I keep thinking of something one of my mother's co-workers told her back in 2005, trying to explain the complicated feelings so many people her age had about Jackson: they'd grown up along with him. They felt responsible for him, and that they'd somehow failed him.
The first time I ever heard Drew Barrymore's life story, I felt sick to my stomach at the appalling failure of the adults around her to nurture and care for her during her most vulnerable years. Barrymore pulled her life together as an adult despite the catastrophic personal damage of her celebrity childhood, but Jackson didn't. That's terribly sad.
I've never felt any responsibility for Michael Jackson. His father beat him, and then Michael had the money and power to indulge the various emotional twists that resulted from his early mistreatment. Like a lot of people, I feel that celebrities don't have much to do with me. They're a distorted version of humanity, and the distortion goes back to their own personalities, the desperation that pushes them forward to such heights. This may not be an entirely fair point of view, since I've never spent much time around any celebrities, but it's widespread. At any rate, a look at Michael Jackson makes it seem fair.
I don't know that I are that much about random celebrities necessarily…but Michael Jackson's classic albums are amazing. It's just depressing to see someone that talented so screwed up, I guess. It's like Elvis, a little.
Off the Wall and Thriller were good. But I always preferred Culture Club.
I have to admit that I may never have heard a Michael Jackson song in my life. I don't feel any grief at his death, although hearing about his childhood makes me sad.
The lives of celebrities mean about as much to me as the lives of other people who are strangers to me–when I hear about interesting or extraordinary or terrible things happening to people I don't know personally, I can be moved. I don't feel more or less compassion for them because they're celebrities.
But clearly, many people do feel a deeper personal connection to celebrities, which is occasionally interesting when you dig down into the why of it. Sometimes, it does seem like nothing more than fantasy, vicarious living–I recall co-worker of mine who responded to the sudden death of Heath Ledger with approximately the same degree of emotional shock that many people expressed on September 11th, which I found kind of bizarre. On the other hand, you have someone feeling some sense of actual personal culpability in the twisted emotional state of a person she'd watched grow up, albeit at a distance. Personal responsibility! It's not a question of whether one ought to feel that; she (and people she knew) simply did. (I'm not positive, but it's fairly likely that my mother's co-worker was black, which would go some ways toward explaining it.)
My father, never much one for celebrity gossip, was saddened at the death of John F. Kennedy Jr, and tried to explain that to me by describing the experience of watching the toddler Kennedy salute his father's coffin; he said, it was something you couldn't forget.
Culture Club better than Michael Jackson? Good lord, Tom. That's just wrong.
Cerusee, I'll bet you've heard some Michael Jackson songs. He's fairly inescapable. In any case, if you've got any interest in pop music at all, you should check out "Off the Wall." It's really a fantastic album.
"Personal responsibility! It's not a question of whether one ought to feel that; she (and people she knew) simply did."
It's an odd way of looking at things, and interesting for that reason. But she might be better off if she could get over the idea. Life is hard enough without making up responsibilities. Then again, maybe it makes her feel important.
"(I'm not positive, but it's fairly likely that my mother's co-worker was black, which would go some ways toward explaining it.)"
Just because she feels closer to him in general? Or what?
"Culture Club better than Michael Jackson? Good lord, Tom. That's just wrong."
I always loved Boy George's voice. To tell the truth, I think Prince was better than MJ, Culture Club, and George Michael put together. One of the greats. But he lost it 20 years ago, for some reason.
Noah: yeah, probably. I think I've heard all kinds of famous things and had no clue what they were, because I don't pay much attention. I'm constantly stumbling a few years behind pop culture phenomena. I'll keep an ear out for it.
Tom: Because when a member of an in-group–a church, an ethnic minority, a subculture–experiences enormous public success, other members of that group often feel a sense of pride and kinship and loyalty to them, and those feelings remain in play even if that person falters later. Do you find that strange? It's not unusual.
You're positing what, some kind of Munchausen's by proxy? I have no reason to think her sense of responsibility was intense enough either disrupt her life or be the object of some kind of indulgent martyr fantasy. A lot of interest in the suffering of strangers might qualify for that, I guess, although a certain amount vicarious living through accounts of other people's lives just strikes me as a normal function of human empathy. I don't think we come equipped with a checklist of subjects that may acceptably arouse sentiment in us.
Don't forget the classic Jackson 5 songs–I Want You Back, ABC, I'll Be There…and several others. Very little better…and Off the Wall, Thriller, and even Bad were great too. Dangerous even has its moments (few, admittedly).
Prince is awesome too–I'd probably have to go for Prince over MJ, but Jackson had mucho talent–and awesome dance moves too. Much like Elvis in the decline, fall, and death. No fear, he'll be canonized now.
