independent and unofficial
Prince fan community
Welcome! Sign up or enter username and password to remember me
Forum jump
Forums > Music: Non-Prince > Discuss Everything and Anything MJ
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Page 7 of 24 « First<34567891011>Last »
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
Reply #180 posted 09/27/11 8:06pm

silverchild

avatar

With the mess that has taken place for the past couple of years, today in this case and what will take place in the future, this cut just resonates with me now more than ever. Michael graced his pure and silky smooth vocal work on this song.

I don't care what took place and how it took place, we truly lost a god-given talent...music pray RIP Michael!

Check me out and add me on:
www.last.fm/user/brandosoul
"Truth is, everybody is going to hurt you; you just gotta find the ones worth suffering for." -Bob Marley
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #181 posted 09/27/11 8:28pm

Timmy84

silverchild said:

With the mess that has taken place for the past couple of years, today in this case and what will take place in the future, this cut just resonates with me now more than ever. Michael graced his pure and silky smooth vocal work on this song.

I don't care what took place and how it took place, we truly lost a god-given talent...music pray RIP Michael!

YOU CAN SAY THAT AGAIN!!!

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #182 posted 09/27/11 11:17pm

mjscarousal

I love that track and yes that is appropiate for now. Love you MJ xx

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #183 posted 09/28/11 12:02am

NMuzakNSoul

Here is a Stranger in Moscow mix I did...I added some instruments to the acapella version, played on my synth.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #184 posted 09/28/11 12:13am

Serena

tmo1965 said:

The recording of Micheal so drugged up broke my heart.

There was bit of humor that came out today though. AEG originally wanted to do 10 shows, but Micheal wanted to do 31. Why 31? Because it's 10 more than Prince did. biggrin

http://www.tmz.com/2011/0...gongaware/

[Edited 9/27/11 20:01pm]

Yeah, I laughed when he said that too.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #185 posted 09/28/11 1:37am

bboy87

avatar

Serena said:

tmo1965 said:

The recording of Micheal so drugged up broke my heart.

There was bit of humor that came out today though. AEG originally wanted to do 10 shows, but Micheal wanted to do 31. Why 31? Because it's 10 more than Prince did. biggrin

http://www.tmz.com/2011/0...gongaware/

[Edited 9/27/11 20:01pm]

Yeah, I laughed when he said that too.

he was so damn competitive lol he was always trying to outdo other artists

"We may deify or demonize them but not ignore them. And we call them genius, because they are the people who change the world."
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #186 posted 09/28/11 5:22am

crazymouse

As the traditional narrative has it, Michael Jackson’s Dangerous album represented the end of an era: the death of pop and the rise, in its wake, of grunge, alt-rock, and hip-hop. Most critics point to the moment Nirvana’s Nevermind knocked Dangerous out of the #1 spot on the Billboard Charts as the symbolic turning point. Within months, muted flannel had smothered all trace of ‘80s excess and flamboyance.


Cultural transformations, of course, are never quite that simple. Several months after Nevermind reached the #1 spot, Nirvana shared the stage at MTV’s Video Music Awards with stadium rockers like Def Leppard, Van Halen, Metallica, and what remained the biggest band in America—Guns N’ Roses. Indeed, if one were forced to pin down a cultural turning point, the 1992 VMAs wouldn’t be a bad choice. Watching Nirvana’s subversive performance (which began with a few bars of the banned “Rape Me” before relenting into the moody “Lithium”) shortly after Def Leppard’s cartoonish “Let’s Get Rocked” not only made ‘80s rock look ridiculous, but it soon made it nearly obsolete. Even the mighty Guns N’ Roses, who closed the show with a spectacular performance of “November Rain”, were openly mocked by Nirvana as “corporate rock” and “packaged rebellion”. If ever there was a public changing of the guard, this was the night.


Michael Jackson, meanwhile, the defining pop icon of the ‘80s, created an album in Dangerous that had as much—or little—to do with pop as Nevermind did. The stylistic differences are obvious enough. Nevermind was rooted in punk rock and grunge, while Dangerous was primarily grounded in R&B/New Jack Swing. Yet both expressed a strikingly similar sense of alienation, with many songs functioning as a kind of confessional poetry. Compare Cobain’s lyrics from “Lithium”—“I’m so happy / Cause today I found my friends / They’re in my head”—to Jackson’s on “Who Is It”—“It doesn’t seem to matter / And it doesn’t seem right / ‘Cause the will has brought no fortune / Still I cry alone at night.” Both albums also contained their share of catchy pop hooks and choruses while introducing more underground sounds to mainstream audiences, and both albums were sung by wounded, sensitive souls who happened to be brilliant marketers/mythmakers.


Sonically, Dangerous shared little in common with the work of fellow pop stars like Madonna, Whitney Houston, and Mariah Carey. Its tone was much more ominous, gritty, urban, and industrial. In short films like “Black or White”, Jackson was likewise exploring darker territory, shocking middle-class audiences with his raw expression of pain and indignation at racism. Ironically, it was the “establishment pop star,” not the outsider grunge band, whose music video was censored following public outcry over its controversial coda. “Smells Like Teen Spirit”, meanwhile, was in such heavy rotation it had one MTV executive gushing that they had “a whole new generation to sell to.”

The point is that, contrary to conventional wisdom, by the end of 1991, Nirvana was as much “pop” as Michael Jackson—and Michael Jackson was as much “alternative” as Nirvana. Both artists’ albums were released by major labels and had similar commercial and chart successes, though they were measured against much different expectations. Each produced hit singles. Each elicited memorable videos and performances that played side-by-side on MTV. And each has now sold in excess of 30 million copies worldwide.


Nevermind, of course, has received far greater critical acclaim, both for its cultural import and artistic substance. Yet 20 years later, Dangerous is gaining admirers as more people move beyond the extraneous nonsense that was so prominent in contemporaneous reviews and pay attention to its content: its prescient themes, its vast inventory of sounds, its panoramic survey of musical styles.


The bottom line is this: If indeed it is considered a pop album, Dangerous redefined the parameters of pop. How else to explain an album that mixes R&B, funk, gospel, hip-hop, rock, industrial, and classical; an album that introduces one song (“Will You Be There”) with Beethoven’s Ninth Symphony and another (“Dangerous”) with what sounds like the heart of a steel-city factory; an album that can alternately be paranoid, cryptic, sensual, vulnerable, idealistic, bleak, transcendent, and fearful? Even the album cover—an acrylic painting by pop surrealist Mark Ryden featuring a circus-like mask through which Jackson gazes back at his audience—signifies a new depth and awareness.

Jackson sets the tone from the opening track. In place of the pristine, cinematic grooves of Bad is something more attuned to the real world, something more edgy and urgent. The shattering glass at the beginning of “Jam” fittingly symbolizes the breakthrough. Dangerous was Jackson’s first album without legendary producer Quincy Jones. Many thought he was crazy to part ways with Jones, given the pair’s unprecedented success together. Yet Jackson liked challenges and was invigorated by the idea of acting as executive producer and working with a fresh canvas. He began experimenting with a group of talented producers and engineers he had developed relationships with in the previous years, including Bill Bottrell, Matt Forger, and Bryan Loren; later in the process, he also brought back longtime engineer, Bruce Swedien. What resulted from the recording sessions—which spanned from 1989-1991—was his most socially conscious and personally revealing album to date.


