mjscarousal said:

SoulAlive said:

mjscarousal said:

I also kinda disagree when you say MJ's impact wasn't the same as MLK. Yea of course MJ did not end Jim Crow and segregation but I think his music had a lot to do with bringing different races of people together. He was the first Black pop star with that particularly reach. Hes right up there with MLK, Nelson Mendala in terms of global figures. When I went to South Africa, there was a picture of Nelson Mendela right beside Michael. We might sit back and say these people were "just artists" but they weren't just artists to a lot of people around the world. Mjs music brought a lot of racises and cultures together. I agree with you, many here are not familiar with the charities, contributions and humanitarian work of these artists.

Michael Jackson was an amazing artist and performer,but let's not go overboard.He was no Martin Luther King

Thank you! Good Grief.

SoulAlive said:

mjscarousal said:

I also kinda disagree when you say MJ's impact wasn't the same as MLK. Yea of course MJ did not end Jim Crow and segregation but I think his music had a lot to do with bringing different races of people together. He was the first Black pop star with that particularly reach. Hes right up there with MLK, Nelson Mendala in terms of global figures. When I went to South Africa, there was a picture of Nelson Mendela right beside Michael. We might sit back and say these people were "just artists" but they weren't just artists to a lot of people around the world. Mjs music brought a lot of racises and cultures together. I agree with you, many here are not familiar with the charities, contributions and humanitarian work of these artists.

Michael Jackson was an amazing artist and performer,but let's not go overboard.He was no Martin Luther King

SoulAlive said:

mjscarousal said:

I also kinda disagree when you say MJ's impact wasn't the same as MLK. Yea of course MJ did not end Jim Crow and segregation but I think his music had a lot to do with bringing different races of people together. He was the first Black pop star with that particularly reach. Hes right up there with MLK, Nelson Mendala in terms of global figures. When I went to South Africa, there was a picture of Nelson Mendela right beside Michael. We might sit back and say these people were "just artists" but they weren't just artists to a lot of people around the world. Mjs music brought a lot of racises and cultures together. I agree with you, many here are not familiar with the charities, contributions and humanitarian work of these artists.

Michael Jackson was an amazing artist and performer,but let's not go overboard.He was no Martin Luther King

Please dont make up things that I did not say. I NEVER called Michael, Martin Luther King and you know I didn't, so don't say I said something I clearly did not say.

Free2BMe said:

SoulAlive said:

Michael Jackson was an amazing artist and performer,but let's not go overboard.He was no Martin Luther King

Mjscarousal said that Michael is right up there with MLK and Nelson Mandela in terms of global figures. She is correct. Michael is as well-known GLOBALLY as the aforementioned men. No one is saying that Michael is Martin Luther King. [Edited 6/14/17 16:43pm]

Thank you.

Rationality and reading comprehension seems to go out the window when it comes to the Jacksons on the org.

liljojo said:

mjscarousal said

This thread is a mess ain't it?

I am shocked about the Prince comments too. They are misinformed about what he has done for Black people on his OWN site! I am not shocked about their remarks on Michael because the org hates the Jacksons but its interesting how they are minimizing the impact Prince made and had on the Black community in terms of giving back when this is a Prince fan site.

I also kinda disagree when you say MJ's impact wasn't the same as MLK. Yea of course MJ did not end Jim Crow and segregation but I think his music had a lot to do with bringing different races of people together. He was the first Black pop star with that particularly reach. Hes right up there with MLK, Nelson Mendala in terms of global figures. When I went to South Africa, there was a picture of Nelson Mendela right beside Michael. We might sit back and say these people were "just artists" but they weren't just artists to a lot of people around the world. Mjs music brought a lot of racises and cultures together. I agree with you, many here are not familiar with the charities, contributions and humanitarian work of these artists.

