We still don't know much of the summer music schedule or the big A&E events for the fall.
But we do know that the "Michael Jackson The Immortal World Tour" will be coming to Conseco Fieldhouse next February. The show--the creation of the Cirque du Soleil folks and Madonna's creative director Jamie King--promises "a unique view into the spirit, passion and heart of the artistic genius who forever transformed global pop culture." It takes place "in a fanastical realm where we discover Michael's inspirational Giving Tree--the wellspring of his creativity."
Whatever the merits of the show turn out to be (and I look forward to seeing anything that comes from the Cirque minds), I continue to be a little baffled by the deification of Michael Jackson.
Yes, I know, he was phenomenally popular, an amazing dancer, a singular singer, and a trend-setter.
But his reign at the top (not to downplay his earlier solo work or his Jackson 5 years, of course) lasted from about 1982--with the release of "Thriller"--through about 1988, when "Bad" singles stopped getting to the top of the charts. (Quick: Name a song from 1991's "Dangerous" besides "Back or White"?)
After that, he became a national joke, better known for dangling babies and fighting court cases than for creating music.
Yes, I know, Jackson was creating a comeback tour when he died. But the contrast between the popular attitude before and after has been jarring. I can still appreciate what Jackson pulled off musically when he was on fire. But everything he created wasn't gold (I'm looking at you, "Captain Eo." And even Elvis didn't squander his creative capital the way Jackson did.
My question: What am I missing? Yes, he achieved a popularity in the music business unlikely--in an increasingly segmented world--to ever be seen again. But what did he actually create in the last 15 years of his life besides source material for late-night comics?
And am I alone in thinking calling the show "The Immortal" is a little much? The Cirque Beatles show was at least, humbly, called "Love."
Your thoughts?
Back to Top
IBJ Conversations
43 Comments
Add Comment
From Dangerous: what about Remember The Time, Heal The World, Give In To Me, Gone Too Soon, Dangerous, Jam, In The Closet? Do yourself a favor and check out: Keep The Faith, pure beauty.
I don't doubt that many of today's rap and R&B stars were heavily influenced by Jackson. But the cult movement going on currently to place Jackson's greatness and influence above that of The Beatles (and a few others) is ridiculous.
I would argue that Jackson revolutionized the music video more so than he did music itself, and we see where the music video is today.
As for Jackson personally, you can make the argument that he didn't engage in criminal conduct, but he was truly a freak. Sorry, but a guy who thinks it's OK to share a bed with little children deserves the ridicule he gets. He was obviously compulsive as hell, too.
And as for today's acts, if Lady Gaga, Eminem, Timberlake, Rhianna, Usher etc could get anywhere near the level of success Dangerous achieved they would be considered a musical genius!
He created an incredible image and was by far and away the most talented performer i have ever seen...he wrote and composed the vast majority of his work, his dancing was awesome, his music outstanding, costumes and image instantly recognisable and live performances unbeatable. Add to this he practically invented the music video and took it to levels that still haven't been matched, breaking down racial borders in the process!! Nobody comes close...
Elvis...didn't write or compose his own music and could not touch Michael Jackson for dancing
The Beatles...Great music and costumes, but no all round performance or spectacle to match Jackson
Madonna...Like MJ, she has survived over the years, but has not made the same kind of impact on the new artists of today, nor did she create the same kind of hysteria in public, or sell as many records
All the above are great artists, but there was just something else about Michael Jackson...so yes, to answer your question, you were definitely missing something, but how you missed it, i do not know!!
He deserves this show more than anyone else in music history.
Maybe if more people defended Michael BEFORE he died alone - strange and lonely - maybe he might just be producing this "angelic" music you all love so much today....think of it that way...
I think, for all practical purposes, Lou Harry is unevolved, unenlighted and uninterested in lifting a finger to learn the truth about the extraordinary Michael Jackson. Harry would much rather ignorantly pontificate from his computer about a man who did more good for the world in one day of his spectacular life than Lou Harry is likely to do in all the days of his pathetic existence in what is amounting to a world ruined by irresponsible, unethical journalists.