Perhaps the most significant addition to the new creative team, however, wasn’t made until the final year. Jackson remained dissatisfied with many of the rhythm tracks. He wanted them to hit harder, to feel edgier. With this in mind, he reached out to then-23-year-old New Jack Swing innovator, Teddy Riley. Since the release of Bad in 1987, R&B and hip-hop had evolved in a variety of directions, from the provocative rap of Public Enemy, to the sexual bluntness of LL Cool J, to the aggressive New Jack Swing of Bobby Brown and Guy. Jackson wanted to take elements from all of the latest innovations and sounds, and bend, contort, and meld them with his own creative vision. While Dangerous is often characterized as New Jack Swing—because of Riley’s presence, no doubt—Jackson’s appropriation of the style is clear. The beats are often more dynamic and crisp, the rhythms more syncopated, the sound more visceral and industrial. Found sounds are used as percussion everywhere: honking horns, sliding chains, swinging gates, breaking glass, crashing metal. Jackson also frequently implements beatboxing, scatting, and finger-snapping.


Take a song like “In the Closet” and compare it to other late ‘80s/early ‘90s New Jack Swing. The differences are striking. Listen to the way the elegant piano intro gives way to the erotic, gyrating beat. Listen to how the song builds tension and releases, builds tension and releases, before the climax explodes at the 4:30 mark. Listen to the agile vocal performance, from the hushed, confessional narration, to the tight falsetto harmonies, to the passionate sighs, gasps and exclamations. It is one of Jackson’s most sexually charged songs, yet it still manages a certain subtlety and intrigue—even the title is coyly playing with expectations about sexuality. Unlike most R&B and pop songwriters, Jackson’s “love songs” almost always contain a certain ambiguity, dramatic tension, and mystery. See, also, “Dangerous”, which contains the lyric: “Deep in the darkness of passion’s insanity / I felt taken by lust’s strange inhumanity.”


It is the second half of the Dangerous album, however, that really showcases Jackson’s artistic range. Following the declarative blockbuster, “Black or White”, Jackson unveils one of the most impressive songs in his entire catalog, the haunting masterpiece, “Who Is It”. For those who still believe the myth that Jackson’s work declined after the ‘80s, this track alone should dispel the notion. Not only is it expertly crafted (rivaling “Billie Jean”), it is Jackson at his most emotionally raw: “I can’t take it ‘cause I’m lonely!” “Give in to Me” continues the dark tone, as Jackson unleashes pent-up angst over Slash’s blistering guitar stabs. It is a song that would be right at home alongside the contrasting quiet/loud song dynamics on Nevermind or the rough, metallic textures of U2’s Achtung Baby.


What comes next? A prelude taken from Beethoven’s Ninth Symphony, naturally, followed by two songs—“Will You Be There” and “Keep the Faith”—rooted in black gospel. Jackson then closes the album with a tender expression on the transience of life (“Gone Too Soon”), inspired by AIDS victim, Ryan White, before returning full circle to the industrial New Jack Swing of the title track.


For some, this kind of eclectic, maximalist approach to an album was viewed scornfully. Dangerous was criticized for being too long, over-the-top, and unfocused. What in the world, skeptics asked, was a song like “Heal the World” doing on an album with “Jam” and “Dangerous”? Certainly, it fell in contrast to the sustained sound and theme of an album like Nevermind. Jackson, of course, could have easily gone this route by adding a few more songs to the seven rhythm tracks he created with Teddy Riley. Yet ultimately, it was an aesthetic choice. Jackson valued diversity and contrast, both sonically and thematically. He loved the idea of surprising an audience with an unusual song sequence, or an unanticipated shift in mood. If traditional R&B couldn’t express a certain emotion, he found a style that could (thus, the epic, Biblically-rooted pathos of “Will You Be There” turns to classical and gospel). Albums, he believed, were journeys—and as he would later explain in reference to his This Is It concert series, he wanted to take people places they’d never been before.

Yet regardless of stylistic preferences, one must at least acknowledge the sheer audacity and talent of an artist who was able to draw from such disparate sources and create in such a variety of genres. Could Axl Rose do New Jack Swing? Could Kurt Cobain do hip hop? Could Chuck D do gospel? Yet Michael Jackson worked as comfortably with Slash as he did the Andrae Crouch Singers Choir or Heavy D.


What, then, is the legacy of Dangerous twenty years later? It was an artistic turning point for Jackson, shifting his focus to more socially conscious material, ambitious concepts, and a broader palette of sounds and styles. It is also the culminating expression of the New Jack Swing sound, contributing to late ‘80s/early ‘90s R&B what albums like Nevermind and Ten did for rock. His R&B-rap fusions set the blueprint for years to come, while his industrial soundscapes and metallic beats were later popularized by artists as disparate as Nine Inch Nails and Lady Gaga. In terms of the overall music scene in 1991—which truly was a remarkable year for music—it may not have been as culturally overpowering as Nevermind, but it does stand alongside it (and a handful of other records) as one of the early decade’s most impressive artistic achievements.


In the end, Nirvana and company may have killed off ‘80s rock. But if pop was dead, its “king” had successfully created alternatives.

http://www.popmatters.com...ion-of-pop

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #187 posted 09/28/11 6:12am

SquirrelMeat

avatar

Vanilli said:

Hearing the voice of MJ so drugged out on propofol, and seeing MJ's body picture there in the hospital garbs, and seeing poor ol' Kenny Ortega all nervous on the stand, and then seeing Brian Oxman's reaction to today that Arnie was givin Michael dimmerol shots before Murray came on the scene, is all so fascating and yet so so so so sad. I took a half personal day from work to watch the trial, and by the time I went back, I was just sick to my stomach.

I wanna know the details and come to my own conclusions from the evidence presented so I will totally tune into the trial and read what I can about it, but damn, as a fan, it is painful.

One final thing...LOVE YOU MJ. I'm posting on a Prince forum how much I love you. Hope that means something to you!

Does it seriously not bother you that your obsession is so severe that you are taking vacation to watch a dead pop stars trial and that you feel the need to come in a non MJ website, with your MJ avatar and talk to MJ like he is here?????????

.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #188 posted 09/28/11 6:29am

silverchild

avatar

crazymouse said:

As the traditional narrative has it, Michael Jackson’s Dangerous album represented the end of an era: the death of pop and the rise, in its wake, of grunge, alt-rock, and hip-hop. Most critics point to the moment Nirvana’s Nevermind knocked Dangerous out of the #1 spot on the Billboard Charts as the symbolic turning point. Within months, muted flannel had smothered all trace of ‘80s excess and flamboyance.


Cultural transformations, of course, are never quite that simple. Several months after Nevermind reached the #1 spot, Nirvana shared the stage at MTV’s Video Music Awards with stadium rockers like Def Leppard, Van Halen, Metallica, and what remained the biggest band in America—Guns N’ Roses. Indeed, if one were forced to pin down a cultural turning point, the 1992 VMAs wouldn’t be a bad choice. Watching Nirvana’s subversive performance (which began with a few bars of the banned “Rape Me” before relenting into the moody “Lithium”) shortly after Def Leppard’s cartoonish “Let’s Get Rocked” not only made ‘80s rock look ridiculous, but it soon made it nearly obsolete. Even the mighty Guns N’ Roses, who closed the show with a spectacular performance of “November Rain”, were openly mocked by Nirvana as “corporate rock” and “packaged rebellion”. If ever there was a public changing of the guard, this was the night.


Michael Jackson, meanwhile, the defining pop icon of the ‘80s, created an album in Dangerous that had as much—or little—to do with pop as Nevermind did. The stylistic differences are obvious enough. Nevermind was rooted in punk rock and grunge, while Dangerous was primarily grounded in R&B/New Jack Swing. Yet both expressed a strikingly similar sense of alienation, with many songs functioning as a kind of confessional poetry. Compare Cobain’s lyrics from “Lithium”—“I’m so happy / Cause today I found my friends / They’re in my head”—to Jackson’s on “Who Is It”—“It doesn’t seem to matter / And it doesn’t seem right / ‘Cause the will has brought no fortune / Still I cry alone at night.” Both albums also contained their share of catchy pop hooks and choruses while introducing more underground sounds to mainstream audiences, and both albums were sung by wounded, sensitive souls who happened to be brilliant marketers/mythmakers.