I just can't put MJ in the same ball park as MLK, he come close with the spread world peace and harmony message and non-violence but MLK start seperating with religious belief and contractual obiligations for MJ. MLK was a preacher and MJ was pop artist phenom which made him more known than MLK. I'm a MJ DIEHARD admirer love him to the end. Sometimes it hurts to hear his songs. Miss the days I can listen to his music without getting sad, and the era that gets to me is the Jackson 5 kid era because I lost my child/infant in 2015. But back on topic, MJ will never be seen as a MLK figure outside his fan base and even within due especially 1993 and again 2005 I think it was but the child molestation charges really fucked him up along with his stubborness and little rebel spirit. I have a brother and he's the baby plus a virgo like Michael and if they feel they aren't doing anything wrong they will continue doing whatever it is and will debate you to the end of life and hell abyss. When Michael wasn't being MJ and humanized himself and was just himself was the best of Michael Joseph Jackson the human, not the superstar. This even carried over into his songs for example people act like the BAD album is terrible but love and respect Man in The Mirror Dirty Diana & Leave Me Alone. Again people don't like HIStory disc 2 album but Scream, They Don't Care About Us, Stranger in Moscow (the song about my life lol), Hip Hop fans love This Time Around, the hidden gem Tabloid Junkie, Earth Song, and You're Not Alone folks love those songs. Damn history got some jams on it lol minus Little Susie, that song scares the shit out of me which I have to give him props for. But I hate little susie, it's like a hidden chunky or that killer clown IT theme song. Michael fight was towards the entertainment industry for the black community and fighting the injustice of the entertainment industry because he had that experience more which cost his life to be a Target. Especially after he came to several other artists rescue with Mariah Carey being the highest and then made RACIST Elvis fans mad when he married Lisa Presly, Lisa own mom was against it. Michael was cray cray man. He did stuff on purpose. Michael and the black community relationship became strained when they felt he turned his back on his family (whatever to that lol), skin color change, and really bad when Don King called him a rich ni66er. Then the church community mainly Christianity and Catholic churches was against him and later jehovah witnesses. So Michael really never gave much of a fuck around the mid 90's as he felt the black community turned their back on him so MJ starting working towards world peace instead of the betterment of the black community. MJ and the black community didn't start getting back together and healing until the 2nd case happen but little did they know that MJ will be gone a few years later in 2009 which is why it was really hard for the black community to handle his death. Which is why I know how die-hard Prince admirers are feeling, that shit feels like a piece of your life is gone. MLK never suffered like MJ because they blow his fucking head off. So for all of you that want to know what the non-violence routine brings you go read MLK history, and for you that want to know how raw truth can get your ass killed by your own black community go read Malcolm Little, 2pac, Christopher Wallace, and Eminem & T.I. friends that was murdered. Being well known never mix good with raw truth as it can cost your life at the end.

Generational understandings and differences is what make us all clash. Myis the 90's and 00's music era and 2pac was my Cassius Clay or MLK. So I understand where you coming from MJcarousal. I like hard raw truth just like 2pac was giving, MJ didn't dare cross the lines 2pac crossed nor Elvis or Prince. Real hip-hop is telling the truth in it's rawest form which is why a lot of people don't like rap and thought it would be dead by now but it is not the strongest music genre. Eminem was the biggest surprised because he was the first time I saw a white guy be treated like a black make. Love people like him!

[Edited 6/14/17 17:37pm]

I never said that MJ and MLK were the same in terms of their impact BUT they are the same in terms of being global world cultural figures.

While I don't think MJ is MLK, I do think MJ broke racial barriers with his music and brought many cultures together through his music, in saying that doesn't mean his impact was the same as MLK in that respect (of course it wasn't).

My point was that MJ is seen as more than just a artist in other global international markets because of his humanitarianism and advocacy work in those countries.

