Whether it's your first Bonnaroo or you’re a music festival veteran, we welcome you to Inforoo.
Here you'll find info about artists, rumors, camping tips, and the infamous Roo Clues. Have a look around then create an account and join in the fun. See you at Bonnaroo!!
I can't help but think that his death has saved some chidren from being exposed to this predator. All of this talk about his children's charities really irks me. He used these charities to mask his sickness and to find more victims. He was a classic child predator that had done enormous harm in his life and likely would have continued.
I'm really worried the negative shit will really fire up in a few days. This morning CBS was interviewing Liza Minelli and her closing comment was "I'm gald we are celebrating him now, because once the autopsy comes out, all hell will break loose."
How cryptic, and how ominous. I grew up with his music and have to lean towards the pro-MJ side of this arguement. But Liza's statement has me really concerned.
I guess she's alluding to the alleged drug issues? And I'm not pro or anti MJ (or anyone, for that matter). I just don't think allegations of pedophilia should overshadow the good that was done in his life -- particularly immediately following his death -- anymore than I believe that should be the case with anyone else on the planet, celebrity or otherwise.
SOOOO if he dies from an OD are we going to downgrade him and hate on his career? If you are going to, before you make your judgements; look at this list I am going to post and think again.
SOOOO if he dies from an OD are we going to downgrade him and hate on his career? If you are going to, before you make your judgements; look at this list I am going to post and think again.
SOOOO if he dies from an OD are we going to downgrade him and hate on his career? If you are going to, before you make your judgements; look at this list I am going to post and think again.
It's practically all musicians on that list. Strange how they have a penchant for drugs.
I doubt that any music fan would take issue with MJ's drug use (if that was the cause of death). Especially when the likes of Hendrix, JJ, Morrison, etc all died from drugs. That would be quite hypocritical.
SOOOO if he dies from an OD are we going to downgrade him and hate on his career? If you are going to, before you make your judgements; look at this list I am going to post and think again.
It's practically all musicians on that list. Strange how they have a penchant for NO NO WORD!!!.
I doubt that any music fan would take issue with MJ's NO NO WORD!!! use (if that was the cause of death). Especially when the likes of Hendrix, JJ, Morrison, etc all died from NO NO WORD!!!. That would be quite hypocritical.
My point exactly ! Thanks.
Something else that is interesting. Check it out. As of right now. 4:00EST Friday June 26 2009
Post by questionablesanity on Jun 26, 2009 15:31:58 GMT -5
I could care less that he died. Sure, I admire him for donating to charities but look at all the money he squandered. To waste that much money over his career and still be in debt 400 million. That is insane. His music was amazing, but his time passed a long time ago. I sure won't be shedding any tears. He was an attention whore. I'm not happy or sad, just indifferent to his death.
A Thieve's Parade 2/24 Conspirator 2/26 Kevin Smith 3/11 Keller 3/17 Papadosio 3/18 JJ Grey 3/25 Bela Fleck/Edgar Meyer 3/26 Toubab Krewe 3/27 O'Death 4/11 Budos Band 4/22 EOTO 4/28 Summer Camp 5/6-29 All Good
SOOOO if he dies from an OD are we going to downgrade him and hate on his career? If you are going to, before you make your judgements; look at this list I am going to post and think again.
It's practically all musicians on that list. Strange how they have a penchant for NO NO WORD!!!.
I doubt that any music fan would take issue with MJ's NO NO WORD!!! use (if that was the cause of death). Especially when the likes of Hendrix, JJ, Morrison, etc all died from NO NO WORD!!!. That would be quite hypocritical.
I'm inclined to disagree. I personally don't care how long a list is or who's on it, if you OD then you caused your life to end sooner than it should have, and that's not something anyone should just take with a grain of salt. Yeah I'm a huge music fan, and you could say I'm a musician as well, but I don't just shrug my shoulders when I read someone OD'd and go on with life. Even Hendrix, one of my idols, I frown upon the fact that he had to go out in such a preventable way. It's not hypocritical I don't think, it's just having standards.
That being said, I don't think MJ OD'd, atleast not intentionally. I think if anything he was just under enormous amounts of stress with the preparation of his upcoming tour, and it's possible that his physician overly-medicated him and his body just couldn't handle the immense physical activity in combination with any prescriptions he was taking, even if he was taking the prescribed amounts.