"other members of that group often feel a sense of pride and kinship and loyalty to them, and those feelings remain in play even if that person falters later. Do you find that strange? It's not unusual."
No, it's very commonplace. But taking pride in someone is not the same as feeling responsible for them.
"I have no reason to think her sense of responsibility was intense enough either disrupt her life or be the object of some kind of indulgent martyr fantasy."
That sort of feeling doesn't have to be intense. It can be quite casual, a momentary indulgence.
"I don't think we come equipped with a checklist of subjects that may acceptably arouse sentiment in us."
It depends what you mean by "acceptably" and what sort of sentiment is being aroused.
"the classic Jackson 5 songs–I Want You Back, ABC, I'll Be There."
Yeah, personally I like those better than MJ's solo stuff.
An interesting point is that I assume a musician is more important if he/she writes the songs, not just performs them. Nowadays that view may not be as widespread as it once was.
But even if MJ did write all his own songs, I'd still prefer Prince. Just can't help it.
Jackson did both sonwriting and production on his solo albums, according to Wikipedia.
MJ wrote some, didn't write others. Five of Thriller's nine songs were written by other people. On the other hand, the best songs are all credited to MJ.
On later albums he seems to have collaborated a lot on various tracks. Of course that leaves open the question of how much he contributed to any given song.
The advantage of Prince's being an insane control freak about music is that all the composing glory goes to him.
Jackson is apparently in the "Songwriters Hall of Fame" fwiw. I believe he cowrote "We are the World" (with Lionel Ritchie?). I'm not sure we should hold that against him at this stage, though.
I remember Robert Christgau arguing that "We Are the World" was obviously better than "Do They Know It's Christmas?" — musically, politically and morally. I thought he was nuts.But I loved early 80s britpop.
Of course a lot of people would think it was crazy to have any preference between those 2 songs.
Robert Christgau is an ass. Anytime I see him say anything, that fact is reinforced.
I never understood what he was talking about. Maybe a sentence here or there.
If I recall, his pol and/or moral argument abt the 2 songs was that "We" was inclusive while "Do They" created a distance between the song's listeners and the Africans getting the charity. I didn't see that as a problem, since there is a distance and why not admit it. But really I just liked the tune.
I'll double down on the scorn for Robert Christgau. An ass, indeed.
I always liked "Do They Know It's Christmas" (and I never minded "We Are the World"" to be honest…Bob Dylan's vocals are hilariously awesome)
I keep thinking of something one of my mother's co-workers told her back in 2005, trying to explain the complicated feelings so many people her age had about Jackson: they'd grown up along with him. They felt responsible for him, and that they'd somehow failed him.
The first time I ever heard Drew Barrymore's life story, I felt sick to my stomach at the appalling failure of the adults around her to nurture and care for her during her most vulnerable years. Barrymore pulled her life together as an adult despite the catastrophic personal damage of her celebrity childhood, but Jackson didn't. That's terribly sad.
I've never felt any responsibility for Michael Jackson. His father beat him, and then Michael had the money and power to indulge the various emotional twists that resulted from his early mistreatment. Like a lot of people, I feel that celebrities don't have much to do with me. They're a distorted version of humanity, and the distortion goes back to their own personalities, the desperation that pushes them forward to such heights. This may not be an entirely fair point of view, since I've never spent much time around any celebrities, but it's widespread. At any rate, a look at Michael Jackson makes it seem fair.
I don't know that I are that much about random celebrities necessarily…but Michael Jackson's classic albums are amazing. It's just depressing to see someone that talented so screwed up, I guess. It's like Elvis, a little.
Off the Wall and Thriller were good. But I always preferred Culture Club.
I have to admit that I may never have heard a Michael Jackson song in my life. I don't feel any grief at his death, although hearing about his childhood makes me sad.
The lives of celebrities mean about as much to me as the lives of other people who are strangers to me–when I hear about interesting or extraordinary or terrible things happening to people I don't know personally, I can be moved. I don't feel more or less compassion for them because they're celebrities.
But clearly, many people do feel a deeper personal connection to celebrities, which is occasionally interesting when you dig down into the why of it. Sometimes, it does seem like nothing more than fantasy, vicarious living–I recall co-worker of mine who responded to the sudden death of Heath Ledger with approximately the same degree of emotional shock that many people expressed on September 11th, which I found kind of bizarre. On the other hand, you have someone feeling some sense of actual personal culpability in the twisted emotional state of a person she'd watched grow up, albeit at a distance. Personal responsibility! It's not a question of whether one ought to feel that; she (and people she knew) simply did. (I'm not positive, but it's fairly likely that my mother's co-worker was black, which would go some ways toward explaining it.)
My father, never much one for celebrity gossip, was saddened at the death of John F. Kennedy Jr, and tried to explain that to me by describing the experience of watching the toddler Kennedy salute his father's coffin; he said, it was something you couldn't forget.