[Edited 6/14/17 23:29pm]

mjscarousal said:

liljojo said:

I just can't put MJ in the same ball park as MLK, he come close with the spread world peace and harmony message and non-violence but MLK start seperating with religious belief and contractual obiligations for MJ. MLK was a preacher and MJ was pop artist phenom which made him more known than MLK. I'm a MJ DIEHARD admirer love him to the end. Sometimes it hurts to hear his songs. Miss the days I can listen to his music without getting sad, and the era that gets to me is the Jackson 5 kid era because I lost my child/infant in 2015. But back on topic, MJ will never be seen as a MLK figure outside his fan base and even within due especially 1993 and again 2005 I think it was but the child molestation charges really fucked him up along with his stubborness and little rebel spirit. I have a brother and he's the baby plus a virgo like Michael and if they feel they aren't doing anything wrong they will continue doing whatever it is and will debate you to the end of life and hell abyss. When Michael wasn't being MJ and humanized himself and was just himself was the best of Michael Joseph Jackson the human, not the superstar. This even carried over into his songs for example people act like the BAD album is terrible but love and respect Man in The Mirror Dirty Diana & Leave Me Alone. Again people don't like HIStory disc 2 album but Scream, They Don't Care About Us, Stranger in Moscow (the song about my life lol), Hip Hop fans love This Time Around, the hidden gem Tabloid Junkie, Earth Song, and You're Not Alone folks love those songs. Damn history got some jams on it lol minus Little Susie, that song scares the shit out of me which I have to give him props for. But I hate little susie, it's like a hidden chunky or that killer clown IT theme song. Michael fight was towards the entertainment industry for the black community and fighting the injustice of the entertainment industry because he had that experience more which cost his life to be a Target. Especially after he came to several other artists rescue with Mariah Carey being the highest and then made RACIST Elvis fans mad when he married Lisa Presly, Lisa own mom was against it. Michael was cray cray man. He did stuff on purpose. Michael and the black community relationship became strained when they felt he turned his back on his family (whatever to that lol), skin color change, and really bad when Don King called him a rich ni66er. Then the church community mainly Christianity and Catholic churches was against him and later jehovah witnesses. So Michael really never gave much of a fuck around the mid 90's as he felt the black community turned their back on him so MJ starting working towards world peace instead of the betterment of the black community. MJ and the black community didn't start getting back together and healing until the 2nd case happen but little did they know that MJ will be gone a few years later in 2009 which is why it was really hard for the black community to handle his death. Which is why I know how die-hard Prince admirers are feeling, that shit feels like a piece of your life is gone. MLK never suffered like MJ because they blow his fucking head off. So for all of you that want to know what the non-violence routine brings you go read MLK history, and for you that want to know how raw truth can get your ass killed by your own black community go read Malcolm Little, 2pac, Christopher Wallace, and Eminem & T.I. friends that was murdered. Being well known never mix good with raw truth as it can cost your life at the end.

Generational understandings and differences is what make us all clash. Myis the 90's and 00's music era and 2pac was my Cassius Clay or MLK. So I understand where you coming from MJcarousal. I like hard raw truth just like 2pac was giving, MJ didn't dare cross the lines 2pac crossed nor Elvis or Prince. Real hip-hop is telling the truth in it's rawest form which is why a lot of people don't like rap and thought it would be dead by now but it is not the strongest music genre. Eminem was the biggest surprised because he was the first time I saw a white guy be treated like a black make. Love people like him!

[Edited 6/14/17 17:37pm]

I never said that MJ and MLK were the same in terms of their impact BUT they are the same in terms of being global world cultural figures.

While I don't think MJ is MLK, I do think MJ broke racial barriers with his music and brought many cultures together through his music, in saying that doesn't mean his impact was the same as MLK in that respect (of course it wasn't).

My point was that MJ is seen as more than just a artist in other global international markets because of his humanitarianism and advocacy work in those countries.

[Edited 6/14/17 23:29pm]

Sorry if my post sounded like I was saying you said that. I was actually agreeing with you with a different point of view. But I do agree and I was saying MJ was actually more well known than MLK globally and trying to point out why and how many people from a religious standpoint was attacking him. Mj was known as the gate keeper of hell in church and Prince......you already know what churches thought of him.

