Posthumus careers of other artists - putting Michael's prospects into a context

HIStory

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
6
Points
0
I know some fans are disappointed in the (so far) not so great US sales of Bad 25. (Worldwide sales have been much better.) Therefore I'd like to analyze how other artists have been doing after their death and what it can mean for Michael in the future.

I browsed the discographies of Elvis, the Beatles and Queen looking for posthumus chart performances (posthumus means post Lennon's and Mercury's deaths in the case of the Beatles and Queen). I know the Beatles are held up as a phenomenal posthumus success story. It is claimed that their "1" album that was released in 2000 sold 30 million copies world wide, making it the best selling album of the 2000s. Other album re-releases, best of compilation by them tend to do well too.

But it wasn't always the case. When I look at their discography: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Beatles_discography it seems to me that the renaissance of the Beatles (post Lennon's death) only really started mid-90s with the "Live at the BBC" album and the Anthology trilogy. Then there was the very successful "1" in 2000 and "Love" (the Cirque album) was also successful. (Their latest album "Tomorrow Never Knows" (released this year) which is a compilation of the Beatles' most infulential rock songs, though, peaked at Nr 24 in the US.)

But in the 1980s Beatles releases were less successful. For example, in 1982 they released an album with the Beatles' Nr 1 hits ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/20_Greatest_Hits_(The_Beatles_album) ) and it peaked only at Nr 50 on Billboard, 52 in Canada and 10 in the UK.

Elvis: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elvis_Presley_albums_discography
His most successful box-set up to date is Today Tomorrow and Forever which peaked at 21 on the Billboard in 2002. When you look at his posthumus compilation albums they did not exactly set the charts afire. Until 2002 when ELV1S was released and went Nr 1 in the US, UK and elsewhere. Then 2nd to None (a sequel to ELV1S) went Nr 3 in the US in 2003. These are his only really notable posthumus chart successes! So the first really big success came 25 years after his death!

Queen: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queen_discography
Made in Heaven was a success in 1995, but it was kind of still riding the post-death hype of Freddie. Though it was released four years after his death, but it was the first posthumus album. But after that you do not really see phenomenal chart success for any Queen release. Their latest Greatest Hits album, Absolute Greatest peaked at Nr 195 in the US in 2009.

I'm bringing this up to put Michael's posthumus career into a context and also to try to keep our expectations realistic. We will have to get used to it that not everything that will be released from him will be a phenomenal chart success. It's very difficult to market dead artists and to sell the same stuff all over and over again. It seems to me also a certain amount of time needs pass after the death and post death surge for the public to get hungry of and re-discover an artist again and before a phenomenally successful Greatest Hits album can be put out ("1", ELV1S). It certainly won't happen in every 2-3 years. And of course the public needs to be in a mood to be receptive of that music. The public wasn't receptive of a Beatles Nr 1s album in 1982 but was very much so in 2000. Timing is everything.

With Michael there is another problem, which is that his catalog is relatively small. We are basically talking about 6 and a half albums and there's not many variations you can release them again and again. The Beatles and Elvis have a much larger catalog, so that can be released again and again in many variations.

Considering all these factors I think we should not feel very much down or worried because of the US sales of Bad 25. It's not like other artists who are not here any more constantly do well on the charts - even if they are as legendary as Elvis, the Beatles or the Queen. It's just the reality of posthumus careers.
 
It's really more about quality releases and Michael's artistry being as widely respected as it deserves to be IMO. Elvis releases in the decade or so following his death were for the most part, fairly poor releases that did little to restore the respect to him as an artist amongst critics or the public. It wasn't until the 90's when a new team took over and released the Grammy nominated box set "The King of Rock 'n' Roll: The Complete 50's Masters" that the perception of Elvis started to change. Writers like Peter Guralnick, who wrote a critically acclaimed biography on Elvis called "Last Train To Memphis" also helped (he also wrote the liner notes to aforementioned box set and a few other Elvis releases).

Michael could have the same thing with more serious writers like Joe Vogel starting to write without prejudice or sensationalism about him and his music. And hopefully the estate can keep on the same sort of path they have started for Bad25, rather than the other path they were on before it. It's all about quality and respect for Michael as a serious, groundbreaking artist. If Michael is presented the way he really was, everything else will fall into place.
 
Great post! I'll try to write a more thoughtful reply later, but right now I just wanted to say thank you for this excellent post!
 
Addition to the OP:

If we look at John Lennon's and Freddie Mercury's posthumus careers as solo artists:

Lennon: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Lennon_discography

Double Fantasy was releases three weeks before Lennon's murder so certainly the tragedy played a big part in the fact that it then went Nr 1.

Wikipedia:

Unimpressed with its cosy domesticity, critical reaction to the album was largely scathing—"a self-obsessed disaster" according to one reviewer.[10] However, three weeks after the album's release, Lennon was murdered and many of the poor reviews were withdrawn from publication.[6]

In the UK album charts, the album had peaked at #14 then slipped to #46,[11] whilst in the US, the album had slowly risen to #11. Upon Lennon's murder, the album jumped to #1 in the US chart, where it stayed for eight weeks[12] and in the UK, it jumped to #2, where it remained for seven weeks before finally spending two weeks at #1.[11]

His first really posthumus album was Milk and Honey in 1984 that peaked at Nr 11 in the US. And that remains his biggest posthumus success until now. A live album in 1986 peaked at 41. His highest peaking posthumus compilation was Power to the People: The Hits, which peaked at Nr 24 in 2010. Many posthumus best of releases of Lennon peaked at around 60 or lower, many outside of the Top 100.

Mercury: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freddie_Mercury_discography

Well, the most successful posthumus release was The Freddie Mercury Album just a year after his death. It peaked at Nr 4 in the UK, and Nr 1 in Italy, but it did not chart in the US.

Again, these people are legends, no matter what. Just to put things into a perspective.
 
I'm bringing this up to put Michael's posthumus career into a context and also to try to keep our expectations realistic. We will have to get used to it that not everything that will be released from him will be a phenomenal chart success. It's very difficult to market dead artists and to sell the same stuff all over and over again. It seems to me also a certain amount of time needs pass after the death and post death surge for the public to get hungry of and re-discover an artist again and before a phenomenally successful Greatest Hits album can be put out ("1", ELV1S). It certainly won't happen in every 2-3 years. And of course the public needs to be in a mood to be receptive of that music. The public wasn't receptive of a Beatles Nr 1s album in 1982 but was very much so in 2000. Timing is everything.

This was a fantastic post! BUT Bad 25 is not a typical release, it's not a traditional GH release trying to sell the same stuff over and over again. It's an uppgrade to the original album with a fantastic one of a kind DVD and the second ever MJ Live album (actually first ever Live album, if you exclude The Jacksons!). At this time we are not yet experiencing the "over and over again phase" and with all the material the Estate has got in the vaults I would guess the "over and over again phase" could still be years if not decades away from today.

With Michael there is another problem, which is that his catalog is relatively small. We are basically talking about 6 and a half albums and there's not many variations you can release them again and again. The Beatles and Elvis have a much larger catalog, so that can be released again and again in many variations.

Exactly, his officially catalogue is relatively smal, but his unreleased catalogue is quite large, especially if you consider the video material (Tours, Award shows, special performances, ...). And seeing that he only ever released 6,5 albums in his grown upp period the Estate and Sony should not waste any opportunities to promote such a special release, to expose it as much as possible and to think the whole timing issue through. 25th anniversaries only come once and the Estate probably won't do a Bad 30 because other projects might be happening in 5 years.
 
Michael has sold over 40 million albums since his passing, and of course Cirque De Soleil did well in the US and will do extremely well in other countries so I know MJ will do well
 
This was a fantastic post! BUT Bad 25 is not a typical release, it's not a traditional GH release trying to sell the same stuff over and over again. It's an uppgrade to the original album with a fantastic one of a kind DVD and the second ever MJ Live album (actually first ever Live album, if you exclude The Jacksons!). At this time we are not yet experiencing the "over and over again phase" and with all the material the Estate has got in the vaults I would guess the "over and over again phase" could still be years if not decades away from today.



Exactly, his officially catalogue is relatively smal, but his unreleased catalogue is quite large, especially if you consider the video material (Tours, Award shows, special performances, ...). And seeing that he only ever released 6,5 albums in his grown upp period the Estate and Sony should not waste any opportunities to promote such a special release, to expose it as much as possible and to think the whole timing issue through. 25th anniversaries only come once and the Estate probably won't do a Bad 30 because other projects might be happening in 5 years.

Well, Bad 25 is not a GH album but a re-release of a certain album. Thus statistically it has even less chance of being a huge chart success, because traditionally its GH albums, not re-releases, those are the biggest sellers of a dead artist's portfolio.

The Bad Tour DVD really is a first timer, but it's compromised by the quality. I don't mind it but it certainly would sell even more in HD quality and also would be more marketable: eg. cinema release, Blue-ray, videos for TV etc.

Having said that, the DVD does look to be a success! Even in the US it went to Nr 1! As in many other countries. So maybe people who are not hard-core fans but have great memories of the Bad era typically just buy the DVD, not really the Boxset (which is rather expensive) and not the 2 CD version which is basically the original album with a few demos. Unfortunately DVD sales don't count into the album sales.

As for the unreleased songs. I really love the demos on Bad 25. Except for DBMA (which I think is average) all are great songs that I will listen to a lot in the future. But demos are not so interesting for the general public.

Now, if they finish the demos on their own account we are at risk that we will get another "Michael" album and that would be a disaster. Honestly I prefer them untouched than finished by someone else. Especially if the production is so poor as it was on the Michael album. That's my main problem with the Michael album (I'm not going into the Cascio debate) that it was very sloppy work production wise. So I'm wary of another album that would have demos finished by others. Rather give me the demos. But on the other hand I know demos won't interest the general public. So it's a dilemma. Certainly for the Estate too.

On the other hand, the Beatles' successful Antohology trilogy in the mid-90s was a collection of unreleased material, outtakes, rare concert recordings. So maybe success can be achieved with such material. But I think timing is important and anticipation must be built up. Anthology's lead song "Free as a Bird" ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UqHjXF1gUWU ) was the first "new" Beatles song in 25 years. IMO it wasn't a very good song - many of Michael's demos are a LOT stronger than that. But there was such an anticipation built up, and the time came when the public was hungry and receptive of the Beatles again, so it sold well, no matter if it was average.
 
^ Take your point about building up anticipation, but the estate's deal with sony for x no of projects is 10 yrs i think.

respect77 said:
I'm bringing this up to put Michael's posthumus career into a context and also to try to keep our expectations realistic.

Thing is, it's not just the fans' expectations that were 'unrealistic', it was the music industry's. MJ estate scored the biggest music contract in history, for anyone living or dead, with sony a year after mj's death. So mj was clearly expected to be a massive seller posthumously.
 
The Bad Tour DVD really is a first timer, but it's compromised by the quality. I don't mind it but it certainly would sell even more in HD quality and also would be more marketable: eg. cinema release, Blue-ray, videos for TV etc.

Having said that, the DVD does look to be a success! Even in the US it went to Nr 1! As in many other countries. So maybe people who are not hard-core fans but have great memories of the Bad era typically just buy the DVD, not really the Boxset (which is rather expensive) and not the 2 CD version which is basically the original album with a few demos. Unfortunately DVD sales don't count into the album sales.

Now imagine a Bad 25 release consisting of the original CD and the DVD in a 2 CD package. They could of course still release the Deluxe version as it is, but just imagine the DVD being released together with then original album! We could have had a 25 year old nr. 1 album all over again.

Yes, I know, woulda, coulda, shoulda...
 
^ Take your point about building up anticipation, but the estate's deal with sony for x no of projects is 10 yrs i think.

Thing is, it's not just the fans' expectations that were 'unrealistic', it was the music industry's. MJ estate scored the biggest music contract in history, for anyone living or dead, with sony a year after mj's death. So mj was clearly expected to be a massive seller posthumously.

Well, yes: then their expectations were unrealistic. There is no way ANY artist who has passed would sell many millions and millions of records year after year after year, non-stop - especially so close to the post-death surge. It never happened. It's just not realistic.

(Of course, it would help Sony to meet their expectations if there would not be distribution problems, for example.)
 
Whatever they do, no more trying to put together and market something as a "new studio album", or "the album Michael would have put together if he were still here". That's impossible. We saw with 'Michael' how that would work out.
 
This post really puts things into perspective. It's funny, I've never really thought about how much the posthumous releases of these famous artists sold. I just knew they're considered iconic artists, so I guess I kind of assumed their every release has been successful, but that's clearly not the case. Well, I wouldn't call their posthumous releases unsuccessful either, they did fine for posthumous releases, it's just great to know that they didn't top the charts every time they released something either.

This is an interesting topic, because I feel like unrealistic expectations is something that Michael had to deal with pretty much his entire life. He certainly seems to have set himself too high expectations that nobody could reach. I get that being a perfectionist is just part of who he was, but it makes me sad that he never seemed entirely happy with anything that he achieved.

And then there's the media of course. They're so eager to point out that Michael's albums after Thriller didn't sell as many copies. They're far less eager to mention that no album ever has sold as much as Thriller. It's like it's Michael alone who's supposed to always sell more and more and break records and be more successful than everybody else. Nobody can do that, and it's so unfair to demand something of Michael that nobody else can do either. I feel like it had to be an enormous pressure and burden on him when he was still here.

And, although I hate to say this, sometimes I wonder if fans' expectations are also too high. Maybe Michael's phenomenal success has affected fans' perceptions of how commercially successful his releases should be. I know at first I was disappointed with Bad selling less than 30k in the US, and I think many others were a little disappointed too. It was only when I had thought about it a little more that I realised 27k is a perfectly fine number for an anniversary edition.