Sonically, Dangerous shared little in common with the work of fellow pop stars like Madonna, Whitney Houston, and Mariah Carey. Its tone was much more ominous, gritty, urban, and industrial. In short films like “Black or White”, Jackson was likewise exploring darker territory, shocking middle-class audiences with his raw expression of pain and indignation at racism. Ironically, it was the “establishment pop star,” not the outsider grunge band, whose music video was censored following public outcry over its controversial coda. “Smells Like Teen Spirit”, meanwhile, was in such heavy rotation it had one MTV executive gushing that they had “a whole new generation to sell to.”

The point is that, contrary to conventional wisdom, by the end of 1991, Nirvana was as much “pop” as Michael Jackson—and Michael Jackson was as much “alternative” as Nirvana. Both artists’ albums were released by major labels and had similar commercial and chart successes, though they were measured against much different expectations. Each produced hit singles. Each elicited memorable videos and performances that played side-by-side on MTV. And each has now sold in excess of 30 million copies worldwide.


Nevermind, of course, has received far greater critical acclaim, both for its cultural import and artistic substance. Yet 20 years later, Dangerous is gaining admirers as more people move beyond the extraneous nonsense that was so prominent in contemporaneous reviews and pay attention to its content: its prescient themes, its vast inventory of sounds, its panoramic survey of musical styles.


The bottom line is this: If indeed it is considered a pop album, Dangerous redefined the parameters of pop. How else to explain an album that mixes R&B, funk, gospel, hip-hop, rock, industrial, and classical; an album that introduces one song (“Will You Be There”) with Beethoven’s Ninth Symphony and another (“Dangerous”) with what sounds like the heart of a steel-city factory; an album that can alternately be paranoid, cryptic, sensual, vulnerable, idealistic, bleak, transcendent, and fearful? Even the album cover—an acrylic painting by pop surrealist Mark Ryden featuring a circus-like mask through which Jackson gazes back at his audience—signifies a new depth and awareness.

Jackson sets the tone from the opening track. In place of the pristine, cinematic grooves of Bad is something more attuned to the real world, something more edgy and urgent. The shattering glass at the beginning of “Jam” fittingly symbolizes the breakthrough. Dangerous was Jackson’s first album without legendary producer Quincy Jones. Many thought he was crazy to part ways with Jones, given the pair’s unprecedented success together. Yet Jackson liked challenges and was invigorated by the idea of acting as executive producer and working with a fresh canvas. He began experimenting with a group of talented producers and engineers he had developed relationships with in the previous years, including Bill Bottrell, Matt Forger, and Bryan Loren; later in the process, he also brought back longtime engineer, Bruce Swedien. What resulted from the recording sessions—which spanned from 1989-1991—was his most socially conscious and personally revealing album to date.


Perhaps the most significant addition to the new creative team, however, wasn’t made until the final year. Jackson remained dissatisfied with many of the rhythm tracks. He wanted them to hit harder, to feel edgier. With this in mind, he reached out to then-23-year-old New Jack Swing innovator, Teddy Riley. Since the release of Bad in 1987, R&B and hip-hop had evolved in a variety of directions, from the provocative rap of Public Enemy, to the sexual bluntness of LL Cool J, to the aggressive New Jack Swing of Bobby Brown and Guy. Jackson wanted to take elements from all of the latest innovations and sounds, and bend, contort, and meld them with his own creative vision. While Dangerous is often characterized as New Jack Swing—because of Riley’s presence, no doubt—Jackson’s appropriation of the style is clear. The beats are often more dynamic and crisp, the rhythms more syncopated, the sound more visceral and industrial. Found sounds are used as percussion everywhere: honking horns, sliding chains, swinging gates, breaking glass, crashing metal. Jackson also frequently implements beatboxing, scatting, and finger-snapping.


Take a song like “In the Closet” and compare it to other late ‘80s/early ‘90s New Jack Swing. The differences are striking. Listen to the way the elegant piano intro gives way to the erotic, gyrating beat. Listen to how the song builds tension and releases, builds tension and releases, before the climax explodes at the 4:30 mark. Listen to the agile vocal performance, from the hushed, confessional narration, to the tight falsetto harmonies, to the passionate sighs, gasps and exclamations. It is one of Jackson’s most sexually charged songs, yet it still manages a certain subtlety and intrigue—even the title is coyly playing with expectations about sexuality. Unlike most R&B and pop songwriters, Jackson’s “love songs” almost always contain a certain ambiguity, dramatic tension, and mystery. See, also, “Dangerous”, which contains the lyric: “Deep in the darkness of passion’s insanity / I felt taken by lust’s strange inhumanity.”


It is the second half of the Dangerous album, however, that really showcases Jackson’s artistic range. Following the declarative blockbuster, “Black or White”, Jackson unveils one of the most impressive songs in his entire catalog, the haunting masterpiece, “Who Is It”. For those who still believe the myth that Jackson’s work declined after the ‘80s, this track alone should dispel the notion. Not only is it expertly crafted (rivaling “Billie Jean”), it is Jackson at his most emotionally raw: “I can’t take it ‘cause I’m lonely!” “Give in to Me” continues the dark tone, as Jackson unleashes pent-up angst over Slash’s blistering guitar stabs. It is a song that would be right at home alongside the contrasting quiet/loud song dynamics on Nevermind or the rough, metallic textures of U2’s Achtung Baby.


What comes next? A prelude taken from Beethoven’s Ninth Symphony, naturally, followed by two songs—“Will You Be There” and “Keep the Faith”—rooted in black gospel. Jackson then closes the album with a tender expression on the transience of life (“Gone Too Soon”), inspired by AIDS victim, Ryan White, before returning full circle to the industrial New Jack Swing of the title track.


For some, this kind of eclectic, maximalist approach to an album was viewed scornfully. Dangerous was criticized for being too long, over-the-top, and unfocused. What in the world, skeptics asked, was a song like “Heal the World” doing on an album with “Jam” and “Dangerous”? Certainly, it fell in contrast to the sustained sound and theme of an album like Nevermind. Jackson, of course, could have easily gone this route by adding a few more songs to the seven rhythm tracks he created with Teddy Riley. Yet ultimately, it was an aesthetic choice. Jackson valued diversity and contrast, both sonically and thematically. He loved the idea of surprising an audience with an unusual song sequence, or an unanticipated shift in mood. If traditional R&B couldn’t express a certain emotion, he found a style that could (thus, the epic, Biblically-rooted pathos of “Will You Be There” turns to classical and gospel). Albums, he believed, were journeys—and as he would later explain in reference to his This Is It concert series, he wanted to take people places they’d never been before.

Yet regardless of stylistic preferences, one must at least acknowledge the sheer audacity and talent of an artist who was able to draw from such disparate sources and create in such a variety of genres. Could Axl Rose do New Jack Swing? Could Kurt Cobain do hip hop? Could Chuck D do gospel? Yet Michael Jackson worked as comfortably with Slash as he did the Andrae Crouch Singers Choir or Heavy D.


What, then, is the legacy of Dangerous twenty years later? It was an artistic turning point for Jackson, shifting his focus to more socially conscious material, ambitious concepts, and a broader palette of sounds and styles. It is also the culminating expression of the New Jack Swing sound, contributing to late ‘80s/early ‘90s R&B what albums like Nevermind and Ten did for rock. His R&B-rap fusions set the blueprint for years to come, while his industrial soundscapes and metallic beats were later popularized by artists as disparate as Nine Inch Nails and Lady Gaga. In terms of the overall music scene in 1991—which truly was a remarkable year for music—it may not have been as culturally overpowering as Nevermind, but it does stand alongside it (and a handful of other records) as one of the early decade’s most impressive artistic achievements.