Sorry and here's some flowers

mjscarousal said:

I never said that MJ and MLK were the same in terms of their impact BUT they are the same in terms of being global world cultural figures.

While I don't think MJ is MLK, I do think MJ broke racial barriers with his music and brought many cultures together through his music, in saying that doesn't mean his impact was the same as MLK in that respect (of course it wasn't).

My point was that MJ is seen as more than just a artist in other global international markets because of his humanitarianism and advocacy work in those countries.

[Edited 6/14/17 23:29pm]

Yes, you did say that Jackson and King were the same in terms of their impact, or, why even
compare the two in terms of being "global world cultural figures" in the first place? And there
is no proof that Jackson did anything that hadn't been done before by musicians in bringing
disparate cultures together: that's the history of many Black American artists performing Black
American art forms, whether it is jazz, blues, rock n roll, R&B, rap, you're going to see cultures
mixing together, so stop making it seem like Michael Jackson "broke racial barriers with his
music" when Black American entertainers have been doing that for years before he was born.
The fact that Michael Jackson packed stadiums around the globe with people from various walks
of life was not anything God hadn't seen done before by a musician/entertainer/performer;
that's why God makes 'em.

But yeah, your idolatry got the best of you when you said:

^^^^^^ ,

I said they are the same in terms of being global world culture figures, that is why I said I disagreed. What are you not understanding about that? You obviously don't like Michael so regardless of how many times I say what he has done, you are going to find some weird excuse for it. AGAIN, I find it interesting that you dismiss ALL of MJ's philanthropy work but you defend Elvis so hard. Here is a list of some of the Black organizations that MJ supported
Minority Aids Project

Motown Museum

NAACP

Transafrica

United Negro College Fund (UNCF)

United Negro College Fund Ladder’s of Hope

YMCA – 28th Street/Crenshaw

Congressional Black Caucus (CBC)

Big Brothers of Greater Los Angeles

Brotherhood Crusade

AIDS Project L.A

Dakar Foundation

National Rainbow CoalitionNational Solidarity Fund

The Sickle Cell Research Foundation

The Carter Center’s Atlanta Project

Million Man March

This is a drawing of MLK that MJ did, his signature is at the bottom

He was even crowned King in Africa

He visited various African countries and did charity and advocacy work there.

Now tell me again what BLACK organizations and artists did Elvis advocate for.... I'll wait.

This thread is a JOKE.

[Edited 6/15/17 9:45am]

[Edited 6/15/17 9:51am]

liljojo said:

mjscarousal said:

I never said that MJ and MLK were the same in terms of their impact BUT they are the same in terms of being global world cultural figures.

While I don't think MJ is MLK, I do think MJ broke racial barriers with his music and brought many cultures together through his music, in saying that doesn't mean his impact was the same as MLK in that respect (of course it wasn't).

My point was that MJ is seen as more than just a artist in other global international markets because of his humanitarianism and advocacy work in those countries.

[Edited 6/14/17 23:29pm]

Sorry if my post sounded like I was saying you said that. I was actually agreeing with you with a different point of view. But I do agree and I was saying MJ was actually more well known than MLK globally and trying to point out why and how many people from a religious standpoint was attacking him. Mj was known as the gate keeper of hell in church and Prince......you already know what churches thought of him.

Sorry and here's some flowers

No need to say sorry, it was just a misunderstanding, its all good and thank you for making a great thread topic!

lol thanks for flowers!

[Edited 6/15/17 9:51am]

What kind of ridiculousness is this? Am I supposed to post pictures of Martin Luther King, Jr
in order to show you that you're making a false comparison because you're a Michael Jackson
stan? Do I post pictures of the March on Washington? How about if I post pictures of the
MLK memorial in DC? Or, better yet, maybe I should post the Louw's pictures taken right
after MLK was shot at the Lorraine Motel - would you then understand the silly comparison
you've been making here between MLK and Michael fucking Jackson?