And everyone is saying how he was so young, and yeah 50 is young when compared to the average life expectancy. But when you're Michael Jackson and you're trying to get ready for a humongous tour in his fashion, it's gotta be draining on a 50 year old body... both physically and mentally. It couldn't have been easy by any means.
I think he was extremely talented. I think he made some great hit records. I think his ability to create himself as a icon is on par with Elvis, Marilyn Monroe and Super man. But I think most of his music sounds dated and completely disposable for the most part. I think the average music fan would struggle to name 10 Michael Jackson songs they love whereas a lot of music fans could easily name 10 great Stevie Wonder or Beatles songs.
Let me put it this way: I think Michael Jackson will be imitated for years to come, but I don't think he'll be covered all that much.
^^ On the covering. I think you mean the covering of his songs. I was reading somewhere and I forget what musician said this, but they were explaining how hard it is to cover a MJ song. This wasn't anyone rambling either. It was someone like Billy Joel, Usher or someone like that. I think it was a twitter post. (Sorry for my forgetfulness!) Check this site out for some covers by bands that we relate to www.glidemagazine.com/hiddentrack/bust-outs-the-michael-jackson-edition/ ..
Now about the ODing and what not. I agree with Strum, I think it is a shame how some of the greatest musicians seem to all OD early in their life. The 27 enigma with all the people that died at 27. Robert Johnson, Janis Joplin, Jimi Hendrix, Brian Jones, Jim Morrison, Ron "Pigpen" McKernan, Pete Ham, and Kurt Cobain, these are some names from Wiki. Think if these people were still around kicking out jams?! I mean Morrison, Hendrix, Joplin ? What if they were still here. Could you imaging having The Doors headline Bonnaroo rather than Bruce ? Jim was only 6 years older than Bruce. But I think thats what adds to the artist. The people that have died so young and early in their career having a bigger reputation because they are not here anymore. We can not really judge how MJ will go down in history. It will be our kids and grandkids that get to experience him as we do with Hendrix, Morrison and Joplin etc.
Post by steveternal on Jun 26, 2009 17:29:30 GMT -5
^^^Re: covering, I agree with Tyler. The reason Jackson isn't covered too often has a great deal to do with the nature of the music. Some songs are just more easily covered than others; they can be reinterpreted more easily and tend to have a more universal subject. That's why Dylan and the Beatles are covered SO much, and why another great songwriter like Paul Simon isn't so much. His lyrics are often too personal and introspective to be done by others, but by no means does that make them inferior songs (or dated, for that matter). I think Jackson's music is like that, although with him the issue isn't really lyrical, but more the superhuman talent a vocalist must have to make a given song work while standing in MJ's shadow.
^^^Re: covering, I agree with Tyler. The reason Jackson isn't covered too often has a great deal to do with the nature of the music. Some songs are just more easily covered than others; they can be reinterpreted more easily and tend to have a more universal subject. That's why Dylan and the Beatles are covered SO much, and why another great songwriter like Paul Simon isn't so much. His lyrics are often too personal and introspective to be done by others, but by no means does that make them inferior songs (or dated, for that matter). I think Jackson's music is like that, although with him the issue isn't really lyrical, but more the superhuman talent a vocalist must have to make a given song work while standing in MJ's shadow.
First off, I'm actually familiar with quite a few Simon covers. Mrs. Robinson, A Bridge Over Troubled Water, 50 Ways to Leave Your Lover, Graceland, American Tune...all have been covered quite extensively. And I don't think a person can point to complexity of a song as a reason for an artist's work not being covered, otherwise why do we hear Bach addressed year after year, decade after decade?
I think there are two really extremely simple reasons Jackson doesn't get covered: 1) His lyrics are often really stupid or not actual words. 2) He doesn't sing to the driving melody of the song. He sings to the rhythm.
I mean if you thing about it, if one were to cover Jackson, the best way to do it would be to turn his songs into lounge jazz tunes, but then they sound like novelty "hey mom look what I can do" pieces.