In the end, Nirvana and company may have killed off ‘80s rock. But if pop was dead, its “king” had successfully created alternatives.

http://www.popmatters.com...ion-of-pop

clapping Great analysis on a timeless masterpiece. Still can't believe it's been 20 years. Boy oh boy!

Check me out and add me on:
www.last.fm/user/brandosoul
"Truth is, everybody is going to hurt you; you just gotta find the ones worth suffering for." -Bob Marley
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #189 posted 09/28/11 8:01am

Militant

avatar

moderator

crazymouse said:

As the traditional narrative has it, Michael Jackson’s Dangerous album represented the end of an era: the death of pop and the rise, in its wake, of grunge, alt-rock, and hip-hop. Most critics point to the moment Nirvana’s Nevermind knocked Dangerous out of the #1 spot on the Billboard Charts as the symbolic turning point. Within months, muted flannel had smothered all trace of ‘80s excess and flamboyance.


Cultural transformations, of course, are never quite that simple. Several months after Nevermind reached the #1 spot, Nirvana shared the stage at MTV’s Video Music Awards with stadium rockers like Def Leppard, Van Halen, Metallica, and what remained the biggest band in America—Guns N’ Roses. Indeed, if one were forced to pin down a cultural turning point, the 1992 VMAs wouldn’t be a bad choice. Watching Nirvana’s subversive performance (which began with a few bars of the banned “Rape Me” before relenting into the moody “Lithium”) shortly after Def Leppard’s cartoonish “Let’s Get Rocked” not only made ‘80s rock look ridiculous, but it soon made it nearly obsolete. Even the mighty Guns N’ Roses, who closed the show with a spectacular performance of “November Rain”, were openly mocked by Nirvana as “corporate rock” and “packaged rebellion”. If ever there was a public changing of the guard, this was the night.


Michael Jackson, meanwhile, the defining pop icon of the ‘80s, created an album in Dangerous that had as much—or little—to do with pop as Nevermind did. The stylistic differences are obvious enough. Nevermind was rooted in punk rock and grunge, while Dangerous was primarily grounded in R&B/New Jack Swing. Yet both expressed a strikingly similar sense of alienation, with many songs functioning as a kind of confessional poetry. Compare Cobain’s lyrics from “Lithium”—“I’m so happy / Cause today I found my friends / They’re in my head”—to Jackson’s on “Who Is It”—“It doesn’t seem to matter / And it doesn’t seem right / ‘Cause the will has brought no fortune / Still I cry alone at night.” Both albums also contained their share of catchy pop hooks and choruses while introducing more underground sounds to mainstream audiences, and both albums were sung by wounded, sensitive souls who happened to be brilliant marketers/mythmakers.


Sonically, Dangerous shared little in common with the work of fellow pop stars like Madonna, Whitney Houston, and Mariah Carey. Its tone was much more ominous, gritty, urban, and industrial. In short films like “Black or White”, Jackson was likewise exploring darker territory, shocking middle-class audiences with his raw expression of pain and indignation at racism. Ironically, it was the “establishment pop star,” not the outsider grunge band, whose music video was censored following public outcry over its controversial coda. “Smells Like Teen Spirit”, meanwhile, was in such heavy rotation it had one MTV executive gushing that they had “a whole new generation to sell to.”

The point is that, contrary to conventional wisdom, by the end of 1991, Nirvana was as much “pop” as Michael Jackson—and Michael Jackson was as much “alternative” as Nirvana. Both artists’ albums were released by major labels and had similar commercial and chart successes, though they were measured against much different expectations. Each produced hit singles. Each elicited memorable videos and performances that played side-by-side on MTV. And each has now sold in excess of 30 million copies worldwide.


Nevermind, of course, has received far greater critical acclaim, both for its cultural import and artistic substance. Yet 20 years later, Dangerous is gaining admirers as more people move beyond the extraneous nonsense that was so prominent in contemporaneous reviews and pay attention to its content: its prescient themes, its vast inventory of sounds, its panoramic survey of musical styles.


The bottom line is this: If indeed it is considered a pop album, Dangerous redefined the parameters of pop. How else to explain an album that mixes R&B, funk, gospel, hip-hop, rock, industrial, and classical; an album that introduces one song (“Will You Be There”) with Beethoven’s Ninth Symphony and another (“Dangerous”) with what sounds like the heart of a steel-city factory; an album that can alternately be paranoid, cryptic, sensual, vulnerable, idealistic, bleak, transcendent, and fearful? Even the album cover—an acrylic painting by pop surrealist Mark Ryden featuring a circus-like mask through which Jackson gazes back at his audience—signifies a new depth and awareness.

Jackson sets the tone from the opening track. In place of the pristine, cinematic grooves of Bad is something more attuned to the real world, something more edgy and urgent. The shattering glass at the beginning of “Jam” fittingly symbolizes the breakthrough. Dangerous was Jackson’s first album without legendary producer Quincy Jones. Many thought he was crazy to part ways with Jones, given the pair’s unprecedented success together. Yet Jackson liked challenges and was invigorated by the idea of acting as executive producer and working with a fresh canvas. He began experimenting with a group of talented producers and engineers he had developed relationships with in the previous years, including Bill Bottrell, Matt Forger, and Bryan Loren; later in the process, he also brought back longtime engineer, Bruce Swedien. What resulted from the recording sessions—which spanned from 1989-1991—was his most socially conscious and personally revealing album to date.


Perhaps the most significant addition to the new creative team, however, wasn’t made until the final year. Jackson remained dissatisfied with many of the rhythm tracks. He wanted them to hit harder, to feel edgier. With this in mind, he reached out to then-23-year-old New Jack Swing innovator, Teddy Riley. Since the release of Bad in 1987, R&B and hip-hop had evolved in a variety of directions, from the provocative rap of Public Enemy, to the sexual bluntness of LL Cool J, to the aggressive New Jack Swing of Bobby Brown and Guy. Jackson wanted to take elements from all of the latest innovations and sounds, and bend, contort, and meld them with his own creative vision. While Dangerous is often characterized as New Jack Swing—because of Riley’s presence, no doubt—Jackson’s appropriation of the style is clear. The beats are often more dynamic and crisp, the rhythms more syncopated, the sound more visceral and industrial. Found sounds are used as percussion everywhere: honking horns, sliding chains, swinging gates, breaking glass, crashing metal. Jackson also frequently implements beatboxing, scatting, and finger-snapping.


Take a song like “In the Closet” and compare it to other late ‘80s/early ‘90s New Jack Swing. The differences are striking. Listen to the way the elegant piano intro gives way to the erotic, gyrating beat. Listen to how the song builds tension and releases, builds tension and releases, before the climax explodes at the 4:30 mark. Listen to the agile vocal performance, from the hushed, confessional narration, to the tight falsetto harmonies, to the passionate sighs, gasps and exclamations. It is one of Jackson’s most sexually charged songs, yet it still manages a certain subtlety and intrigue—even the title is coyly playing with expectations about sexuality. Unlike most R&B and pop songwriters, Jackson’s “love songs” almost always contain a certain ambiguity, dramatic tension, and mystery. See, also, “Dangerous”, which contains the lyric: “Deep in the darkness of passion’s insanity / I felt taken by lust’s strange inhumanity.”


