PatrickS77 said:

You're the best Patsy!!!!!

unique said:

Based on that argument then Elvis stopped being The King of Rock 'n' Roll decades ago. Some artists are given mantles by the press, some by fans, some by very savy managers - do you really think Elvis, James Brown and Sinatra all got their mantles organically? The King, The Hardest Working Man in Showbusiness (The Godfather of Soul), and The Chairman of the Board were all monikers invented to help package and sell an artist.

I remember back in the Thriller days that articles referenced MJ as the Prince of Pop, and it was natural for fans to gravitate towards the King of Pop title - and for the powers to be to run with it and start wanting to capitalise on it. Bob Jones often spoke about wanting to expand the title to King of Pop, Rock, n Soul (btw this was an actual coverline on Rock 'n' Soul magazine back in the Thriller era) but it was shortened to King of Pop and then adopted and included in all future press releases, which then made the press (some who felt they were being instructed to call MJ that - and maybe they were) to retailiate with self proclaimed.

After that, then it seemed like a way to bring MJ down and belittle his achievements by always including "self proclaimed". The King of Pop title also helped other artists who by comparison were being called Queen of Pop, Princess of Pop etc.

There is no denying that MJ's influence and achievements warrant the title, whether you see it as self-proclaimed or fan ordained.

Swa

Swa said:

James Brown was called many other titles.

I think the black media gave him his first nickname: Mr. Please Please Please.

Then it was "Mr. Dynamite".

Then it was "The Hardest Working Man in Show Business".

Then it was "Soul Brother #1".

It wasn't until 1973 that James used "The Godfather of Soul" as his moniker.

PatrickS77 said:

You can be sure that far more people on this planet would recognize the name "Michael Jackson" than "Justin Timberlake." And would know that Mike's famous for making pop music. 'Nuff said!

As for Madonna, I've seen her refer to herself (half-jokingly or not) as a queen, though she didn't specifically use the phrase "Queen of Pop." I think she'd be satisfied with "Dancing Queen"!

PatrickS77 said:

June 1988:

ehuffnsd said:

the first one was actually David Bowie

bboy87 said:

King of Pop, that suits him.

MJ's efforts to impose the title "King of Pop" have been well documented and have come from multiple different sources. When he gave MTV the right to premiere "Black Or White" he obligated them to call him "The King of Pop" every day while they were playing it. That was when the "title" became branded in people's minds. Chris Evans spoke about how he was instructed to introduce MJ as the "King of Pop" at the BRIT Awards, at Michael's request.

I'm sure there are plenty of other verifiable incidents I don't even know about, but one thing's for sure. The loons will not be forthcoming with any unflattering details they may have heard. Any such details will have been banished from their brain two seconds after they heard them anyway.

Personally re: the KOP title thing, I reckon he put his best efforts out there to maintain it. All other silly media "titles" for artists pretty much stick with the person forever. In the past the only black people with such titles have always been genre specific for R&B/Soul/Funk. Elvis will always be the King of Rock N Roll, Madonna the Queen of Pop etc.

If you look at the many "honorific pop titles"here: http://en.wikipedia.org/w...er_of_Punk ...

... Michael Jackson's "King of Pop" name is the only one that people ever desperately try to replace with someone else.

But the "king of pop" sounds so cheap and tacky. With the rise of King of Pop came the rise of Wacko Jacko. Michael use to be quite a classy guy in everyway and he didn't need a silly title to validate who he was. But today like the tacky title he himself has become tacky, superficial and plastic!!. No intended.

I could careless about title, Mj doesn't need the help, his talents speak for themselves , whether he initially proclaimed the title or not is not important, regardless of the title, no matter what he is called ,he deserved it whether haters like it or not.
[Edited 4/23/09 12:07pm]

whatsgoingon said:

Funny how he's been this tacky, superficial and plastic Wacko Jacko for much longer than he was ever the "classy guy" now. I think it's time to give up and find someone else to whinge about. Someone with a hope of you liking them again.

whatsgoingon said:

After seeing the pictures of his 'throne' and paintings of him dressed as a King, that shows he's a megalomaniac about KOP crap.

