Here's a question that's bubbled in my mind for a long time. I'm well aware that Mike wanted BAD to surpass Thriller. Didn't happen, probably disappointed him, but
certainly didn't kill him. He continued his career and BAD, Dangerous, HIStory were still
massive albums.
Why is it (or where exactly is the source to support it) that many artists or celebrities believe that he wanted to continually top Thriller, so much so that he thought of himself as a massive failure?? I do not understand this. I'm well aware of his professionalism and perfectionism. I believe that his work ethic and his belief in getting "better" were positive aspects. But where is it really that shows that he was tragically devastated by not accomplishing 100 million albums and
continually sought out to chase it anyways until it, in a way, ruined him?
Btw, I greatly admire J.K. Rowling and I totally understand where she's coming from in regards to moving on and taking on different challenges. But whose to say that Michael didn't also? Didn't Michael himself say that even he couldn't keep up with Thriller (I believe in the PHM special)? Isn't it more realistic to realize that after BAD Michael was, indeed, smart enough to know that surpassing Thriller wouldn't likely happen? Where's the evidence to support that he never got over chasing it?
From Rowling:
- Quote :
- Knowing when to let go and move forward is a lesson Rowling said she learned from Michael Jackson, the king of pop who grew up to light the world on fire with his own "Thriller."
"He wanted to do 'Thriller' again and again and again and instead of accepting that he had produced one of the best albums of all time, and he would always have that, and freeing him to do, I don't know, to do something maybe a little more offbeat or explore, and risk failure, I mean, it's tragic, actually. It's very, very sad that someone with that amount of talent would be chasing that," she said.
This has been said by Oprah too. That he didn't understand that he couldn't do it again. I understand their sentiments, but
come on. Does he not get any credit for being smart enough to figure that out too? Had any of these people also recognized the terrible trials he had to go through as well in his career? And that he certainly was a special case, considering he started his professional career as a 10 year old?
Sorry, but I just keep hearing that and I can't quite buy into it like they relate it. I'm all for accepting new challenges, but who's to say Michael didn't (and
couldn't, by their account) understand that? I think they sell him short.
Another thing about Rowling's comment. This part:
- Quote :
- and freeing him to do, I don't know, to do something maybe a little more offbeat or explore, and risk failure
I'm guessing that many never took the time to appreciate how Michael's music evolved. That he did explore, experiment with different sounds, and that his successive albums DO NOT sound like Thriller - especially Dangerous and onward. He even wanted to eventually get into movies in the long run. He also wanted to compose classical music, correct?
Most of us, his audience, appreciated him as a musician first, as I'm sure he did as well - so what other avenues was he suppose to partake in exactly? He was also a business man and invested a great amount of time as a philanthropist.
And really, it begs the question, what is *
Michael Jackson* going to do? I admire Rowling's genius, popularity and success. She's shifted her focus as an author. I applaud that. Books and music are certainly a part of a similar vein. However, I think it's needless to say that Michael's celebrity was unique within itself. Yes? No?
Michael Jackson....what conceivably could he do? It's a genuine question.
Home 