It is the second half of the Dangerous album, however, that really showcases Jackson’s artistic range. Following the declarative blockbuster, “Black or White”, Jackson unveils one of the most impressive songs in his entire catalog, the haunting masterpiece, “Who Is It”. For those who still believe the myth that Jackson’s work declined after the ‘80s, this track alone should dispel the notion. Not only is it expertly crafted (rivaling “Billie Jean”), it is Jackson at his most emotionally raw: “I can’t take it ‘cause I’m lonely!” “Give in to Me” continues the dark tone, as Jackson unleashes pent-up angst over Slash’s blistering guitar stabs. It is a song that would be right at home alongside the contrasting quiet/loud song dynamics on Nevermind or the rough, metallic textures of U2’s Achtung Baby.


What comes next? A prelude taken from Beethoven’s Ninth Symphony, naturally, followed by two songs—“Will You Be There” and “Keep the Faith”—rooted in black gospel. Jackson then closes the album with a tender expression on the transience of life (“Gone Too Soon”), inspired by AIDS victim, Ryan White, before returning full circle to the industrial New Jack Swing of the title track.


For some, this kind of eclectic, maximalist approach to an album was viewed scornfully. Dangerous was criticized for being too long, over-the-top, and unfocused. What in the world, skeptics asked, was a song like “Heal the World” doing on an album with “Jam” and “Dangerous”? Certainly, it fell in contrast to the sustained sound and theme of an album like Nevermind. Jackson, of course, could have easily gone this route by adding a few more songs to the seven rhythm tracks he created with Teddy Riley. Yet ultimately, it was an aesthetic choice. Jackson valued diversity and contrast, both sonically and thematically. He loved the idea of surprising an audience with an unusual song sequence, or an unanticipated shift in mood. If traditional R&B couldn’t express a certain emotion, he found a style that could (thus, the epic, Biblically-rooted pathos of “Will You Be There” turns to classical and gospel). Albums, he believed, were journeys—and as he would later explain in reference to his This Is It concert series, he wanted to take people places they’d never been before.

Yet regardless of stylistic preferences, one must at least acknowledge the sheer audacity and talent of an artist who was able to draw from such disparate sources and create in such a variety of genres. Could Axl Rose do New Jack Swing? Could Kurt Cobain do hip hop? Could Chuck D do gospel? Yet Michael Jackson worked as comfortably with Slash as he did the Andrae Crouch Singers Choir or Heavy D.


What, then, is the legacy of Dangerous twenty years later? It was an artistic turning point for Jackson, shifting his focus to more socially conscious material, ambitious concepts, and a broader palette of sounds and styles. It is also the culminating expression of the New Jack Swing sound, contributing to late ‘80s/early ‘90s R&B what albums like Nevermind and Ten did for rock. His R&B-rap fusions set the blueprint for years to come, while his industrial soundscapes and metallic beats were later popularized by artists as disparate as Nine Inch Nails and Lady Gaga. In terms of the overall music scene in 1991—which truly was a remarkable year for music—it may not have been as culturally overpowering as Nevermind, but it does stand alongside it (and a handful of other records) as one of the early decade’s most impressive artistic achievements.


In the end, Nirvana and company may have killed off ‘80s rock. But if pop was dead, its “king” had successfully created alternatives.

http://www.popmatters.com...ion-of-pop

Brilliant article on one of pop music all time masterpiece albums.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #190 posted 09/28/11 8:54am

Unholyalliance

SquirrelMeat said:

Does it seriously not bother you that your obsession is so severe that you are taking vacation to watch a dead pop stars trial and that you feel the need to come in a non MJ website, with your MJ avatar and talk to MJ like he is here?????????

That's their decisions. Don't bother them about it.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #191 posted 09/28/11 9:23am

mjforever

avatar

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #192 posted 09/28/11 9:30am

SquirrelMeat

avatar

Unholyalliance said:

SquirrelMeat said:

Does it seriously not bother you that your obsession is so severe that you are taking vacation to watch a dead pop stars trial and that you feel the need to come in a non MJ website, with your MJ avatar and talk to MJ like he is here?????????

That's their decisions. Don't bother them about it.

Its also their decision to post it on a public forum, on a Prince site. That is as good as asking for comment.

.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #193 posted 09/28/11 9:32am

Timmy84

crazymouse said:

As the traditional narrative has it, Michael Jackson’s Dangerous album represented the end of an era: the death of pop and the rise, in its wake, of grunge, alt-rock, and hip-hop. Most critics point to the moment Nirvana’s Nevermind knocked Dangerous out of the #1 spot on the Billboard Charts as the symbolic turning point. Within months, muted flannel had smothered all trace of ‘80s excess and flamboyance.


Cultural transformations, of course, are never quite that simple. Several months after Nevermind reached the #1 spot, Nirvana shared the stage at MTV’s Video Music Awards with stadium rockers like Def Leppard, Van Halen, Metallica, and what remained the biggest band in America—Guns N’ Roses. Indeed, if one were forced to pin down a cultural turning point, the 1992 VMAs wouldn’t be a bad choice. Watching Nirvana’s subversive performance (which began with a few bars of the banned “Rape Me” before relenting into the moody “Lithium”) shortly after Def Leppard’s cartoonish “Let’s Get Rocked” not only made ‘80s rock look ridiculous, but it soon made it nearly obsolete. Even the mighty Guns N’ Roses, who closed the show with a spectacular performance of “November Rain”, were openly mocked by Nirvana as “corporate rock” and “packaged rebellion”. If ever there was a public changing of the guard, this was the night.


Michael Jackson, meanwhile, the defining pop icon of the ‘80s, created an album in Dangerous that had as much—or little—to do with pop as Nevermind did. The stylistic differences are obvious enough. Nevermind was rooted in punk rock and grunge, while Dangerous was primarily grounded in R&B/New Jack Swing. Yet both expressed a strikingly similar sense of alienation, with many songs functioning as a kind of confessional poetry. Compare Cobain’s lyrics from “Lithium”—“I’m so happy / Cause today I found my friends / They’re in my head”—to Jackson’s on “Who Is It”—“It doesn’t seem to matter / And it doesn’t seem right / ‘Cause the will has brought no fortune / Still I cry alone at night.” Both albums also contained their share of catchy pop hooks and choruses while introducing more underground sounds to mainstream audiences, and both albums were sung by wounded, sensitive souls who happened to be brilliant marketers/mythmakers.


Sonically, Dangerous shared little in common with the work of fellow pop stars like Madonna, Whitney Houston, and Mariah Carey. Its tone was much more ominous, gritty, urban, and industrial. In short films like “Black or White”, Jackson was likewise exploring darker territory, shocking middle-class audiences with his raw expression of pain and indignation at racism. Ironically, it was the “establishment pop star,” not the outsider grunge band, whose music video was censored following public outcry over its controversial coda. “Smells Like Teen Spirit”, meanwhile, was in such heavy rotation it had one MTV executive gushing that they had “a whole new generation to sell to.”

The point is that, contrary to conventional wisdom, by the end of 1991, Nirvana was as much “pop” as Michael Jackson—and Michael Jackson was as much “alternative” as Nirvana. Both artists’ albums were released by major labels and had similar commercial and chart successes, though they were measured against much different expectations. Each produced hit singles. Each elicited memorable videos and performances that played side-by-side on MTV. And each has now sold in excess of 30 million copies worldwide.


Nevermind, of course, has received far greater critical acclaim, both for its cultural import and artistic substance. Yet 20 years later, Dangerous is gaining admirers as more people move beyond the extraneous nonsense that was so prominent in contemporaneous reviews and pay attention to its content: its prescient themes, its vast inventory of sounds, its panoramic survey of musical styles.


