Er...why all the drawings of young boys?

[Edited 7/6/11 13:19pm]

smoothcriminal12 said:

Er...why all the drawings of young boys?

[Edited 7/6/11 13:19pm]

Only 3 of them are

the rest is Charlie Chaplin and other things. There's one he did of Diana Ross when he was 12 but michaeljacksonart doesn't allow to hotlink

smoothcriminal12 said:

Er...why all the drawings of young boys?

[Edited 7/6/11 13:19pm]

Le sigh. Huckleberry Finn and Peter Pan. Smdh:-|

bboy87 said:

Michael DELIBERATELY didn't release albums year after year.

Agree. Michael was quite aware, and maybe even fearful of the possiblity of OVEREXPOSURE. Even the most successful and established artists can kill their own careers by flooding the market with too much product.

bboy87 said:

*The picture of Chaplin yawning.*

I think I've read he did this one as a child. Pretty impressive.

[Edited 7/6/11 14:18pm]

[Edited 7/6/11 14:18pm]

In a letter sent to the artist, Dr. Tohme Tohme, Jackson’s last business manager and spokesperson, paved the way for the sale, transferring over the collection of artwork -- free of charge -- "to keep, sell, copy, exhibit and to use in whatever way you wish."

"Michael wants you to know he is truly grateful for the loyalty you have shown him over the years, and he views this as a small token of appreciation for your continued friendship and artistic partnership," Dr. Tohme wrote in the hand-signed letter, dated November 17, 2008, obtained by Star.

Why doesn't this surprise me... Tohme is a crook and I am sure he has tons of MJ's money hidden somewhere.

He looked perfect here

tiny pic[img:$uid]http://i51.tinypic.com/4togmp.jpg[/img:$uid]

NaughtyKitty said:

Thanks for posting those Bboy Michael could've had another career as a cartoonist or sketch artist. That "Outraged" drawing is pretty wild, what did he write on that? Cant make out all the words.

Looks like it says A mind that is shredded beyond recognition.

[Edited 7/6/11 13:11pm]

He could have drawn political cartoons or something like that style, poking fun at society and media and fear factors and the like....kind of the way Banksy does, regardless of not agreeing with all his work but appreciating the ones I do like. I remember reading somewhere that his kids were telling him he should go to school to study art.

scorp84 said:

bboy87 said:

Michael DELIBERATELY didn't release albums year after year.

Agree. Michael was quite aware, and maybe even fearful of the possiblity of OVEREXPOSURE. Even the most successful and established artists can kill their own careers by flooding the market with too much product.

Well, I agree that he didn't refrain from creating more music by ACCIDENT! ("Oops, forgot to record an album!") But I don't buy the over-exposure part. As others have mentioned, he typically milked singles off of a one album for 2+ years, creating huge "event" music videos all the while.

During the 80's, he was just as "exposed" as any other artist! He just wasn't as proflic.

Does anyone have the link to the Bill Bottrell interview around the Dangerous era?

smoothcriminal12 said:

Er...why all the drawings of young boys?

[Edited 7/6/11 13:19pm]

So?I don't see anything unusual about it. Lots of artists draw children.

Examples:

I think he saw himself in them...possible self-portraits, I'd say. I love'em anyways. He could've made a living as an artist/cartoonist if singin' didn't pan out.

[Edited 7/6/11 16:29pm]

ThruTheEyesOfWonder said:

I think he saw himself in them...possible self-portraits, I'd say. I love'em anyways. He could've made a living as an artist/cartoonist if singin' didn't pan out.

[Edited 7/6/11 16:29pm]

In a way, singing didn't pan out too well. Maybe he should have pursued the other. He certainly was a talented illustrator, and there can be no doubt that pressure from the music business contributed to his death.

[Edited 7/6/11 16:56pm]

Imaginative said:

ThruTheEyesOfWonder said:

I think he saw himself in them...possible self-portraits, I'd say. I love'em anyways. He could've made a living as an artist/cartoonist if singin' didn't pan out.

[Edited 7/6/11 16:29pm]

In a way, singing didn't pan out too well.... Maybe he should have pursued the other.

And here's the cliff you can jump off, jack-ass...