Then yesterday I saw one of him dressed in robes like Jesus, with a glow about his head and children at his feet..WTF??!?!

Win two Michael Jackson tickets, Block C3, Row A - Monday 25th January 2010

http://www.readysteadybid...ching.html

I think there was a British soda named "The King of Pop".

midnightmover said:

I think you'll find most "level headed" fans will agree that the King of Pop title once adopted by the MJ camp was pushed heavily. For Michael I think sadly that he need/needed a title to solidfy his influence in music history - little did he know that he already had. The title King of Pop was one that appeared in press and by fans long before MJ adopted it as his "official" title, it was only when he wanted the mass media to adopt it also that it backfired and became "self-proclaimed". I think these days most people don't really care about the title, for fans it might be a nice way to show their love, and for the press to fill copy space with (and maybe even for Michael to feel important) but hopefully his next tour will solidfy his place in people's minds - regardless of titles - bestowed, adopted, decreed or otherwise that he is one of the greatest entertainers ever to grace the stage.

Swa

Swa said:

Michael became a LEGEND before "Thriller". Michael shouldn't have to remind people why he's so great but you know how a lot of people sometimes overlook that.

Timmy84 said:

Thats what I meant, his talents speak for themselves , he doesn't need any title, and if he was given any title he deserves it, people who keep talking that he self-proclaimed himself like that need to find a new hobby, or keep talking like there is no tomorrow, no one cares.

Timmy84 said:

Agree totally - sadly Michael is one of these people though.

Swa

Serena said:

Which one was that, because of the 15 portraits, I didn't see that one

him dressed as a king? yep....dressed as a musketeer? yep....Peter Pan? Batman? royalty? yep

but as Jesus? I didn't see that

people are STILL debating this King of Pop crap and if he is a legend without "Thriller?" Really? dang. and i don't click on these threads for a reason

badujunkie said:

Er, what have you just done???

Those paintings are kinda disturbing.

As for the titles, Madonna was humble and settled with:

Ellie said:

Well that's very sad. The problem is those of us who were fortunate enough to remember him well before the plasic and tackiness completely took over, keep hoping that underneath all that mess the real Michael Jackson is still there, somewhere.

And has anyone else wondered what his family truely think, not the sound bites they give to the media now and again, but what they truely think about their son, brother, cousin etc. I remember as early as 1987 a newspaper article proclaiming that Katherine Jackson(His Mother) said that looking at Michael at that time that it didn't seem that was her son, anymore. She probably lies of awake at night now, thinking where did it all go wrong!!

whatsgoingon said:

NOBODY CARES. I worry about my own family. You worry about yours. Michael Jackson will worry about his.

Ellie said:

You obvously do care, otherwise you wouldn't be get so touchy of my criticism of someone who has obviously gone from classy to tacky over the years. He will always be a great talent, but he sure messed up big time!
[Edited 4/24/09 12:51pm]

More like utter boredom. I like Michael Jackson. I still actually respect him. I'll call him out on individual things as they come but ultimately I'm still a fan. You're not. I was a big fan of lots of people as a child and went off them. Either they went crap, I grew out of them, something happened and I lost respect for them, I gave them up and don't whine on about them for years on end.

Serena said:

Yeah seems to be very full of himself, although he's not arrogant by any mean. But just proudy.He needs a reality check and shouldn't be portraying himself like some god.

Michael Jackson is a great singer- but I think man is seriously very very out of touch with reality, and can't accept the fact that its no longer his heydays. The fact that he wears surgical masks and covers his face, is enough to prove that he's stuck his own world and abides his own standards of what's okay for him to do and not.

Prince doesn't behave the same way like Michael does, instead Prince just focuses on making good music rather another Thriller like MJ does. Prince doesn't go on about Purple Rain,and all. He just grows up with the times, and sadly Michael Jackson never did. His creativity has been on a decline for years- it the same style of concerts he continued to give from Bad era to History era.

[Edited 4/24/09 13:44pm]
[Edited 4/24/09 13:45pm]
[Edited 4/24/09 13:54pm]

LiveToTell86 said:

Agreed.