I'm so happy Prince doesn't get this kind of heat from the media!

I'm not the biggest MJ fan, but regardless if he's found inoccent or guilty, I will still enjoy those songs of his that I've always enjoyed in the past. I don't really connect his public image with his music, as strange as that sounds in today's day and age.

Sure I would. Just like I still enjoy Prince's music even though he's a JW.

I'd keep everything made from from 1970-1991 and throw anything from 'History' onwards.

scififilmnerd said:

Or Elton even though he is gay

mdiver said:

Or Marilyn Manson, even though he's straight

scififilmnerd said:

nice one

MJ was one of my most biggest reasons for ever dreaming of being an artist and performer, and nuffin dats going on wif him now can ever take dat away from me
MJ seems like such a fragile creature. As strange as he seems to society i guess,i just wanna give him a big i cant stand 2 see anyone suffer man, and when i hear him speak, he just sounds like a timid kid in his own imaginary world. And he's had that many physical changes too...it's like exposed his insecurities in a way...making him more vulnerable to the bulling vultures that make-up alot of the media unfortunately.

I can recognize and acknowledge someone as a deeply flawed and tragic individual and still appreciate their genius.

There are quite a few artistic, political, spiritual figures in American and World history who possessed serious personal problems and contradictions; but it did not take away from their contribution to the onward march of civilization.

And Michael--for all his flaws and weirdness--has made an indelible mark on American and world culture. I do not believe there is another human on earth who has had the ability to elicit the kinds of emotional reactions (crying, overwhelm-ment, etc.) from a diverse audience from around the world like Michael (maybe the Pope).

This man has entertained the public from 5 years old onward. And many many people built their recording and business careers off of him and his family.

There is no way one can look at the landscape of popular music or even R&B and hip hop and not see MJ's imprint--the dance moves of everyone from Justin Timberlake, Genuwine, Usher, Sisco, Brittney, etc.; the stage shows of every pop act from New Edition all the way up to Backstreet and NSync; and the business deals, the endorsements with softdrinks, etc. All of that MJ either pioneered or turned the notch up on in significant ways.

As for music video... he turned it into an art form. With Michael Peters he co-choreographed amazing performances that are still being emulated today. Most countdowns of the greatest videos of all time still end up with Thriller being number one. Because nothing to date--20 years later--has been able to top it.

And let's not forget that MTV would NOT play videos by Black artists at all (not even Prince) until MJ's popularity forced them to deal with Black popularity to their audience. MJ broke through that glass ceiling and all else followed.

Even Ronald Reagan with his right wing disregard for the poor black and brown played host to MJ, because he recognized that unlike anything probably since the Beatles, MJ had inaugaurated a period of total media saturation and force, setting the stage for subsequent moves by Prince, Madonna, etc.

Regardless of how this trial turns out, none of those things change. His amazing accomplishments certainly do not make him immune from any well deserved criticism or justifiable legal action; but neither do his alleged evil deeds change the fact of what he has accomplished not only for himself but the music industry and American culture.

Hey Nu stuck to the topic and his post was sensible and understandable. Nicely written homie!

you gotta seperate the man from his music... sometimes the two are inseperable... a lot of artists write and sing solely about their lifestyle and their political beliefs and whatnot... but not michael so much... his songs don't seem to be so personal... and even if they are, he doesn't have any songs about molesting children... so, it should be fairly easy to seperate the man from the music, if he is found guilty...

NuPwrSoul said:

Well said my friend

Paisley said:

i agree with Paisley, althought i only read less than 10% of all that

Ardeo said:

:LOL: yeah I was kinda speed reading myself.

NuPwrSoul said:

Very astute.

i would not be able to listen to the majority of his music because it would conjur some crazy images...keep it in the closet, smooth criminal, the way you make me feel, human nature, etc...uh uh, i'd feel wierd listening to those.

imnotsayinthisjust2bnasty said:

Not me then again I don't read into Princes Jehovah style lyrics cuz they might just make me convert... when I go to the club and they throw on an old cut I dance! Beit MJ,P, or any oldschooler if the song is dancable I stay and get my dance on... dance on?

EllisDee said:

gotta disagree there. he isn't singing about molesting children, but both his last albums are about 50% him reacting to the world's reaction to him.

EllisDee said:

What about Pretty Young Thing?