Imaginative said:

Timmy84 said:

I just HATE when these two are compared. A while back I would've been one of those people who thought the comparisons were accurate but when you really think about it, they aren't and just are useless to a discussion. There's reasons why Michael released as little albums he did and why Prince released as much as he did but to compare it is ridiculous imho.

Agree that the comparison is ridiculous. It's like comparing Sammy Davis Jr. to Duke Ellington. I also agree there is a reason why Jackson released so little. It can be summed up in one word, "Ability."

Prince's problem was that the record companies wouldn't let him release as much material as he could produce. Jackson's problem was the the record labels wanted him to release more than he was able to produce.

Jackson had good timing to be able to milk singles off a single album for 2+ years. That wouldn't have worked 20 years prior to Thriller, and it wouldn't work today. The reason he was able to make it work can also be summed up in one word, "MTV." How do you make a 2 year old song seem brand new? Release a new high-budget video. As MTV became less and less relevant, this strategy became less and less effective for Jackson.

[Edited 7/6/11 8:16am]

[Edited 7/6/11 8:17am]

Yes comparissons are ridiculous - but then why call Prince a Sammy Davis Jnr?

I have to disagree though on the limitations you seem to place on Michael though in terms of ability. You talk about Jackson having good "timing", then how come other artists in the same time couldn't achieve the same level of success on releases during the 80s/90s that we are discussing? Surely you have to admit, if other acts could have "milked" a release for two years they would have. What it comes down to is that the quality of the songs off the releases worked as singles and were strong enough to make it on their own. You can't extend the life of an album if there isn't ongoing demand for it, and if the singles released aren't drawing new people into it.

Swa said:

Yes comparissons are ridiculous - but then why call Prince a Sammy Davis Jnr?

I have to disagree though on the limitations you seem to place on Michael though in terms of ability. You talk about Jackson having good "timing", then how come other artists in the same time couldn't achieve the same level of success on releases during the 80s/90s that we are discussing? Surely you have to admit, if other acts could have "milked" a release for two years they would have. What it comes down to is that the quality of the songs off the releases worked as singles and were strong enough to make it on their own. You can't extend the life of an album if there isn't ongoing demand for it, and if the singles released aren't drawing new people into it.

I haven't placed limitations on Jackson's ability at all, or criticized the quality of his best singles. The limitations I cite (i.e. prolificness) are evident by his rate of output, by definition.

Plenty of other acts released lots of hit singles from their albums in the 80s, with HUGE success. Prince, The Police, Madonna, etc. all released lots of hit singles off of their albums. But Prince didn't milk Purple Rain for three years (three years later, "Kiss" had come and gone and he was releasing singles off of Sign O' the Times). Madonna didn't milk her albums and all of the power-house Synchonicity singles were released over a period of six months. Jackson could have easily released all of the Thriller singles over 6-months and moved on to the next thing, like his more prolific peers. I don't see the relationship between the quality of his material (which I agree was high) and the rate at which he chose to release singles.

Amazingly, The Beatles' generally didn't even put thier singles on the albums! Sometimes they came out with a single and an album on the same exact day, with no overlap of songs (i.e. neither the A or B side was on the album released that day). Them apples!

[Edited 7/6/11 17:08pm]

bboy87 said:

babybugz said:

Thank You timmy for not being a delusional dumbass fan and responding to politely answering my question it is appreciated. I'm Out

Hey!

Have you checked out MJ Photos Collectors? it's a pretty nice site and they have a lot of photos

[img:$uid]http://mjphotoscollectors.com/web/uploads/1306789265/med_gallery_8_1624_66122.jpg[/img:$uid]

[img:$uid]http://mjphotoscollectors.com/web/uploads/1278020214/med_gallery_44_128090.jpg[/img:$uid]

[img:$uid]http://mjphotoscollectors.com/web/uploads/1293389381/med_gallery_8_829_198162.png[/img:$uid]

[img:$uid]http://mjphotoscollectors.com/web/uploads/1297636336/med_gallery_6026_993_5123.jpg[/img:$uid]

[img:$uid]http://mjphotoscollectors.com/web/uploads/1303983445/med_gallery_7_986_33054.jpg[/img:$uid]

www.mjphotocollectors.com

LOL Thank You.