And there's something you said about songs being too personal that I completely disagree with. When an artist puts himself into his music, other artists flock to that as a point of reference. Lennon wrote Julia, Happiness Is a Warm Gun and In My Life from a very personal place. Dylan wrote Blood on the Tracks from a very personal place.
To me, Jackson wrote disposable pop music. No big deal. Lots of artists do it. I would argue Elvis performed mostly disposable pop music that stacked up against his contemporaries doesn't really hold up. I would say Jackson is the same way. He outsold Prince, but Prince wrote great songs that bands will be learning to play 50 years from now. I don't think you can really say that about Jackson.
However, I do think his image will remain and I do think there will be young pop singers who will always take cues from him. He's the Charlie Chaplin of pop music.
The fact that michael jackson still gets played regularly 20 years after his heyday is proof his songs weren't disposable. I work in a bar, and even before his death I heard at least 2 mj songs a night from the jukebox. His songs are timeless pop, not disposable.
Garth Algar: Do you ever get the feeling Benjamin's just using us?
Wayne Campbell: Good call. It's like he wants us to be liked by everyone. I mean Led Zeppelin didn't write tunes everybody liked. They left that to the Bee Gees.
Post by strumntheguitar on Jun 27, 2009 0:13:19 GMT -5
Jackson's physician is getting to be pretty sketchy to me as of late. I heard on the news that MJ received a shot of demerol within an hour before he went into cardiac arrest. On the 911 call, it was reported that MJ was on his bed after going into cardiac arrest. Any physician or doctor is CPR certified and should know that the bed is not the place to give CPR, which is something most people would think to do once someone has had a heart attack. Now he's MIA, and his car has been confiscated and towed away from the estate. Seems fishy to me.
First off, I'm actually familiar with quite a few Simon covers. Mrs. Robinson, A Bridge Over Troubled Water, 50 Ways to Leave Your Lover, Graceland, American Tune...all have been covered quite extensively. And I don't think a person can point to complexity of a song as a reason for an artist's work not being covered, otherwise why do we hear Bach addressed year after year, decade after decade?
I think there are two really extremely simple reasons Jackson doesn't get covered: 1) His lyrics are often really stupid or not actual words. 2) He doesn't sing to the driving melody of the song. He sings to the rhythm.
I mean if you thing about it, if one were to cover Jackson, the best way to do it would be to turn his songs into lounge jazz tunes, but then they sound like novelty "hey mom look what I can do" pieces.
And there's something you said about songs being too personal that I completely disagree with. When an artist puts himself into his music, other artists flock to that as a point of reference. Lennon wrote Julia, Happiness Is a Warm Gun and In My Life from a very personal place. Dylan wrote Blood on the Tracks from a very personal place.
To me, Jackson wrote disposable pop music. No big deal. Lots of artists do it. I would argue Elvis performed mostly disposable pop music that stacked up against his contemporaries doesn't really hold up. I would say Jackson is the same way. He outsold Prince, but Prince wrote great songs that bands will be learning to play 50 years from now. I don't think you can really say that about Jackson.
However, I do think his image will remain and I do think there will be young pop singers who will always take cues from him. He's the Charlie Chaplin of pop music.
OK first let me say that I agree that Jackson's legacy will be his own image, and that his style as a performer is what will always be most influential. That is already the case. Secondly I don't think his songs are among the best in the world and will live on forever. Essentially we agree here.
But I just don't think they are anywhere near "disposable". Let me try to clarify myself because most of what you said indicated you misunderstand me.
When I spoke about the difficulty in covering a Jackson song, I didn't mean compositional complexity in any way (nor I do think they are that complex). I was indicating that Jackson, like most pop singers, sang songs that were written for his voice, either by him or others. He had one of the greatest and most inimitable voices, and indeed he excelled at a very rhythmic, often staccato delivery. Thus songs like "Don't Stop Till You Get Enough" were written to fit that. When you have a song that was written for a one-of-a-kind voice, how can anyone else think to cover it? Obviously this extreme isn't really the case and Jackson is covered, but this is the idea that I'm trying to present. I don't have much to say about why Jackson's songs are great songs, just that I believe they are. Yes the lyrics could be vapid or clunky, but I struggle to think of any great "pop" song from the last 30 years that did have great lyrics.