WHAT A CROCK OF SH*T.

I am dumbfounded by some of the rationalizations that some of you offer in defense of Wacko Jacko.

The topic, as I understand it, was; "...will you still be down for Mike even if the court finds him guilty?"
NOT, "was he an inspiration" or "did he change the history of modern music"...ARE you or AREN'T you a supporter and/or fan of this man if it's proven beyond a doubt that he's a child molestor??? Simple and plain.

If you say YES, then you need to re-examine your personal values and beliefs.

Put it this way; if you're black and all of a sudden you find out that Tom Clancy is a card-carrying member of the KKK...would you still buy his books? If you are gay and find out that Mel Gibson believes that AIDS is God's way of getting rid of homosexuals...would you still see his movies?

Need I go on? MJ is a man. He is fallible. And just like any man, he must be held liable and responsible for his actions. So answer the question people...ARE you or AREN'T you willing to support a convicted pedophile?
Stop with the sugar-coating please.

PurpleJedi said:

well it doesn't change the fact that he's given the world a lot of hits, and that i already own the music, so i don't really see what your point is. obviously people are inclined and allowed to give more than a "yes" or "no" answer to the question. don't you think?


would i continue to support him? no. but then, if he goes to prison, there's nothing new to buy, so the whole issue is irrelevant.


this isn't the same thing as, say, R. Kelly... where there's a video tape of him IN THE ACT, where you can decide guilt before it goes to trial.

AaronUniversal said:

My "point" has nothing to do with whether or not he gave the world great music. Was he a great artist? ABSOLUTELY. I own three of his albums, and consider DANGEROUS to be one of my favorite albums of all time.

But the author of this thread posted a VERY SIMPLE QUESTION..."will you still be down for Mike even if the court finds him guilty?"

My answer is NO. Actually...make that a; HELL NO.

Your answer was NO. However - there IS something new to buy (a new "Greatest Hits" I believe with some never-released material if I am correct). Will you buy it? If he comes out with a new album next year, or the year after that...would you buy those? If you were honest...then I guess that you will say NO.

And honestly...even if he goes to jail...do you think that the music would stop? Tupac's been dead for YEARS and he's STILL putting out albums!!!

And of course it's not the same as with R.Kelly...which is why we were asked, "...if the court finds him guilty..." don't you think?

PurpleJedi said:

then me buying the greatest hits album that came out tuesday is not affected by the question presented, as he has not been found guilty by the court.


and yeah, my answer is no. but i'll let the legal system make my final decision for me.

What I wanna know is , if he is found guilty will the radio stations continue to play his music?
The reason I wonder this is because of a case in the UK a few years ago. Former 70's pop star Gary Glitter was jailed for possessing child porn on his computer. His music hasn't beeb played since ( although admittedly , it was dire ). Last I heard he was travelling around the Far-East in areas that are well known for child prostitution.

MICHAEL JACKSON KICKS ASS. IS HE'S GUILTY IT'S COS HE'S FUCKED IN THE HEAD, HE SHOULD BE TREATED AND CARED FOR LIKE HE CARES FOR ALL OF US. SURE I'M DOWN FOR HIM.

PurpleJedi said:

First of all the only crock of shit, is the one you're sitting on.

Secondly, your analogy to the Tom Clancy or Mel Gibson example falls flat... those (racism and homophobia) are attitudes, whereas I wonder if pedophilia has roots in some mental or psychological disorder. And if so, it is need of treatment.

Thirdly, as long as someone lives, there exists the chance for their redemption and reformation. That is my belief. I am not saying that they should not be held responsible for their actions--they should to the fullest extent of the law and what society deems appropriate.

That being said, I am not of the mindset where people should be discarded when they have fucked up or the belief that no good can come from them any longer.

Finally, Woody Allen continues making films that receive critical acclaim after he has sex with his adoptive daughter when she was underage; and Roman Pulanski received an Oscar and standing ovation after having refused to come to America to face charges of statutory rape of a young girl... and neither of those persons have expressed any remorse, guilt or contrition for their problems.

So if I say, I will continue to respect MJ's legacy AND I say I will support him IF he seeks professional help for his problem (if he is deemd to have one) I feel as though I am being way more responsible than those who receive Allen and Polanski uncritically.

NuPwrSoul said:

kaBLAM!

rdhull said:

Paisley said: