a sham that is foistered upon us by an industry that controls certain artists, recording labels and media networks that restrict the playing of anything not in their stable. With the demise of CD sales and the growth in downloadable sales and free content then it will only improve.
Last Edited by on Jul 08, 2009 10:53 PM