Now on to the secondary argument about the cover-ability of personal songs: A great song can, and often does, come from a personal place, but what matters is how explicit a song is in referring to the songwriter and no one else. When that happens you can't deny that cover-ability decreases, and it has nothing to do with the quality of the music. The Lennon pieces you mentioned were written personally but the lyrics still speak universally, whether you have a mother you love, a painful addiction, or a life-long loved one. And who among us can't find a way to fit ourselves within one of those categories and thus allow each song to resonate? To tie it back to Simon, many of his songs can speak universally but a surprising amount still don't. Again it doesn't make the songs inferior by any means, it just means they are less likely to be adopted by another musician. I never said Simon wasn't covered, just not as commonly as artists like Dylan. Admittedly they aren't on par in terms of popularity, but I maintain that Simon's music is much more personal than most other great songwriters. I think "Hearts and Bones" is one of Simon's very best songs--one of the best songs ever--, but it's so very explicitly about his failed marriage to Carrie Fisher that it has almost never been covered.
It's practically all musicians on that list. Strange how they have a penchant for NO NO WORD!!!.
I doubt that any music fan would take issue with MJ's NO NO WORD!!! use (if that was the cause of death). Especially when the likes of Hendrix, JJ, Morrison, etc all died from NO NO WORD!!!. That would be quite hypocritical.
I'm inclined to disagree. I personally don't care how long a list is or who's on it, if you OD then you caused your life to end sooner than it should have, and that's not something anyone should just take with a grain of salt. Yeah I'm a huge music fan, and you could say I'm a musician as well, but I don't just shrug my shoulders when I read someone OD'd and go on with life. Even Hendrix, one of my idols, I frown upon the fact that he had to go out in such a preventable way. It's not hypocritical I don't think, it's just having standards.
That being said, I don't think MJ OD'd, atleast not intentionally. I think if anything he was just under enormous amounts of stress with the preparation of his upcoming tour, and it's possible that his physician overly-medicated him and his body just couldn't handle the immense physical activity in combination with any prescriptions he was taking, even if he was taking the prescribed amounts.
And everyone is saying how he was so young, and yeah 50 is young when compared to the average life expectancy. But when you're Michael Jackson and you're trying to get ready for a humongous tour in his fashion, it's gotta be draining on a 50 year old body... both physically and mentally. It couldn't have been easy by any means.
I was just saying that it would be hypocritical to look down upon MJ and tarnish his legacy because he used drugs when we still look up to people like Hendrix and JJ. If they are not to be admonished for their drug use, why should MJ be put down for his?
As for his death, my feeling is that his handlers had a hand in this. They were pumping him full of demerol every day just trying to get him through those 50 dates in England. The rehearsals and practicing was taking a toll on his 50 year old body, so they were injecting him with drugs to prop him up. I think he was just too trusting and these people accidentally killed him.
After the sudden death of Michael Jackson Evan Chandler tells the truth.
In 1993, Chandler told a psychiatrist and police that he and Jackson had engaged in sexual acts that included oral sex, the boy gave detailed description of Jackson’s genitals. The case was settled out of court for a reported $22 million, but the strain led Jackson to begin taking painkillers. Eventually he became addicted.
Now maybe for the remorse of his death Chandler decides to tell us the truth. ” I never meant to lie and destroy Michael Jackson but my father made me to tell only lies. Now i can’t tell Michael how much i’m sorry and if he will forgive me ”.Evan Chandler was tape-recorded saying amongst other things, “If I go through with this, I win big-time. There’s no way I lose. I will get everything I want and they will be destroyed forever…
Under the influence of a controversial father (Jordan Chandler) told his son to tell that Jackson had touched his penis.Jordan Chandler then told a psychiatrist and later police that he and Jackson had engaged in acts of kissing, masturbation and oral sex, as well as giving a detailed description of what he alleged were the singer’s genitals. ” Now for the first time i can’t bare to lie anymore. Michael Jackson didn’t do anything to me, all was my father lies to escape from being poor.”
Garth Algar: Do you ever get the feeling Benjamin's just using us?
Wayne Campbell: Good call. It's like he wants us to be liked by everyone. I mean Led Zeppelin didn't write tunes everybody liked. They left that to the Bee Gees.