The Lynching of Michael Jackson
http://www.apj.us/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2474&Itemid=2
Your statement about 5 years is simply inane. I only ask that people with a public platform do us all a favor by doing their homework a bit more thoroughly.
For the 1993 allegations Mary Fischer wrote an excellent investigative piece for GQ magazine.
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread477059/pg1
For the 2005 allegations a wonderful book called "Michael Jackson Conspiracy" was written about the subject by an author named Aphrodite Jones who covered the trial from inside the courtroom.
http://www.amazon.com/Michael-Jackson-Conspiracy-Aphrodite-Jones/dp/0578061112/ref=tmm_pap_title_0
If you can't afford to buy book journalist Charles Thomson did a nice summary for the Huffinging Post.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/charles-thomson/one-of-the-most-shameful_b_610258.html
SOME PEOPLE DON'T KNOW A GOOD THING UNTIL IT'S GONE. And that saying certainly applies to Michael Jackson.
And for those complaining about the show, it's pretty simple. No one is forcing you to buy a ticket. Quit complaining.
I admit to having a skewed perception of MJ based on the media. And the media is notoriously bad at giving credit where credit is due. I'm also human, and therefore subject to the opinions of those around me, so yeah, I heard he was wierd and not cool at some point from someone. I'm too young to have caught the impact of Thriller's groundbreaking elements. I own Dangerous, and I like it, though I haven't heard it in a while. There is a lot I don't understand about MJ, and I haven't taken the time to research and find out the truth about allegations and whatnot, if that's even possible. I expose myself to less media now, and I'm older, so I think I'm more objective than I was. There's lots of ways that piling onto a bed with a bunch of kids can be not criminal - watching TV, telling stories, comfort during a storm. I wasn't there. Not my job to judge.
Related to Lou's point, however, I have never understood the way popular culture has deified/villified any celebrity. So often the judgement is passed based on hotness, wierdness, a hit, or association. While I appreciate all these things, I'd rather know a little more about the trip that lead to the hit, the story behind the wierd, the art and the awesome that someone is creating and how they are changing the world. With the resurgence of all the MJ interest, I've realized that popularity doesn't just go away because the media stops paying attention, which is pretty cool, and maybe obvious to some. I might do more digging someday to find out more about MJ, but I've got my own wierd awesome life to create, so I'm a little too busy right now.
I don't want to squelch discussion. But I do want to clear up facts (Yes, I do my homework).
I didn't say Jackson wasn't successful before "Thriller." I said that his reign at the top began with "Thriller." That doesn't mean its a lesser album, just that Jackson wasn't yet the phenomenon that he became.
I never said Jackson was guilty of the charges--just that he became better known as a national joke than for making music.
I agree that the media was embarrassing in the way it salivated over the case--just as it is in most stories dealing with celebrities. Whatever the case, though, Jackson did little music making for 15 years. Whether that's his fault or that of an unjust world, it remains a fact.
I never claimed that Lou Harry had more impact than Michael Jackson. That's just silly.
Some perspective: Bing Crosby, who revolutionized the recording business, had over 300 singles chart, including more than 40 #1 hits. Every year from 1931-1954 he had songs charting. All that--plus hit movies--and most people today only know him from "White Christmas." Immortality doesn't last long.
Oh and, not that you asked, but I thought Jackson was terrific in "The Wiz."
--Lou
BTW, Crosby's chart positions were U.S.; Jackson international.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bing_Crosby_discography#Charted_singles
But my point is here that what Michael Jackson the "King of Pop" wasn't just the notes, lyrics, and dance steps. He was always willing to speak up against injustice, and made an impact globally in much the same way Muhammed Ali did. For whatever reasons that we may never be able to fully explain, he became larger than life. His "memory" (without intending to deify him) WILL probably live on forever - as will the memory of The Beatles, Elvis, Madonna, and Henry Lee Summer (OK, maybe not that last one).
Maybe the word "immortal" seems a bit over the top, but I think they're referring to the fact that his legacy will be immortal. They could have used the word immortal in a show about the Beatles, and it wouldn't have been "wrong" but "Love" just seemed to fit.
No matter how big or important the person is - they don't impact everyone the same, so let's cut Lou some slack here.
Let's just agree to disagree and say that we "get" Michael Jackson and his place in history, and Lou doesn't.... and that's OK.
Well, multiply your experience by millions of people who are susceptible to media brainwashing and stop blaming Jackson, who mostly unsuccessfully tried to be heard above the din.
To those who now fully understand what the media put him through (as well as other celebrities) as the media routinely abuses their First Amendment privileges, we are standing up for him. It's not "deification," it's called "getting it"--finally.
and humanitarian throughout his life. Thanks to the caricaturization of Jackson as someone
he never was by media chasing a buck, there
were many people cheated out of appreciating his gifts while he was with us. Now that's changed and it is about time. So, no, no one
is making a god out of Jackson, it just feels that way to some because he was so cruelly treated before. The man's lyrics and films spoke to issues such as racism, bigotry, poverty, hatred, conservationism and individual responsibility to give to the less fortunate.
Definitely reasons to celebrate a life and
the grand music it produced.
I also believe after we are all long gone from this earth, Michael Jackson will be of the biggest interest of those looking back on icons of the past. His legacy will live on and only become bigger as the tabloid style gossip disappears.
From Cirque du Soleil's standpoint, does it make more sense to base a show on Michael Jackson or Bing Crosby? C'mon ... ridiculous comparison.
Elvis had creative capital? As the other posters have pointed out, Jackson was a legitimate songwriter. And even if Elvis HAD creative capital, he went into deep debt with his two-dozen-some schlocky movies. And have we all forgotten how creepy Elvis was? Wasn't Priscilla about 15 when they started dating? Wasn't he feeding her amphetamines when she was 17 or so?
Thriller came out in 1982, Dangerous came out in 1991 and produced hit singles until 1993.
Even after the allegations he sold millions of albums and his history tour's total attendance was 4.5 million, a record for a solo artist. And this was in 95 and 96.
But, ummm...where there is smoke there is usually fire.
please tell me you simpletons dont actually think he wasnt doing "bad things".
He was a joke for the most of the last 15 years and for a sane person...he still is.
Thanks for the input.
--Lou
Michael Jackson only released 6 albums in a 30yr span.
He started at age 19 with Off The Wall which was released in 1979 and ended with Invincible which was released when he was 43yrs of age.
Michael died in 2009. (30yrs)
Off The Wall, Thriller, BAD, Dangerous, History, and Invincible.
Off the Wall was the FIRST album in the United States to generate 4 top 10 hits by a solo artist.
The other albums ALL debuted at number One.
Michael released History in 1995 and it generated the FIRST song ever to debut on the Billboard hot 100 at number one.
It went on to sell 20 million copies.
Later released his last album Invincible in 2001.
It debuted at number one.
What I'm saying is that Michael NEVER released album after album yet you knew who he was after only being born in 1993.
It wasn't that Michael Jackson had fallen off it's just that you were born at the wrong time. LOL
Some people are only now waking up to the reality that Jackson was savagely diminished by the media for years and years, and newly appreciating what he accomplished. You may recoil and call him a "freak" if you wish, but he made the world a less mundane place for sure. And I guess the likes of Prince, and Mick Jagger, and John Lennon himself were called pretty much the same in their day. Funny how that works with artists sometimes--they challenge us to stretch our narrow little boundaries and perceptions.
buy into and endlessly repeat old media tapes about Jackson. In fact, he was a lifelong humanitarian who put his money, and lots of it, into hospitals and orphanages; a social activist who, again, spoke through his music about injustice, racism, hatred and bigotry and how to change it; a champion for children who opened his home to
improve lives and impart hope to those in need; and always an innocent man, the victim himself of extortion and the evils of racism and jealousy. That's who the real Jackson was, not some cartoon character promoted by those looking for financial gain. So, no deification here, just a recognition of the exceptional contributions of an extremely talented man. Oh, and by the way, all of the above and more is readily available and documented for anyone interested in truth.