The bottom line is this: If indeed it is considered a pop album, Dangerous redefined the parameters of pop. How else to explain an album that mixes R&B, funk, gospel, hip-hop, rock, industrial, and classical; an album that introduces one song (“Will You Be There”) with Beethoven’s Ninth Symphony and another (“Dangerous”) with what sounds like the heart of a steel-city factory; an album that can alternately be paranoid, cryptic, sensual, vulnerable, idealistic, bleak, transcendent, and fearful? Even the album cover—an acrylic painting by pop surrealist Mark Ryden featuring a circus-like mask through which Jackson gazes back at his audience—signifies a new depth and awareness.

Jackson sets the tone from the opening track. In place of the pristine, cinematic grooves of Bad is something more attuned to the real world, something more edgy and urgent. The shattering glass at the beginning of “Jam” fittingly symbolizes the breakthrough. Dangerous was Jackson’s first album without legendary producer Quincy Jones. Many thought he was crazy to part ways with Jones, given the pair’s unprecedented success together. Yet Jackson liked challenges and was invigorated by the idea of acting as executive producer and working with a fresh canvas. He began experimenting with a group of talented producers and engineers he had developed relationships with in the previous years, including Bill Bottrell, Matt Forger, and Bryan Loren; later in the process, he also brought back longtime engineer, Bruce Swedien. What resulted from the recording sessions—which spanned from 1989-1991—was his most socially conscious and personally revealing album to date.


Perhaps the most significant addition to the new creative team, however, wasn’t made until the final year. Jackson remained dissatisfied with many of the rhythm tracks. He wanted them to hit harder, to feel edgier. With this in mind, he reached out to then-23-year-old New Jack Swing innovator, Teddy Riley. Since the release of Bad in 1987, R&B and hip-hop had evolved in a variety of directions, from the provocative rap of Public Enemy, to the sexual bluntness of LL Cool J, to the aggressive New Jack Swing of Bobby Brown and Guy. Jackson wanted to take elements from all of the latest innovations and sounds, and bend, contort, and meld them with his own creative vision. While Dangerous is often characterized as New Jack Swing—because of Riley’s presence, no doubt—Jackson’s appropriation of the style is clear. The beats are often more dynamic and crisp, the rhythms more syncopated, the sound more visceral and industrial. Found sounds are used as percussion everywhere: honking horns, sliding chains, swinging gates, breaking glass, crashing metal. Jackson also frequently implements beatboxing, scatting, and finger-snapping.


Take a song like “In the Closet” and compare it to other late ‘80s/early ‘90s New Jack Swing. The differences are striking. Listen to the way the elegant piano intro gives way to the erotic, gyrating beat. Listen to how the song builds tension and releases, builds tension and releases, before the climax explodes at the 4:30 mark. Listen to the agile vocal performance, from the hushed, confessional narration, to the tight falsetto harmonies, to the passionate sighs, gasps and exclamations. It is one of Jackson’s most sexually charged songs, yet it still manages a certain subtlety and intrigue—even the title is coyly playing with expectations about sexuality. Unlike most R&B and pop songwriters, Jackson’s “love songs” almost always contain a certain ambiguity, dramatic tension, and mystery. See, also, “Dangerous”, which contains the lyric: “Deep in the darkness of passion’s insanity / I felt taken by lust’s strange inhumanity.”


It is the second half of the Dangerous album, however, that really showcases Jackson’s artistic range. Following the declarative blockbuster, “Black or White”, Jackson unveils one of the most impressive songs in his entire catalog, the haunting masterpiece, “Who Is It”. For those who still believe the myth that Jackson’s work declined after the ‘80s, this track alone should dispel the notion. Not only is it expertly crafted (rivaling “Billie Jean”), it is Jackson at his most emotionally raw: “I can’t take it ‘cause I’m lonely!” “Give in to Me” continues the dark tone, as Jackson unleashes pent-up angst over Slash’s blistering guitar stabs. It is a song that would be right at home alongside the contrasting quiet/loud song dynamics on Nevermind or the rough, metallic textures of U2’s Achtung Baby.


What comes next? A prelude taken from Beethoven’s Ninth Symphony, naturally, followed by two songs—“Will You Be There” and “Keep the Faith”—rooted in black gospel. Jackson then closes the album with a tender expression on the transience of life (“Gone Too Soon”), inspired by AIDS victim, Ryan White, before returning full circle to the industrial New Jack Swing of the title track.


For some, this kind of eclectic, maximalist approach to an album was viewed scornfully. Dangerous was criticized for being too long, over-the-top, and unfocused. What in the world, skeptics asked, was a song like “Heal the World” doing on an album with “Jam” and “Dangerous”? Certainly, it fell in contrast to the sustained sound and theme of an album like Nevermind. Jackson, of course, could have easily gone this route by adding a few more songs to the seven rhythm tracks he created with Teddy Riley. Yet ultimately, it was an aesthetic choice. Jackson valued diversity and contrast, both sonically and thematically. He loved the idea of surprising an audience with an unusual song sequence, or an unanticipated shift in mood. If traditional R&B couldn’t express a certain emotion, he found a style that could (thus, the epic, Biblically-rooted pathos of “Will You Be There” turns to classical and gospel). Albums, he believed, were journeys—and as he would later explain in reference to his This Is It concert series, he wanted to take people places they’d never been before.

Yet regardless of stylistic preferences, one must at least acknowledge the sheer audacity and talent of an artist who was able to draw from such disparate sources and create in such a variety of genres. Could Axl Rose do New Jack Swing? Could Kurt Cobain do hip hop? Could Chuck D do gospel? Yet Michael Jackson worked as comfortably with Slash as he did the Andrae Crouch Singers Choir or Heavy D.


What, then, is the legacy of Dangerous twenty years later? It was an artistic turning point for Jackson, shifting his focus to more socially conscious material, ambitious concepts, and a broader palette of sounds and styles. It is also the culminating expression of the New Jack Swing sound, contributing to late ‘80s/early ‘90s R&B what albums like Nevermind and Ten did for rock. His R&B-rap fusions set the blueprint for years to come, while his industrial soundscapes and metallic beats were later popularized by artists as disparate as Nine Inch Nails and Lady Gaga. In terms of the overall music scene in 1991—which truly was a remarkable year for music—it may not have been as culturally overpowering as Nevermind, but it does stand alongside it (and a handful of other records) as one of the early decade’s most impressive artistic achievements.


In the end, Nirvana and company may have killed off ‘80s rock. But if pop was dead, its “king” had successfully created alternatives.

http://www.popmatters.com...ion-of-pop

I'm loving these 20th anniversary stories of Dangerous, Nevermind and Use Your Illusion. Great year (1991).

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #194 posted 09/28/11 11:15am

sag10

avatar

Seriuosly where were Michael's family and friends. I have seen intervention, they could have helped Michael.

I would have tackled his ass.

Arnold Klien is a scum bucket.. I knew from the get go.

^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^
Being happy doesn't mean that everything is perfect, it means you've decided to look beyond the imperfections... unknown
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #195 posted 09/28/11 11:38am

prodigalfan

avatar

bboy87 said:

got this from KOP

Defense Claims MICHAEL JACKSON KILLED HIMSELF
Ed Chernoff -- Defense Attorney's Opening Statement

Updated 9/27/11 at 11:00 AM

Dr. Conrad Murray's attorney Ed Chernoff told the jury Michael Jackson caused his own death.

* Chernoff says the evidence will show MJ swallowed 8, 2 mg pills of Lorazepam.

* And Chernoff says MJ self-injected a dose or Propofol that created a "perfect storm" that killed him.

* There was no way to save MJ. He died instantly.

http://www.tmz.com/2...ol-ed-chernoff/

but then......

Just said MJ DIED INSTANTLY (didn't even have time to close his eyes) after basically "eating" lorazepam pills while Murray was outta the room and then injected himself with the fatal dose of propofol.