. . . and for Carousal to contextualize those pictures of Michael Jackson hanging out with various
brown skinned people as a condemnation of Elvis Presley for not being more overt and adamant
about his advocation for Black American recording artists is also fucking ridiculous and intellectually
dishonest as that is not what the point of this thread is about, as given by the OP.

mjscarousal said:

liljojo said:

I agree! I will edit that part and replace depressed with maybe upset or not happy tomorrow when I post the my next part about Prince and MJ challenging the industry and fans to read and learn to OWN your works and the difference between partnership and just another slave. Where I'm getting at soon is to how Prince and Michael fought so hard to tell the next generations the blueprint to owning your businesses and how to do investments. I'm writing it out now and hope I can get some help and knowledge from everyone who doesn't mind sharing their point of views.

Thank you for posting, I really appreciate it, thank you.

You would think that given all that MJ, Prince, Stevie, and the Black pioneers did to challenge the system this current generation would try to model more off of it. However, this generation doesn't seem to care about ownership and standing up for themselves against corporate big heads. Fame and success is more important to them than their dignity and freedom. That is why I feel very sorry for this generation. There is only a few that don't allow the industry to manipulate them and they play by their own rules (i.e. Janelle Monae). Unfornately, these type of artists don't get their just due but I have tremendous more respect for them. I have respect for anybody willing to stand up for themselves and whats right and willing to risk their reputation to do so. That is why MJ and Prince are more than just Icons, there heroes.

[Edited 6/7/17 5:09am]

.

VALID POINT, mjs..

I agree that most of today's ("popular") performers

(I hesitate to call most of them "artists" based on what they put out to the public)

are more focused on being rich & making it rain & all that material nonsense

so it's not likely we will see output from these performers that would compare to

fulfillingness' first finale

or

what's goin' on

or

DIRTY MIND..

.

I KNOW there are true artists who actually play instruments & sing & write their own music..

but those ARTISTS hardly get promoted or exposed to the general public.

.

similar to the US (2-party) political system..

the so-called "music business" is rife with a set up & practices

that favor the music companies more than they favor the actual artists.

.

lastly, for the record - I am 1 of those who thinks

OFF THE WALL

IS

Michael's best solo album..

ESPECIALLY the title song..

mltijchr said:

mjscarousal said:

You would think that given all that MJ, Prince, Stevie, and the Black pioneers did to challenge the system this current generation would try to model more off of it. However, this generation doesn't seem to care about ownership and standing up for themselves against corporate big heads. Fame and success is more important to them than their dignity and freedom. That is why I feel very sorry for this generation. There is only a few that don't allow the industry to manipulate them and they play by their own rules (i.e. Janelle Monae). Unfornately, these type of artists don't get their just due but I have tremendous more respect for them. I have respect for anybody willing to stand up for themselves and whats right and willing to risk their reputation to do so. That is why MJ and Prince are more than just Icons, there heroes.

[Edited 6/7/17 5:09am]

.

VALID POINT, mjs..

I agree that most of today's ("popular") performers

(I hesitate to call most of them "artists" based on what they put out to the public)

are more focused on being rich & making it rain & all that material nonsense

so it's not likely we will see output from these performers that would compare to

fulfillingness' first finale

or

what's goin' on

or

DIRTY MIND..

.

I KNOW there are true artists who actually play instruments & sing & write their own music..

but those ARTISTS hardly get promoted or exposed to the general public.

.

similar to the US (2-party) political system..

the so-called "music business" is rife with a set up & practices

that favor the music companies more than they favor the actual artists.

.

lastly, for the record - I am 1 of those who thinks

OFF THE WALL

IS

Michael's best solo album..

ESPECIALLY the title song..

Thank you and I agree.