I see that you seem to feel Michael Jacksons reign was only 5 years.
Come on Lou.
You got to do your homework before you come against MJ fans. LOL
Ok Let's begin.
Off The Wall-Released in 1979.
It was the FIRST album by a solo artist in the United States to have 4 top 10 singles.
Thriller-Released in 1982. Went on to sell 110 million copies. First to win 8 Grammy awards in a single night.
BAD-Released 4yrs later in 1987.
It is the ONLY ablum EVER to have 5 Number One singles. Sold over 30 million units.
Dangerous-Released in 1991.
Generated 4 top 10 singles in the U.S. The album is certified at 32 million selling.
So between Thriller (released in 1982) to Dangerous (released in 1991) we're up to 9yrs of Michael Jacksons global reign.
Let's keep going shall we.
In 1995 Michael Jackson released History.
I will concede that after the allegations things did fall off a bit BUT like Geraldo said you could cut it in half and he still did more than most.
History: Released in 1995.
Had 2 top 5 singles in the United States. Scream which debuted at number 5 and You are not alone which was the first song ever to debut at number one.
The album went on to sell 20 million copies which is remarkable for what happened to him.
And lastly and Invincible: Released in 2001.
The album debutes at number one.
There were only 3 singles released as Michael was fighting with his record company who eventually stopped promotion on the album altogether.
You Rock My World came it at number 10.
Cry was never released in the U.S.
Butterflies which was a WONDERFUL song came it at number 14 although there was no video for it.
Overall Invincible debuted at number one and sold a total of 13 million copies.
Name anyone else that sold 13 million copies in the early part of the decade.
One last note: Invincible was voted, by readers of Billboard magazine as the best album of the decade when it was released in 2001.
Do you still think Michael Jacksons "reign" was only 5yrs?
I am no huge Michael Jackson fan -- Prince was more my guy -- but I don't understand why you keep starting his career at "Thriller." "Off the Wall" was a HUGE success, and I recall it much more fondly than I do "Thriller."
Gary: I take no issue with Jackson's talents. My initial post expressed my admiration. What I pointed out--and directly invited readers to comment on--was the dramatic difference between what he achieved during his time at the top, what he didn't do in the last 15 years of his life, and the public attitudes toward him before and after his death.
I think what's happened posthumously with Jackson is a bit different from what happened with Elvis and Sinatra. Yes, they all have their worshipers, wide bases of fans, and respect in the industry for their influence.
However, with Elvis and Sinatra, I saw an energizing of the fan base and some retroactive appreciation of the best of their work, but also an increase in the amount of jokes and dirt revealed about them. Rather than being deified, Presley and Sinatra seemed more sadly human after they departed. Is that because Jackson was so trashed during his lifetime? Perhaps.
That's my take, but I'd be interested in hearing civil discussion on this as well.
--Lou
You had better correct your statement -'But what did he actually create in the last 15 years of his life besides source material for late-night comics?'
As mentioned by many in the above posts this period saw him release the 'HISTORY' Album ..with the first ever song ('You are not alone') in the history of Billboard 100 (which was in the 37th year then) to debut at No 1. The HISTORY album also had crtical gems such as the 'Earth Song' , 'Stranger in Moscow' (considered by many critics to be his best ever) and 'They don't really care about us' (possibly the most hard hitting protest song of all time). This 15 year period also saw him deliver the 'Invincible' album which I firmly believe will be recognized in due course as a masterpiece way ahead of its time.
I guess its time you checked your facts before making incorrect lofty statements !
Michael was mobbed and loved by the world in all eras. There were youtube videos where he was mobbed in Japan in 2006, UK in 2005, UK in 2009. Different generations have chased his car in all eras.