If he dies instantly, then Murray's timeline and telling the EMTs that MJ had a pulse and had only been "down" or in trouble for a few minutes when EMT got there because he had "just been talking to him" is HOGWASH!

Lies. You don't die instantly with Diprivan. YOu stop breathing but the half life of the drug is so short. I believe if he tried to inject himself with a lethal dose, that he would fall unconcious before completing the injection. And he would stop breathing... for maybe several minutes... then the medication would wear off and he would start breathing again, before his heart stopped. Propofol is a weird/wonderous drug for official medical use. It works almost INSTANTLY to render a patient unconcious. Used frequently in OR/ER setting when you need the patient to become unconcious quickly so you can put a breathing tube down his throat and not have to deal with a thrashing and crashing patient. And then the medication wears off within MINUTES! You have to have a continuous drip in order to maintain the sedation. I have turned off propofol drips on patients on ventilator machine and stood there and watch them "wake up" less than 4 minutes after the drip wears off, and they start to breath spontaneously as well. That is why I do not believe for one second that MJ injected himself. Propofol only works as a continuous drip... or for a very very brief sedated moment.
"Remember, one man's filler is another man's killer" -- Haystack
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #196 posted 09/28/11 11:48am

prodigalfan

avatar

^ "When propofol is used for both induction (2.0 to 2.5 mg/kg) and maintenance (0.1 to 0.2 mg/kg/min) of anesthesia, the majority of patients are generally awake, responsive to verbal command and oriented in approximately 7 to 8 minutes." taken from website: RXMed: Pharmaceutical Information. BTW awake and oriented means you can get up and walk, know who you are and wear you are. You are back to your baseline. So imagine how quickly you are moving your arms and legs, breathing on your own, starting to mumble, scratch your face.... etc after the propofol is stopped. Not long... maybe 3 - 4 minutes AT THE MOST. Dr. Conrad is a liar... I talk to anestesiologists about this case several times... we use this medication in my line of work... weekly. It is given by an anesthesiologist, with a nurse anethesist, with 2 RN and a cardiologist, and a monitor, and a crash cart, and the whole FREAKING code blue team just seconds away from us. There is NO way ANY OF US would EVER give that drug in that setting. Conrad should not only lose his license... he should serve some jail time. He KNEW BETTER. I am a NURSE and I KNOW BETTER!!!
"Remember, one man's filler is another man's killer" -- Haystack
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #197 posted 09/28/11 12:23pm

V10LETBLUES

For get the Propofol, just one lorazapam has knocked me out! There is no way justify all of these controlled substances by ANY doctor. This is criminal, no way to get out of this one. Murray is going to jail.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #198 posted 09/28/11 2:48pm

Timmy84

V10LETBLUES said:

For get the Propofol, just one lorazapam has knocked me out! There is no way justify all of these controlled substances by ANY doctor. This is criminal, no way to get out of this one. Murray is going to jail.

Common sense.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #199 posted 09/28/11 3:57pm

ThruTheEyesOfW
onder

avatar

My friends...I have restarted this petition because IT NEEDS TO BE DONE. Justice cannot just come from the courtroom. Federal legislation needs to be done make sure the tragedy that happened to Michael Jackson never happens again. Please sign, raise your voice, spread the word! MAKE THAT CHANGE! And heal the world...♥

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/29/michael-jacksons-law/

God bless you all...

It's all for love..

[Edited 9/28/11 15:58pm]

The salvation of man is through love and in love. - Dr. V. Frankl

"When you close your heart, you close your mind." - Michael Jackson (Man In The Mirror)

"I don't need anger management, I need people to stop pissing me off" lol
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #200 posted 09/28/11 4:20pm

Timmy84

I got a question... and this isn't directed at you, TTEOW, but I have to, why have we resorted to petitions and/or protests? We just can't simply walk to our congressmen and let us known that we want to make change? Especially considering this law?

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #201 posted 09/28/11 5:39pm

WetDream

avatar

SquirrelMeat said:

Unholyalliance said:

That's their decisions. Don't bother them about it.

Its also their decision to post it on a public forum, on a Prince site. That is as good as asking for comment.

It's funny ain't it, lol

--

.

I'm coming away from the embarrassment via others out there by coming in here for the 1st time in jah knows to see what's new with Jacko!

Since i've been on the subject of Sly Stone lately, i've come to the conclusion that Mike learned from him vocally more so than anything else of him.

Sly songs like Keep On Dancing, you can hear the "Dah" and "Ah" vox effects after a few words ala "Now you can't touch me, Dah..." on that Unbreakable song. Songs like You Can Make It If You Try sound almost identical vocally to MJ in tracks like Enjoy Yourself.

.

The other thing i found interesting was learning Mike wanted to work with Sly on his new album....perhaps one of them VERY, very rare moments i'm onboard with a choice made by MJ in his later music life. Would of been interesting.

[Edited 9/28/11 17:46pm]

This Post is produced, arranged, composed and performed by WetDream
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #202 posted 09/28/11 6:47pm

prodigalfan

avatar

First let me say that this post means no disrespect.

I have a question that maybe fans of MJ have no answer for. But here it goes anyway.

I heard the MJ voice recording and was FLOORED that his voice was so deep. I think that shocked me even more than the slurred-by-drugs voice.

Here is my question. Does anyone know why... has it ever been addressed in interviews/gossip etc. WHY did MJ have a stage voice that was several octaves higher than his natural speaking voice? Why did he use this voice ALL the time except in the sole presence of his inner circle?

I just don't know how he was able to remember to use his stage voice for concerts, and videos, and even in times of distress like the pepsi commercial fire... didn't he talk to the fans while being carried out on a gurney... using this same stage voice. What about when he is pissed off at the paparazzi... did he ever "slip" and cuss or mumble something in his natural voice.

I don't know why... but just that alone has deeply disturbed me about MJ. Like I dunno... he was a little off.... ya know? Not trying to be disrespectful.... just truly bewildered.

"Remember, one man's filler is another man's killer" -- Haystack
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #203 posted 09/28/11 7:17pm

Cinnamon234

avatar

I think the high voice was MJ's attempt to seem approachable and non-threatening to the public. When he was with his Family & Friends, he spoke normally for the most part, but remember, Diana Ross was an idol of his and I do believe he tried to emulate some of her mannerisms and speech. MJ would also slouch in certain pictures I noticed when he was in his 20's to appear shorter than he was I believe (On the other hand, later on his life it seemed he'd often wear shoes with lifts to appear taller). I just think he wanted to appear non-threating and childlike.

That's my theory anyway, but where MJ is concerned, you just don't know with him.

And I think to say MJ was "off" is not inaccurate, but I just feel that none of us can understand his life. He was always a different or unique individuals, most people who are extremely talented or geniuses are often this way, but he didn't just become that way out of the blue.

I think his environment had a lot to do with it. Either way, NO ONE can possibly understand what MJ went through. No one's been in his shoes or went through what he did. He truly did lead a fascinating yet tragic life in many ways and I wont even pretend I know what it was like to be him.

We as the public don't even know the half of it and I doubt we ever will.

"And When The Groove Is Dead And Gone, You Know That Love Survives, So We Can Rock Forever" RIP MJ heart

"Baby, that was much too fast"...Goodnight dear sweet Prince. I'll love you always heart
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #204 posted 09/28/11 8:02pm

Timmy84

Cinnamon234 said:

I think the high voice was MJ's attempt to seem approachable and non-threatening to the public. When he was with his Family & Friends, he spoke normally for the most part, but remember, Diana Ross was an idol of his and I do believe he tried to emulate some of her mannerisms and speech. MJ would also slouch in certain pictures I noticed when he was in his 20's to appear shorter than he was I believe (On the other hand, later on his life it seemed he'd often wear shoes with lifts to appear taller). I just think he wanted to appear non-threating and childlike.