I also want to add there are political agendas being pushed in todays industry more than ever in the history of music. For example, (I know that awards have always been political) but its bewildering that in todays industry, pop stars can win and buy awards without any legitmacy to them. Back in the day there was at least some merit to awards and award nominations. There are certain stars being pushed more than others and certain messages and themes are pushed more than others. This is all orchestrated, this is not by chance.

[Edited 6/16/17 4:10am]

mltijchr said:

mjscarousal said:

You would think that given all that MJ, Prince, Stevie, and the Black pioneers did to challenge the system this current generation would try to model more off of it. However, this generation doesn't seem to care about ownership and standing up for themselves against corporate big heads. Fame and success is more important to them than their dignity and freedom. That is why I feel very sorry for this generation. There is only a few that don't allow the industry to manipulate them and they play by their own rules (i.e. Janelle Monae). Unfornately, these type of artists don't get their just due but I have tremendous more respect for them. I have respect for anybody willing to stand up for themselves and whats right and willing to risk their reputation to do so. That is why MJ and Prince are more than just Icons, there heroes.

[Edited 6/7/17 5:09am]

.

VALID POINT, mjs..

I agree that most of today's ("popular") performers

(I hesitate to call most of them "artists" based on what they put out to the public)

are more focused on being rich & making it rain & all that material nonsense

so it's not likely we will see output from these performers that would compare to

fulfillingness' first finale

or

what's goin' on

or

DIRTY MIND..

What standard of being an "artist" are you appealing to? Otherwise, all you're really saying is
"I don't like today's contemporary music; I prefer whatever decade I was raised on" as most
people do not have any idea of what being an "artist" means. I'm quite sure that artists, hell,
I'm an artist, would like to get paid for their work, so this conception we have of any particular
decade containing "pure or true artists" who didn't want to be rich and/or famous but were
solely interested in producing art, is unfounded.

If you ever read the letters of Vincent Van Gogh to his brother, Theo, you'll see an artist who is
just as concerned with gaining notoriety and making scrilla as he was with producing art. But,
you wouldn't refer to Van Gogh as not being a "true artist," would you? So, no, Carousal's point
is not valid; it's biased. She, like you and me, prefer the eras of music in which we were raised
as neither of you have the ability to articulate the compositional features of today's music, as a
whole, and the same for yesterday's music, as a whole, and then offer up a comparison between
the two demonstrating why one is superior/inferior to the other.

Purplestar88 said:

214 said:

Both Michaeand Prince only "fight back" against the system when the system did not longer played by their rules, stop trying tomake them martyrs,

Don't you agree?

Dasein said:

mjscarousal said:

I agree hun but your not going to get any authentic and intellectual discussions on this predominately White site. Don't let the critcisms get to ya!

I find it comical people are really stanning for Elvis and making him seem like the Great White Hope for Black folks in this thread. Elvis did not give not one damn about us. He didn't build no music schools for us and he damn sure did not pay any of his Black songwriters that wrote all his music so they can miss me with that bullshit. He did not advocate for ANY of the Black musicians and performers he copied. During the 1950's (racially divided and segregated period for Black musicians and Black people) that would have meant a lot. I have yet to see any evidence of it in this thread but they LOVE to have so much criticism for MJ and Prince who actually did advocate and promote Black performers/artists, so dont pay these people no mind.

[Edited 6/12/17 13:15pm]

Well, I'm Black, and I think you're not being honest here: nobody ever, in this thread, made it
seem like Elvis Presley was the Great White Hope for Black folks. You pulled that straight outta
yer butthole, Carousal, and I know you did because I posted history which tells us Elvis Presley
did not like being called the King of Rock N Roll and deferred to Fats Domino. You continue to
present Prince and Michael Jackson as these recording artists who were chiefly concerned with
advocating for Black performers and artists but they were not; they were out to get their own first,
and once their relationships with the recording industry began to sour (coincidentally alongside
their waning popularity and the dramatic paradigm shift within the recording industry), they then
became vocal advocates for recording artists having more freedom.