Culture Club better than Michael Jackson? Good lord, Tom. That's just wrong.
Cerusee, I'll bet you've heard some Michael Jackson songs. He's fairly inescapable. In any case, if you've got any interest in pop music at all, you should check out "Off the Wall." It's really a fantastic album.
"Personal responsibility! It's not a question of whether one ought to feel that; she (and people she knew) simply did."
It's an odd way of looking at things, and interesting for that reason. But she might be better off if she could get over the idea. Life is hard enough without making up responsibilities. Then again, maybe it makes her feel important.
"(I'm not positive, but it's fairly likely that my mother's co-worker was black, which would go some ways toward explaining it.)"
Just because she feels closer to him in general? Or what?
"Culture Club better than Michael Jackson? Good lord, Tom. That's just wrong."
I always loved Boy George's voice. To tell the truth, I think Prince was better than MJ, Culture Club, and George Michael put together. One of the greats. But he lost it 20 years ago, for some reason.
Noah: yeah, probably. I think I've heard all kinds of famous things and had no clue what they were, because I don't pay much attention. I'm constantly stumbling a few years behind pop culture phenomena. I'll keep an ear out for it.
Tom: Because when a member of an in-group–a church, an ethnic minority, a subculture–experiences enormous public success, other members of that group often feel a sense of pride and kinship and loyalty to them, and those feelings remain in play even if that person falters later. Do you find that strange? It's not unusual.
You're positing what, some kind of Munchausen's by proxy? I have no reason to think her sense of responsibility was intense enough either disrupt her life or be the object of some kind of indulgent martyr fantasy. A lot of interest in the suffering of strangers might qualify for that, I guess, although a certain amount vicarious living through accounts of other people's lives just strikes me as a normal function of human empathy. I don't think we come equipped with a checklist of subjects that may acceptably arouse sentiment in us.
Prince is great too.
Cerusee: Here's Michael J. on Youtube.
Don't forget the classic Jackson 5 songs–I Want You Back, ABC, I'll Be There…and several others. Very little better…and Off the Wall, Thriller, and even Bad were great too. Dangerous even has its moments (few, admittedly).
Prince is awesome too–I'd probably have to go for Prince over MJ, but Jackson had mucho talent–and awesome dance moves too. Much like Elvis in the decline, fall, and death. No fear, he'll be canonized now.
"other members of that group often feel a sense of pride and kinship and loyalty to them, and those feelings remain in play even if that person falters later. Do you find that strange? It's not unusual."
No, it's very commonplace. But taking pride in someone is not the same as feeling responsible for them.
"I have no reason to think her sense of responsibility was intense enough either disrupt her life or be the object of some kind of indulgent martyr fantasy."
That sort of feeling doesn't have to be intense. It can be quite casual, a momentary indulgence.
"I don't think we come equipped with a checklist of subjects that may acceptably arouse sentiment in us."
It depends what you mean by "acceptably" and what sort of sentiment is being aroused.
"the classic Jackson 5 songs–I Want You Back, ABC, I'll Be There."
Yeah, personally I like those better than MJ's solo stuff.
An interesting point is that I assume a musician is more important if he/she writes the songs, not just performs them. Nowadays that view may not be as widespread as it once was.
But even if MJ did write all his own songs, I'd still prefer Prince. Just can't help it.
Jackson did both sonwriting and production on his solo albums, according to Wikipedia.
MJ wrote some, didn't write others. Five of Thriller's nine songs were written by other people. On the other hand, the best songs are all credited to MJ.
On later albums he seems to have collaborated a lot on various tracks. Of course that leaves open the question of how much he contributed to any given song.
The advantage of Prince's being an insane control freak about music is that all the composing glory goes to him.
Jackson is apparently in the "Songwriters Hall of Fame" fwiw. I believe he cowrote "We are the World" (with Lionel Ritchie?). I'm not sure we should hold that against him at this stage, though.
I remember Robert Christgau arguing that "We Are the World" was obviously better than "Do They Know It's Christmas?" — musically, politically and morally. I thought he was nuts.But I loved early 80s britpop.
Of course a lot of people would think it was crazy to have any preference between those 2 songs.
Robert Christgau is an ass. Anytime I see him say anything, that fact is reinforced.
I never understood what he was talking about. Maybe a sentence here or there.
If I recall, his pol and/or moral argument abt the 2 songs was that "We" was inclusive while "Do They" created a distance between the song's listeners and the Africans getting the charity. I didn't see that as a problem, since there is a distance and why not admit it. But really I just liked the tune.
I'll double down on the scorn for Robert Christgau. An ass, indeed.
I always liked "Do They Know It's Christmas" (and I never minded "We Are the World"" to be honest…Bob Dylan's vocals are hilariously awesome)