That's my theory anyway, but where MJ is concerned, you just don't know with him.

And I think to say MJ was "off" is not inaccurate, but I just feel that none of us can understand his life. He was always a different or unique individuals, most people who are extremely talented or geniuses are often this way, but he didn't just become that way out of the blue.

I think his environment had a lot to do with it. Either way, NO ONE can possibly understand what MJ went through. No one's been in his shoes or went through what he did. He truly did lead a fascinating yet tragic life in many ways and I wont even pretend I know what it was like to be him.

We as the public don't even know the half of it and I doubt we ever will.

Not only Diana, but I think he also saw how Stevie and Marvin spoke and they spoke rather high themselves so it was probably a combo. I can believe Michael doing the high voice to appear nonthreatening. It helped to create his androgynous character and it worked for the most part. And you're right, we definitely don't understand half of what we went through. It's easier for us to think we do but we really don't.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #205 posted 09/28/11 8:03pm

Timmy84

prodigalfan said:

First let me say that this post means no disrespect.

I have a question that maybe fans of MJ have no answer for. But here it goes anyway.

I heard the MJ voice recording and was FLOORED that his voice was so deep. I think that shocked me even more than the slurred-by-drugs voice.

Here is my question. Does anyone know why... has it ever been addressed in interviews/gossip etc. WHY did MJ have a stage voice that was several octaves higher than his natural speaking voice? Why did he use this voice ALL the time except in the sole presence of his inner circle?

I just don't know how he was able to remember to use his stage voice for concerts, and videos, and even in times of distress like the pepsi commercial fire... didn't he talk to the fans while being carried out on a gurney... using this same stage voice. What about when he is pissed off at the paparazzi... did he ever "slip" and cuss or mumble something in his natural voice.

I don't know why... but just that alone has deeply disturbed me about MJ. Like I dunno... he was a little off.... ya know? Not trying to be disrespectful.... just truly bewildered.

Like I and Cinnamon said, it was probably to appear nonthreatening (and androgynous). But there were a few times where his deeper voice could be heard (the '93 Super Bowl performance, the intro to "You Rock My World", etc).

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #206 posted 09/28/11 8:33pm

prodigalfan

avatar

Cinnamon234 said:

I think the high voice was MJ's attempt to seem approachable and non-threatening to the public. When he was with his Family & Friends, he spoke normally for the most part, but remember, Diana Ross was an idol of his and I do believe he tried to emulate some of her mannerisms and speech. MJ would also slouch in certain pictures I noticed when he was in his 20's to appear shorter than he was I believe (On the other hand, later on his life it seemed he'd often wear shoes with lifts to appear taller). I just think he wanted to appear non-threating and childlike.

That's my theory anyway, but where MJ is concerned, you just don't know with him.

And I think to say MJ was "off" is not inaccurate, but I just feel that none of us can understand his life. He was always a different or unique individuals, most people who are extremely talented or geniuses are often this way, but he didn't just become that way out of the blue.

I think his environment had a lot to do with it. Either way, NO ONE can possibly understand what MJ went through. No one's been in his shoes or went through what he did. He truly did lead a fascinating yet tragic life in many ways and I wont even pretend I know what it was like to be him.

We as the public don't even know the half of it and I doubt we ever will.

thanks for the reply. you have brought up some valid points.... wanting to seem more approachable especially to kids. Maybe decrease that fear factor that some people have around Black men. Also it would be part of his persona to come off as a gentle lamb with the gift to sing and dance. That is how I think of MJ. And another valid point that as a super talented performer, it is true that they are so creative that they borderline eccentric which is the just this side of sanity. So I think most truly gifted people teeter on the edge. That is what makes them special and at the same time so self destructive.

"Remember, one man's filler is another man's killer" -- Haystack
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #207 posted 09/28/11 8:36pm

prodigalfan

avatar

Timmy84 said:

prodigalfan said:

First let me say that this post means no disrespect.

I have a question that maybe fans of MJ have no answer for. But here it goes anyway.

I heard the MJ voice recording and was FLOORED that his voice was so deep. I think that shocked me even more than the slurred-by-drugs voice.

Here is my question. Does anyone know why... has it ever been addressed in interviews/gossip etc. WHY did MJ have a stage voice that was several octaves higher than his natural speaking voice? Why did he use this voice ALL the time except in the sole presence of his inner circle?

I just don't know how he was able to remember to use his stage voice for concerts, and videos, and even in times of distress like the pepsi commercial fire... didn't he talk to the fans while being carried out on a gurney... using this same stage voice. What about when he is pissed off at the paparazzi... did he ever "slip" and cuss or mumble something in his natural voice.

I don't know why... but just that alone has deeply disturbed me about MJ. Like I dunno... he was a little off.... ya know? Not trying to be disrespectful.... just truly bewildered.

Like I and Cinnamon said, it was probably to appear nonthreatening (and androgynous). But there were a few times where his deeper voice could be heard (the '93 Super Bowl performance, the intro to "You Rock My World", etc).

Is that the one where he is bantering with Chris Tucker? I really liked his chemistry with Tucker and so You Rock My Worlds is one of my favorite post Thriller songs.

"Remember, one man's filler is another man's killer" -- Haystack
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #208 posted 09/28/11 8:36pm

Timmy84

prodigalfan said:

Cinnamon234 said:

I think the high voice was MJ's attempt to seem approachable and non-threatening to the public. When he was with his Family & Friends, he spoke normally for the most part, but remember, Diana Ross was an idol of his and I do believe he tried to emulate some of her mannerisms and speech. MJ would also slouch in certain pictures I noticed when he was in his 20's to appear shorter than he was I believe (On the other hand, later on his life it seemed he'd often wear shoes with lifts to appear taller). I just think he wanted to appear non-threating and childlike.

That's my theory anyway, but where MJ is concerned, you just don't know with him.

And I think to say MJ was "off" is not inaccurate, but I just feel that none of us can understand his life. He was always a different or unique individuals, most people who are extremely talented or geniuses are often this way, but he didn't just become that way out of the blue.

I think his environment had a lot to do with it. Either way, NO ONE can possibly understand what MJ went through. No one's been in his shoes or went through what he did. He truly did lead a fascinating yet tragic life in many ways and I wont even pretend I know what it was like to be him.

We as the public don't even know the half of it and I doubt we ever will.

thanks for the reply. you have brought up some valid points.... wanting to seem more approachable especially to kids. Maybe decrease that fear factor that some people have around Black men. Also it would be part of his persona to come off as a gentle lamb with the gift to sing and dance. That is how I think of MJ. And another valid point that as a super talented performer, it is true that they are so creative that they borderline eccentric which is the just this side of sanity. So I think most truly gifted people teeter on the edge. That is what makes them special and at the same time so self destructive.

And Michael knew this. That's why he worked so hard to create that image, an image that also almost destroyed him in the process when it comes to the allegations and stuff. It was like he couldn't win.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #209 posted 09/28/11 8:37pm

Timmy84

prodigalfan said:

Timmy84 said:

Like I and Cinnamon said, it was probably to appear nonthreatening (and androgynous). But there were a few times where his deeper voice could be heard (the '93 Super Bowl performance, the intro to "You Rock My World", etc).

Is that the one where he is bantering with Chris Tucker? I really liked his chemistry with Tucker and so You Rock My Worlds is one of my favorite post Thriller songs.

Yep that's the one.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Page 7 of 24 « First<34567891011>Last »
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Forums > Music: Non-Prince > Discuss Everything and Anything MJ