Get your story straight, and you're the last person in this message board who ought to be criticizing
someone for being a "stan" as anytime the surname "Jackson" is mentioned, you fall flat on your
face in full reverential worship.

You are utterly right, but she is blind and deaf.

mjscarousal said:

Dasein said:

No; I asked that you not make it seem as if Prince and Michael Jackson were initially and mostly
interested in making sure others were good before themselves; and that to frame their gripes with
the record industry as freedom fighting/advocating was merely your martyrizing two of your idols.

Nobody is "stanning" for Elvis Presley; instead, we're telling you that you're criticism of him for not
being the advocate you erroneously think Michael Jackson and Prince were is wrongheaded. I love
Billy Corgan and Elliott Smith; yet, they never argued for the rights of Black recording artists.
Does that mean then that I should criticize them for as much? Of course not! What you're doing
here is wanting to find fault with Presley so you create this standard you think he won't be able to
meet in order to then justify the fault-finding - but, this is really disingenuous on your part. And,
nobody said anything disparaging about Michael Jackson or Prince, so for you to say we "got so
much b.s. to say about" them is another disingenuous misdirection on your part.

And please stop with this "I'm entitled to my opinion" stuff. Of course you're entitled to your opin-
ion, just like someon is entitled to have the opinion that the Earth is flat, not round. But, if you are
entitled to your opinion, then I am likewise entitled to tell you when your opinion is stupid.

You need to read. I never said that BUT they did advocate for Black artists and they DID advocate for social causes and they DID advocate for themselves against the system.

Where is the lie? What is untrue about that? NO lies told.

You keep saying Elvis did all this shit for Black people and still haven't provided any evidence for it. Ya'll are the one martyrizing Elvis as some figure that stood up for Black musicians when he did not.

She/he did not say nothing of the sort. He/she is saying that it's not fair for anyone toi blame Elvis for not standing up for black performers/musicians,composers/artists.

Free2BMe said:

SoulAlive said:

Michael Jackson was an amazing artist and performer,but let's not go overboard.He was no Martin Luther King

Mjscarousal said that Michael is right up there with MLK and Nelson Mandela in terms of global figures. She is correct. Michael is as well-known GLOBALLY as the aforementioned men. No one is saying that Michael is Martin Luther King. [Edited 6/14/17 16:43pm]

That's what she meant indeed.

Dasein said:

mltijchr said:

.

VALID POINT, mjs..

I agree that most of today's ("popular") performers

(I hesitate to call most of them "artists" based on what they put out to the public)

are more focused on being rich & making it rain & all that material nonsense

so it's not likely we will see output from these performers that would compare to

fulfillingness' first finale

or

what's goin' on

or

DIRTY MIND..

What standard of being an "artist" are you appealing to? Otherwise, all you're really saying is
"I don't like today's contemporary music; I prefer whatever decade I was raised on" as most
people do not have any idea of what being an "artist" means. I'm quite sure that artists, hell,
I'm an artist, would like to get paid for their work, so this conception we have of any particular
decade containing "pure or true artists" who didn't want to be rich and/or famous but were
solely interested in producing art, is unfounded.

If you ever read the letters of Vincent Van Gogh to his brother, Theo, you'll see an artist who is
just as concerned with gaining notoriety and making scrilla as he was with producing art. But,
you wouldn't refer to Van Gogh as not being a "true artist," would you? So, no, Carousal's point
is not valid; it's biased. She, like you and me, prefer the eras of music in which we were raised
as neither of you have the ability to articulate the compositional features of today's music, as a
whole, and the same for yesterday's music, as a whole, and then offer up a comparison between
the two demonstrating why one is superior/inferior to the other.

Preach to the choir, but the choir is not listening (choir, meaning carousal)

mjscarousal said:

Please dont make up things that I did not say.... so don't say I said something I clearly did not say.