Guys, I was going thru an old email account of mine...and found these from 2009...

I even had a pre-sale code...

I miss him guys...

ThruTheEyesOfWonder said:

Guys, I was going thru an old email account of mine...and found these from 2009...

I even had a pre-sale code...

I miss him guys...

Man, I remember wishing I could conveniently hit on a lotto ticket or something, 'cause I wanted to go so badly...

ThruTheEyesOfWonder said:

Guys, I was going thru an old email account of mine...and found these from 2009...

I even had a pre-sale code...

I miss him guys...

that hurts, i never had intentions on going but i was excited to see him egt back to doing what he did best. it was supposed to be a new chapter in his life...

[Edited 7/6/11 19:36pm]

mimi07 said:

ThruTheEyesOfWonder said:

Guys, I was going thru an old email account of mine...and found these from 2009...

I even had a pre-sale code...

I miss him guys...

that hurts, i never had intentions on going but i was excited to see him egt back to doing what he did best. it was supposed to be a new chapter in his life...

[Edited 7/6/11 19:36pm]

It was...the end.

smoothcriminal12 said:

mimi07 said:

that hurts, i never had intentions on going but i was excited to see him egt back to doing what he did best. it was supposed to be a new chapter in his life...

[Edited 7/6/11 19:36pm]

It was...the end.

Oh man..

Going back to about Michael not releasing many albums Michael was nonstop releasing albums with his brothers for so many years he probably wanted a break . I wished he released more Adult solo albums but I can understand why he didn’t.

Somebody is pressed:lol:

Imaginative said:

I also agree there is a reason why Jackson released so little. It can be summed up in one word, "Ability."

Prince's problem was that the record companies wouldn't let him release as much material as he could produce. Jackson's problem was the the record labels wanted him to release more than he was able to produce.

Jackson had good timing to be able to milk singles off a single album for 2+ years. That wouldn't have worked 20 years prior to Thriller, and it wouldn't work today. The reason he was able to make it work can also be summed up in one word, "MTV." How do you make a 2 year old song seem brand new? Release a new high-budget video. As MTV became less and less relevant, this strategy became less and less effective for Jackson.

[img:$uid]http://i.imgur.com/BZvpU.jpg[/img:$uid]

Weird, it's like Beyonce and Lady Gaga don't even exist today or something.

[Edited 7/6/11 22:58pm]

ThruTheEyesOfWonder said:

Guys, I was going thru an old email account of mine...and found these from 2009...

I even had a pre-sale code...

I miss him guys...

I still have my ticket confirmations, and thankfully opted to get the tickets sent to me after his death. I have 6 tickets in total for 3 shows. I was looking at them last week as a matter of fact.

Oh what could/should have been.

Imaginative said:

Timmy84 said:

I just HATE when these two are compared. A while back I would've been one of those people who thought the comparisons were accurate but when you really think about it, they aren't and just are useless to a discussion. There's reasons why Michael released as little albums he did and why Prince released as much as he did but to compare it is ridiculous imho.

Agree that the comparison is ridiculous. It's like comparing Sammy Davis Jr. to Duke Ellington. I also agree there is a reason why Jackson released so little. It can be summed up in one word, "Ability."

Prince's problem was that the record companies wouldn't let him release as much material as he could produce. Jackson's problem was the the record labels wanted him to release more than he was able to produce.

Jackson had good timing to be able to milk singles off a single album for 2+ years. That wouldn't have worked 20 years prior to Thriller, and it wouldn't work today. The reason he was able to make it work can also be summed up in one word, "MTV." How do you make a 2 year old song seem brand new? Release a new high-budget video. As MTV became less and less relevant, this strategy became less and less effective for Jackson.

For someone who thinks comparisons are ridiculous, you sure make a lot of them - and why would you call Prince Sammy Davis Jnr?

As for your definition of ability - I have to disagree. There is evidence Michael had the ability to produce more albums than needed (as evident by the amount of songs he would write and record for each release) he simply choose not to. That is the distinction.

