With Michael Jackson’s passing came passionate arguments concerning his place in the history of music.
He has been compared to Fred Astair, whose dancing abilities far outreached his contemporaries. It’s comparing apples to oranges. Freestyle to precise, classically-taught movement. Solitary dancing (or grinding) to the ability to glide gracefully while leading a partner. No comparisons.
He has been compared to Elvis Presley. Again, no comparison. Elvis was responsible for bringing black music and rock and roll into the mainstream. Every phase of his career led to another iconic event in our music library.
And the Beatles? Are you kidding me? Forget the Beatles and consider the music of John Lennon alone. He influenced generations of kids and adults, and while as self-absorbed as most stars, managed to express a message that made all of us feel connected. It’s the Golden Rule, man. Give it a chance.
On these points I agree with jm. And just esthetically, I always thought post-Jackson Five Michael was banal musically and side-show freakish in his private life. He horrified me on many occasions with his appearance and child-rearing skills. He was one of those sad clown paintings by Red Skelton stored in Dorian Gray’s attic. But the painting stayed the same, little Michael singing “ABC,” while Jackson grew increasingly grotesque.
So, where, in my opinion, does Jackson stand in the history of music? Right smack at the top of our pop music culture. If any disdain is to be directed at Jackson, the same disgust should be applied to every boy band and Britney Spears wannabe on the charts. The sad clown is responsible for these people and their success.
In 1959, Barry Gordy, Jr., founded a record company that would become Motown Records. Soul with a pop influence was the sound and eventually The Supremes, The Four Tops and the Pips were the look. Back-up singers who danced.
Then came the Jackson 5. Twirls and dips and sweeping arm motions were the moves of the day. jm wanted to be a Pip. I wanted to be Michael Jackson. The baby and front man.
Now, jm, at the age of three, was way into the Motown movement before the 1972 special The Jackson 5 Show. But I was transfixed. The Jacksons were different. They were a cohesive group instead of a singer with two to five backup singer/dancers.
And this is what is important. The Jackson 5 was the catalyst for contemporary boy bands like New Edition, New Kids On The Block and the Backstreet Boys. Sure, the Osmonds were around before the Jacksons. Sure, Motown had a history before J5. But the group most identifiable and accessible to the age group responsible for current boy bands is Michael and the Jackson 5.
Simon Cowell, you know I’m right. It wasn’t your idea.
Not only that, singer/dancers like Paula Abdul, Madonna and Britney Spears should acknowledge that Michael did it first. Maybe not the lip-sincing. But who knows? Who the hell can jump around a stage for 90 minutes and still sing? Just ask Milli Vanilli.
So, modern Michael may not have been my cup of tea. His music was self-serving and trite. But his place in Pop/Soul history is pretty much set in stone. His freakishness aside (and who in the music business is sane, anyway, Phil Spector?), he was the single most important influence on modern pop videos and concerts.
I’m not saying that’s a good thing. Just sayin’.