mjscarousal said:

Scorp said:

Jermaine, Marlon, Jackie, Tito, and Randy

they have never ever suggested that Michael wasnt the centerpiece and most talented member of the Jackson Five

that's not a debate, especially after Michael cracked the code w/Thriller

but history is being rewritten in a way that paints the picture that the brothers were stand bys on stage when the fact was J5 was the ultimate self contained unit on the scene, proof in that is the countless number of acts who patterned their presentation afer them,

The Osmonds, The Sylvers, Force MDs, New Edition, Troop, Five Star, Menudo, Boyz II Men, Backstreet Boys, N Sync, 98 degrees....we can go down the line

People have said consistently this entire time that the Jackson boys, even the girls in their own way were talented, not sure why you think they are being slated.

I'm referring to actual history that's being rewritten

phunkdaddy said:

TD3 said:

BLASPHEMY!

Thank you, so many people want to create a fictional narrative... on the org.

Especially folk that weren't even born then.

amazing ain't it?

Scorp said:

mjscarousal said:

People have said consistently this entire time that the Jackson boys, even the girls in their own way were talented, not sure why you think they are being slated.

I'm referring to actual history that's being rewritten

I'm confused.

Everyone has said all the Jackson siblings were talented. However, Michael's talent was special and unique. I don't think that is slighting the other Jackson members. That IS just a fact. Even Michael's brothers would say the same thing. So you honestly think they were all on the SAME level of talent and appeal? I don't understand why some feel the other Jacksons are being slighted just because people are acknowledging that Michael's talent was unique. The brothers worked well together on albums and performances but that still does not change the fact that Michael stood out and there was obviously something more special about him even going back to the J5 days. Michael was a unique and rare talent. I actually think there are people slighting Michael's unique talent and abilities by trying to justify it with insisting J5 made MJ We all know that MJ got his start from the J5 but his god given talent was something he was BORN with not something that his father or his brothers gave him.... but then again this is this is prince.org they will do anything to slight MJ.

[Edited 9/21/15 7:14am]

terrig said:

BlackCat1985 said:

lowkey said: They love to down play Janet's success and talent. I will always stand by the notion that Janet has it harder than her peers. Because she has to constantly prove to people that having the last name Jackson doesn't guarantee success...look at all the other Jacksons. Are any of them selling out Arena sized shows? Hell naw! But she is. All on her own. She's worked hard for every bit of success she's had. And people still don't want to give her credit for it. [Edited 9/19/15 19:50pm]

okay lets drop the 'they' bs.

theres no doubt janet is a superstar. but janet cant freaking sing. just like madonna, they are both talented artists but lets not call them great voices because they aren't. janet had the infrastructure, money and connections that put her on a path since the day she was born. let's not act like she'd be where she is now, if she was janet nobody.

janet was MADE. i even own all her music and have been to her shows....i love her...but its a formulaic pop star trajectory. likewise the jackson 5 was MADE.

michaels talent was a gift from god that none of them could match or eclipse. michale would have been who he is if hed been born to wolves in the forest.

that wasnt the question...the question was is janet jackson not a superstar in her own right? also if the j5 was made how can you exclude michael, the bottom line is michael jackson came from the jackson 5, you cant rewrite history to fit your own beliefs or narrative. its impossible to say michael would have made it out of gary,indiana to become the king of pop without the jackson 5.

lowkey said:

SoulAlive said:

But he didn't say that Michael made it out of gary indiana on his own. He said he thought that Michael COULD HAVE made it out on his own because of his god given talent. He's giving his opinion on what possibly could have been and just because that is not the reality of what did happened doesn't mean he is not entitled to his opinion.

BlackCat1985 said:

SoulAlive said:

This is so funny

I remember,back in 1988,reading a review of her album.The writer said....

These days,it's not always about being Aretha....you just have to be vocally convincing.Latoya is neither.

Damn!! That was mean!

LOL!!! Oh toy-toy...

This thread isn't very relevatory.

Probably every single person at the Grammys has led somewhat of a charmed life to arrive there, so debating possibilities about their arrival is moot.

lowkey said:

BlackCat1985 said:

SoulAlive said:

jackson35 said:

micheal really started to get the attention is when he went solo, but before then it was his brothers

Nope.Even in the Jackson 5 days,Michael stood out.He was clearly the "star".

keep in mind in the 70's it was about your instument of choice. mj was for the tinyboppers, the highs schoolers cared more about randy on the bongos or keyboards, jermaine on bass, tito on guitar, jonny jackson, on drums, randy rancifer on keys. nobody cared that much about micheal among the older crowed because he didn't play an instument.

phunkdaddy said:

TD3 said:

BLASPHEMY!

Thank you, so many people want to create a fictional narrative... on the org.

Especially folk that weren't even born then.

Preach on!

I'm not sure that the impact of the J5 phenomenon can be fully appreciated by people who grew up only exposed to MJ and Janet. We've always had great musical groups but the Jackson Five were unlike any who came before them.

Those of us who were around at the time know that groups who came before the J5 and those who came after the J5 influence were very different.

Scorp said:

Jermaine, Marlon, Jackie, Tito, and Randy

they have never ever suggested that Michael wasnt the centerpiece and most talented member of the Jackson Five

that's not a debate, especially after Michael cracked the code w/Thriller

but history is being rewritten in a way that paints the picture that the brothers were stand bys on stage when the fact was J5 was the ultimate self contained unit on the scene, proof in that is the countless number of acts who patterned their presentation afer them,

The Osmonds, The Sylvers, Force MDs, New Edition, Troop, Five Star, Menudo, Boyz II Men, Backstreet Boys, N Sync, 98 degrees....we can go down the line

jackson35 said:

SoulAlive said:

Nope.Even in the Jackson 5 days,Michael stood out.He was clearly the "star".

keep in mind in the 70's it was about your instument of choice. mj was for the tinyboppers, the highs schoolers cared more about randy on the bongos or keyboards, jermaine on bass, tito on guitar, jonny jackson, on drums, randy rancifer on keys. nobody cared that much about micheal among the older crowed because he didn't play an instument.

In the seventies it was ALL about musicians/bands.

We were all mainly into Jermaine and Tito, mostly Jermaine. We pawned Michael off onto my cousin's eight year old sister who used to follow us around all the time.....wasn't nobody checking for Michael, he was kid stuff.

jackson35 said:

SoulAlive said:

Nope.Even in the Jackson 5 days,Michael stood out.He was clearly the "star".

keep in mind in the 70's it was about your instument of choice. mj was for the tinyboppers, the highs schoolers cared more about randy on the bongos or keyboards, jermaine on bass, tito on guitar, jonny jackson, on drums, randy rancifer on keys. nobody cared that much about micheal among the older crowed because he didn't play an instument.

MJ's voice was his instrument back then.Listen to "Who's Loving You".He was singing with the power and intensity of an adult.That's why people were buying those records.

SoulAlive said:

jackson35 said:

keep in mind in the 70's it was about your instument of choice. mj was for the tinyboppers, the highs schoolers cared more about randy on the bongos or keyboards, jermaine on bass, tito on guitar, jonny jackson, on drums, randy rancifer on keys. nobody cared that much about micheal among the older crowed because he didn't play an instument.

MJ's voice was his instrument back then.Listen to "Who's Loving You".He was singing with the power and intensity of an adult.That's why people were buying those records.

Not exactly. I lived that era and Jackson35 is exactly right. It was much more about the group back then.

Just to put you guys up on game. The reason that the suits isolate one group member to focus on isn't only because they may or may not be a bit more talented and charismatic....it's also according to who is most vulnerable to manipulation. Don't forget this is a business.

With a solo act as opposed to a group the distribution of the money is different and the handlers have a chance to make a lot more when the pie doesn't need to be divided into so many pieces. An isolated person is also easier to control than a group of people.

By the time Michael peeped the game it was too late and he paid with his life.

^^I hope it doesn't appear that I'm downplaying the other brother's contributions.I'm not.I'm just saying that,in many groups,there's always that one member that stands out and becomes the "superstar".In this group,Michael was that member.

SoulAlive said:

^^I hope it doesn't appear that I'm downplaying the other brother's contributions.I'm not.I'm just saying that,in many groups,there's always that one member that stands out and becomes the "superstar".In this group,Michael was that member.

I don't think you're downplaying and it may have turned out that way but what I'm saying is that wasn't always the case and also it was for other reasons in addition to Michael's talent. He was very talented and also more profitable solo than he was with a group.

babynoz said:

babynoz said:

SoulAlive said:

MJ's voice was his instrument back then.Listen to "Who's Loving You".He was singing with the power and intensity of an adult.That's why people were buying those records.

Not exactly. I lived that era and Jackson35 is exactly right. It was much more about the group back then.

Just to put you guys up on game. The reason that the suits isolate one group member to focus on isn't only because they may or may not be a bit more talented and charismatic....it's also according to who is most vulnerable to manipulation. Don't forget this is a business.

With a solo act as opposed to a group the distribution of the money is different and the handlers have a chance to make a lot more when the pie doesn't need to be divided into so many pieces. An isolated person is also easier to control than a group of people.

By the time Michael peeped the game it was too late and he paid with his life.

Bingo!

mjscarousal said:

But he didn't say that Michael made it out of gary indiana on his own. He said he thought that Michael COULD HAVE made it out on his own because of his god given talent. He's giving his opinion on what possibly could have been and just because that is not the reality of what did happened doesn't mean he is not entitled to his opinion.

but nobody can realistically say without the jackson 5 mj could have still made it, you would have to change the entire trajectory of his life. michael had a father who played guitarand older brothers who taught themself to play instruments while singing around the house, the daddy finds out his sons have talent and decides to make them a group, little mj wanted to sing with his brothers, he shows that he could also sing. the father makes a group, rehearses them,prepares them and when the time came for their big break they were ready. if you take away all of this you would not have the michael jackson that became the king of pop.

babynoz said:

Fame and money can be the root of all evil

I recall after Michael passing several interviews he gave were reprinted. I remember reading Michael telling the interview, when he turned 19 he knew he wanted a solo career. Reading between the lines Michael wanted to get out from under his father's thumb and wanted to be out on his own. Michael said, ' his brothers and he didn't see much of the money they'd made as the Jackson 5 / The Jacksons. Michael said, they were given an allowance but it was nominal.

To babynoz point about the Jackson 5...

In my humble opinion, the Jackscon 5 were the 1st band who represented "young baby boomers" to be more specific pre-teen and teenage black baby boomers. Most of the Motown, Philly, and Stax artist were older than a significant percentage or their fans. The Jackson's, we could relate to them because they were our ages... from high school to late elementary / junior high-school. These are the boys we saw play the sock-hops and talent shows. All artist use to do matinee concerts because percentage of their auidence were 8 to 15 years of age... pre / teenagers who parents wouldn't allow them to attend a 7:00PM clock concert.

Michael brothers weren't in the back ground just keeping to the beat. With all do respect, if Michael had been signed to a solo career from jump he probably would faded into oblivion like some of the pre-teen singers did. Let's get real, those guys weren't writing their own stuff are calling some shots (artistically) until they departed Motown. To Michaels and his brothers credit,they had been honing their musicianship and paying attention to production and writing music.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Edited 9/21/15 19:06pm]

SoulAlive said:

^^I hope it doesn't appear that I'm downplaying the other brother's contributions.I'm not.I'm just saying that,in many groups,there's always that one member that stands out and becomes the "superstar".In this group,Michael was that member.

Agree.

I am not sure why people are lecturing on the other brothers talents when everyone has agreed all the brothers and family members were talented. However, MJ was clearly the star in the Jackson 5. I am not sure why people are trying to minimize that fact.

lowkey said:

mjscarousal said:

But he didn't say that Michael made it out of gary indiana on his own. He said he thought that Michael COULD HAVE made it out on his own because of his god given talent. He's giving his opinion on what possibly could have been and just because that is not the reality of what did happened doesn't mean he is not entitled to his opinion.

but nobody can realistically say without the jackson 5 mj could have still made it, you would have to change the entire trajectory of his life. michael had a father who played guitarand older brothers who taught themself to play instruments while singing around the house, the daddy finds out his sons have talent and decides to make them a group, little mj wanted to sing with his brothers, he shows that he could also sing. the father makes a group, rehearses them,prepares them and when the time came for their big break they were ready. if you take away all of this you would not have the michael jackson that became the king of pop.

But that is YOUR opinion which you are entitled too. I don't see anything wrong with someone making a prediction of what could have been. Michael was a unique talent so I think anything is possible. Who knows? Michael could have possibly been discovered a different way. These are all opinions at the end of the day which means there is no right or wrong. We obviously can't change history and the reality of what DID happen. However, I don't like the idea of people scolding others for their opinion. He never said it was a fact nor did he try to rewrite history with insisting MJ made it without J5. I just think some people feel threatened about the fact that Michael was the most talented in the family.

mjscarousal said:

SoulAlive said:

^^I hope it doesn't appear that I'm downplaying the other brother's contributions.I'm not.I'm just saying that,in many groups,there's always that one member that stands out and becomes the "superstar".In this group,Michael was that member.

Agree.

I am not sure why people are lecturing on the other brothers talents when everyone has agreed all the brothers and family members were talented. However, MJ was clearly the star in the Jackson 5. I am not sure why people are trying to minimize that fact.

another way to look at this: how many Jacksons album did they record without Michael? I know they did one in the late 80s but it wasn't exactly a huge success.If they had done the Victory Tour without Michael,who would have shown up to the shows?

TD3 said:

Fame and money can be the root of all evil

I recall after Michael passing several interviews he gave were reprinted. I remember reading Michael telling the interview, when he turned 19 he knew he wanted a solo career. Reading between the lines Michael wanted to get out from under his father's thumb and wanted to be out on his own. Michael said, ' his brothers and he didn't see much of the money they'd made as the Jackson 5 / The Jacksons. Michael said, they were given an allowance but it was nominal.

To babynoz point about the Jackson 5...

In my humble opinion, the Jackscon 5 were the 1st band who represented "young baby boomers" to be more specific pre-teen and teenage black baby boomers. Most of the Motown, Philly, and Stax artist were older than a significant percentage or their fans. The Jackson's, we could relate to them because they were our ages... from high school to late elementary / junior high-school. These are the boys we saw play the sock-hops and talent shows. All artist use to do matinee concerts because percentage of their auidence were 8 to 15 years of age... pre / teenagers who parents wouldn't allow them to attend a 7:00PM clock concert.

Michael brothers weren't in the back ground just keeping to the beat. With all do respect, if Michael had been signed to a solo career from jump he probably would faded into oblivion like some of the pre-teen singers did. Let's get real, those guys weren't writing their own stuff are calling some shots (artistically) until they departed Motown. To Michaels and his brothers credit,they had been honing their musicianship and paying attention to production and writing music.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Edited 9/21/15 19:06pm]

Truth.

SoulAlive said:

mjscarousal said:

Agree.

I am not sure why people are lecturing on the other brothers talents when everyone has agreed all the brothers and family members were talented. However, MJ was clearly the star in the Jackson 5. I am not sure why people are trying to minimize that fact.

another way to look at this: how many Jacksons album did they record without Michael? I know they did one in the late 80s but it wasn't exactly a huge success. If they had done the Victory Tour without Michael,who would have shown up to the shows?

Scorp said:

babynoz said:

Not exactly. I lived that era and Jackson35 is exactly right. It was much more about the group back then.

Just to put you guys up on game. The reason that the suits isolate one group member to focus on isn't only because they may or may not be a bit more talented and charismatic....it's also according to who is most vulnerable to manipulation. Don't forget this is a business.

With a solo act as opposed to a group the distribution of the money is different and the handlers have a chance to make a lot more when the pie doesn't need to be divided into so many pieces. An isolated person is also easier to control than a group of people.

By the time Michael peeped the game it was too late and he paid with his life.

Excellent points, excellent Once the stragglers separated him from his family, and geared him to extreme choices and destructive path, his life and career would exist in a constant state of flux, for that reason alone, out of all these years I have referred to him as the King of Pop because that distinction has undermined the essense of his talent, and the stragglers left hin out to dry, all alone without the means to cope effectively for how everything turned If he had not been led estray, he would still be present today and in full stride

Many people don't realize what kind of sick, depraved hyenas celebs have to put up with. It's even worse for child stars. Hell, Mike didn't even have a childhood and often spoke about how deeply that affected him.

We will never know the price that some people have paid for fame. Makes me feel like crying all over again.