I also disagree that Jackson had good timing being able to "milk" singles of an album for 2 years. Obviously the singles would only sell if the songs could stand on their own. The fact that he could release an album with so many hit singles on it, and release them over a longer period of time is only evidence of the ability and strength of the songs to exist beyond the albums and draw in new people to the album. If the songs weren't good, and weren't selling then there would be pressure to release new material. In fact the opposite was true in the case of Billie Jean and Beat It. Sony actually wanted to delay the release of Beat It as they feared it would cannabalise the ongoing success of Billie Jean. As we all know, they released Beat It and both songs stayed in the top 10.

The whole "timing" argument is flawed in that Jackson wasn't operating in a vacuum. There were heaps of other artists with big albums during these release periods, many that you noted but they still only managed to release 4 hits off the albums - this speaks more about the content of the albums and the appeal of the album than it does to anything else. And your argument that MJ compensated for poor music with MTV videos also doesn't hold up when 7 songs were released off Thriller (all of which went top 10) and only 3 had videos.

Yes, as a fan of Michael's I would have liked to see more releases from him during his solo years, but truth be told it's only post HIStory that I wanted to see more frequent releases. I would have especially liked to have see a follow up to Invincible and especially a 2005+ release.

http://newblackman.blogspot.com/2009/06/conjuring-michael-uncut-before-u-git.html

Conjuring Michael (the “uncut-before-u-git-the-academic-ish” mix)
by Mark Anthony Neal

“Schumaw”—like some ancient African dialect that only he, James Brown, Miles Davis, Nina Simone, Macy Gray, and quiet as it’s kept, Lil’ Wayne quite understand. Random utterings like “Mama-ko, mama-sa, ma-ka-ma-ko-ssa” and even Cameroonian musician Manu Dibango can’t quite claim it. The point is that this was some deep knowledge and there was never any explanation for it—like that riff in the middle of “Remember the Time” that can’t even be transcribed. Much the same with the infamous audition tape—the grainy black & white one, where the lil’ boy is singing JB and moving through an archive of masculine movements known only to Mr. Brown, Mr. Wilson—and quiet as it’s kept, Mr. Presley. Mr. Gordy was hooked, not quite knowing what he had and misreading the lil boy as some kind of novelty, like that lil blind boy, who asked for his freedom only to return with Music On My Mind under one arm and genius under the other. But that boy had almost a decade of seasoning before the breakthrough; this other cat was 10-years old, singing about stuff he ain’t supposed to know about.

Aks him who he dug and the boy say “William Hart.” What? Yeah, William Hart. Like what this 10-year-old know about The Delphonics, and then you listen to “Can You Remember?” from that first Jackson 5 joint and it’s like damn—this boy ain’t real. Smokey must have thought the same thing listening to the playback of “Who’s Lovin’ You?”—the b-side of the original hot ish, “I Want You Back.” Naw, Smokey, flip that ish over. I mean damn, you did write this joint right—and you did record this joint right? But damn if that ain’t yo’ song no mo’. And the rest was history.

My story with the boy started just a bit after that. Call it a serious boy crush and who could blame me, he was like the prettiest M’fer we’d ever seen, especially with the Apple Jack on his head. I talking from the beginning, like I listened to that ABC album on 8-Track—years before I figured out what the actual album sequencing was like. Years later I danced with my mother to that album’s “I Found that Girl” at my wedding. The boy was my first muse—literally. Used to copy lyrics from those early albums—“Darling Dear,” “Wings of Love,” “In Our Small Way”—and sent them in secret notes to the first shortie who really caught my eyes. Got the idea peeping an old episode of the ABC Afterschool Special where the boy’s “We’ve Got a Good Thing Going” played in the background and I got that queasy first love thing in my stomach. The song that’s on the album with the rat. Boy was on some queer ish even them. Shame the boy wasn’t free to be on some Ziggy Stardust ish, but what’s a little black boy to do in the mid-1970s.

Boy tried to get his own freedom in the late 1970s frequenting dance clubs like 54, checking the scene, watching cats like Gamble and Huff work the boards and when he and them other boys took control over their own music and that young boy hooked up with Q, all was magic. Young boy found his own muse in the scarecrow, easing on down the road to the Emerald City—“can you, feel it, brand day?”—and damn if those early videos for “Rock With You”, “Don’t Stop ‘Till You Get Enough” and “Can You Feel It” don’t feel inspired by The Wiz. Truth be told, Off the Wall was the crown jewel—ish was still innocent, earnest, organic. Thriller seemed contrived—like that young boy was trying to sell 20 million records. Find the boy’s true fans by asking “Thiller” or “Off the Wall”? If they say the former, than you know that were on some Johnny/Janie come-lately ish when that young boy took claim to the world.