Lastly, you've forgotten one thing. Michael Jackson died while doing a rehearsal for a 50 sold out show concerts in London. His fans are willing travel to London to see him.
Whether you admit it or not, MJ is a King!!! And he deserve the deity being given to him. But if you don't agree, why waste your time to even write and article?
I guess some people are just hypocrite!
I see that my post was deleted. That's ok. I won't post it again.
I now know where you and others who think like you regarding Michael stand.
For some reason you dislike him and will never give him the credit he deserves as the King of popular music.
I guess you realized that Off the Wall was released in 1979 and was the first to have 4 top ten singles long before Whitney Houstons debut in 1985. (6yr difference)
I support the Cirque du Soleil Immortal Michael Jackson tour.
And yes, the name is befitting.
No one has achieved what Michael Jackson did in the music business as a solo artist.
I guess if you are an artist, you hope to leave something behind that lasts after you pass...so if Michael is "Immortal" in that sense, then I guess the moniker fits. I thought the Cirque people were just poking fun at his album titles myself...Bad, Dangerous, Invincible (clearly he was none of the above). Maybe it will all shake out in time...I personally would opt for Marvin Gaye, Stevie Wonder, or Prince, in that genre of music, but Michael had a big impact. In the meantime, you definitely shook the tree, and the Jackson fans fell out and came after you! I personally see nothing wrong or unfair with what yopu wrote.
I was thinking some of the same things that Lou was thinking during this sudden "resurgence" of Michael Jackson fans in the past year.
After the trial MJ should have felt vindicated as was referenced in the article that I posted above by Charles Thomson but he didn't because of the misrepresentation of the facts. I think the public ( and casual fans) picked up and moved on with their lives and didn't really confront their personal feeling about MJ or his music, it all became about whether or not they thought he was guilty.
I think a comeback tour would have forced casual fans to confront their personal feelings about MJ but the tour didn't happen. When he died the whole world had to confront their personal feelings about MJ, and the media's 24 hours non-stop coverage both positive and negative only forced more and more people to come face to face with hearing about Michal Jackson and coming to a conclusion about how they were going to move forward in their opinion of him.
I think that could be one reason we see such a resurgence in his popularity. I'm sure their are several reasons for it though.
Michael was guilty of telling the truth & unfortunately for him, his truth in admitting to having boys in his room led to the obvious.
However, that does not make him guilty of sexual acts upon children, as was proven over & over again by the accusers themselves.
Society likes to dictate what is normal & what is not, & when we have an individual such as Michael Jackson going against what we perceive as normal, it causes people to instantly believe he is a freak.
Perhaps, some people believe it was abnormal for him & his brothers to all sleep together? Perhaps not, because they can rationalize that the home was small.
I can assure you that many found that "freaky" as well.
In my humble opinion, it was "freaky" what Michael had to deal with all in the name of what is normal & what is not.
What about fathers that sleep with their sons? Is that perceived as normal as the mother sleeping with her son? What age limit is acceptable to stop sleepin with ones' own family?
I pose these questions because it shows that people make up their own "rules".
Simply put, Michael led his life in such a way that he found appropriate & was ridiculed for it.
If you look up the "standard" type of ped profile, you'll find that Michael doesnt fit the catagory at all...not even close.
He never denied or tried to cover up his life & THAT is what got him into trouble.
However, IF he had done that, the first thing people would say is "look! I told you he was up to something".
I think it is irrelevant as to which artist is better than the other. I am a fan of the Beatles, Rolling Stones and the like.
I do like Michael Jackson, more, but I see no need to compare them & bicker about them.
Michael Jackson lived his life completely in the public eye & he never tried to hide anything, so you might wish to consider why such a public figure would even take the chance of committing such an act.
Lastly, please take the time to actually read & hear the documents before you pass judgment on anyone.
I think you've been living under a rock for the last 20 years. And,there are 14 songs on the Dangerous album, one of which is called Remember the Time? You sure don't.