The rest was a blur, like if you drop like 26 millions sales, what exactly do you do next? The young boy never figured that out and the less it was about the music, the more surreal the ish got. Then it became about young boys, ‘cept he was now a grown ass-man, though true be told, if I’m to believe that this grown ass man was fondling young boys, I also got to believe the ass whumpings that occurred at the hands of that once young boy’s daddy. That boy spent a lifetime seeking a meaningful freedom, perhaps from the tyranny of family, but later from the tyranny of celebrity. And yeah perhaps Mr. Presley, Ms. Monroe and those four British mop-tops could relate, but when that young boy was hitting his half half of them were dead—and they never had to deal with MTV and 24-hour cable networks in their prime.

I will shed a tear sometime soon, not for the man who breathed his last breath today, but for that young boy that helped to define the me that I be. That young boy was special and it’s that young boy that I choose to remember today.

Swa said:

Imaginative said:

Agree that the comparison is ridiculous. It's like comparing Sammy Davis Jr. to Duke Ellington. I also agree there is a reason why Jackson released so little. It can be summed up in one word, "Ability."

Prince's problem was that the record companies wouldn't let him release as much material as he could produce. Jackson's problem was the the record labels wanted him to release more than he was able to produce.

Jackson had good timing to be able to milk singles off a single album for 2+ years. That wouldn't have worked 20 years prior to Thriller, and it wouldn't work today. The reason he was able to make it work can also be summed up in one word, "MTV." How do you make a 2 year old song seem brand new? Release a new high-budget video. As MTV became less and less relevant, this strategy became less and less effective for Jackson.

For someone who thinks comparisons are ridiculous, you sure make a lot of them - and why would you call Prince Sammy Davis Jnr?

As for your definition of ability - I have to disagree. There is evidence Michael had the ability to produce more albums than needed (as evident by the amount of songs he would write and record for each release) he simply choose not to. That is the distinction.

I also disagree that Jackson had good timing being able to "milk" singles of an album for 2 years. Obviously the singles would only sell if the songs could stand on their own. The fact that he could release an album with so many hit singles on it, and release them over a longer period of time is only evidence of the ability and strength of the songs to exist beyond the albums and draw in new people to the album. If the songs weren't good, and weren't selling then there would be pressure to release new material. In fact the opposite was true in the case of Billie Jean and Beat It. Sony actually wanted to delay the release of Beat It as they feared it would cannabalise the ongoing success of Billie Jean. As we all know, they released Beat It and both songs stayed in the top 10.

The whole "timing" argument is flawed in that Jackson wasn't operating in a vacuum. There were heaps of other artists with big albums during these release periods, many that you noted but they still only managed to release 4 hits off the albums - this speaks more about the content of the albums and the appeal of the album than it does to anything else. And your argument that MJ compensated for poor music with MTV videos also doesn't hold up when 7 songs were released off Thriller (all of which went top 10) and only 3 had videos.

Yes, as a fan of Michael's I would have liked to see more releases from him during his solo years, but truth be told it's only post HIStory that I wanted to see more frequent releases. I would have especially liked to have see a follow up to Invincible and especially a 2005+ release.

So your position is that Jackson could have been as prolific as any of his peers, but chose not to. That makes sense. That's why there is SO much material coming out now that he's dead. Do you also feel that he cured Cancer and was the first person to walk on Mars? Was he also a great piano player and guitarist? I'm glad to see you feel that someone who averaged writing ONE SONG PER YEAR by himself in the years following Off the Wall was prolific.

You must have me confused with someone else; I never made the argument that Jackson compensated for poor music with MTV. On the contrary, I stated that during the Thriller period, the quality was high! He compensated for a lack of prolificness by stretching out the release of singles and music videos from a single album for several years.

[Edited 7/7/11 8:17am]

The estate has been more focused on doing other projects and clearing the debt than releasing unreleased music, which I think should be main focus