The more I look at Bad25 chart success, the happier I am with it. It has some very nice chart peaks in several countries, and while it may not sell millions, few albums do these days. It looks even more successful when you compare it to the albums you mentioned in this post. It's reassuring to know that not every release by these other very famous, influential artists were phenomenal successes either, and it hasn't made them any less legendary. It's especially good to know that for Elvis and the Beatles their posthumous success didn't happen immediately. MJ's posthumous releases so far have done perfectly fine considering everything, and it's only been three years. Who knows what will happen in 20 years from now? I'm happy with the success of his posthumous releases so far, and I'm optimistic about the future.
 
As for the unreleased songs. I really love the demos on Bad 25. Except for DBMA (which I think is average) all are great songs that I will listen to a lot in the future. But demos are not so interesting for the general public.
Now, if they finish the demos on their own account we are at risk that we will get another "Michael" album and that would be a disaster. Honestly I prefer them untouched than finished by someone else. Especially if the production is so poor as it was on the Michael album. That's my main problem with the Michael album (I'm not going into the Cascio debate) that it was very sloppy work production wise. So I'm wary of another album that would have demos finished by others. Rather give me the demos. But on the other hand I know demos won't interest the general public. So it's a dilemma. Certainly for the Estate too.
It's definitely a dilemma. Demos are not that interesting for the general public, which is understandable. I listen to other artists too besides just Michael, but honestly, Michael is the only one whose demos I'd love to hear. You have to be a big fan to want to hear everything the artist recorded. For the casual listener it's enough to hear the songs that made it to the album.

But somebody else finishing Michael's demos and then selling them as Michael Jackson songs is hugely problematic too. The point shouldn't be just to get a radio-friendly tune, it should be about respecting Michael as an artist. Maybe one solution could be to release several versions of the song - the original demo and a version finished by someone else. Then you'd get at least some idea of what's somebody else's work than Michael's. Then of course, if an album has several versions of the same songs that might not be interesting to the general public either.

I don't want to get into the Cascio debate either, but for me a big problem with the Michael album was that it wasn't cohesive as a whole. It was just a bunch of random songs thrown together. It had some unreleased songs from almost 30 years ago, and then it had some recent tracks that had been finished by other people and there was no way to know what Michael's original vision was. With Bad25 it's much more interesting to listen to the demos because you have some context for them. We know they were written around the same time as other songs for the Bad album, so you get a clearer picture of where Michael was at the time he made this album. And it's interesting to think about what kind of choices Michael made with the album, why he included certain songs and not others etc. I just feel like Bad25 says something very interesting about Michael as an artist, in a way that the Michael album didn't.

Personally, I love Bad25, and I'd love to have similar releases in the future, where there are some new demos added to an album. I'd especially love to hear what kind of songs Michael recorded for HIStory that weren't included on the album. But then on the other hand, I don't think the Estate should make decisions based just on what the already existing fans want, I think they should be trying to get some new fans as well. So, I don't know. I don't think there's an easy answer to this.

On the other hand, the Beatles' successful Antohology trilogy in the mid-90s was a collection of unreleased material, outtakes, rare concert recordings. So maybe success can be achieved with such material. But I think timing is important and anticipation must be built up. Anthology's lead song "Free as a Bird" ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UqHjXF1gUWU ) was the first "new" Beatles song in 25 years. IMO it wasn't a very good song - many of Michael's demos are a LOT stronger than that. But there was such an anticipation built up, and the time came when the public was hungry and receptive of the Beatles again, so it sold well, no matter if it was average.
That's a really interesting point about the public being hungry for a new Beatles song, even if the song wasn't terribly good. I think it's too soon after Michael's death for the public to feel that same kind of hunger for new Michael songs, especially since we've already had so many new songs so soon after his death. I hate to say this, but I hope they don't release too many new tracks too soon. I mean, of course I'd love to hear a lot of new material as soon as possible, but I also want Michael's legacy to last for a long time. It's not good if they "waste" a lot of new material now that the timing doesn't seem to be right.
 
I don't really care what the general public want. The "general public" as a whole are not exactly very smart IMO. At least not musically. The general public are the ones more likely to make a Greatest Hits release a success. In fact, that's generally all they're interested in. I want Michael to reach the real music fans out there. That's how how you have consistent success. The one's who buy the many rarity releases of all the classic artists. People who appreciate all genres and the history of music. Those are the one's that will buy Bad25 and appreciate the art, rather than looking for a hooky song to dance to. They're also the ones that will probably turn their noses up at the remixes on the disc also. I think Bad25 is doing fine and will continue to do so. I think the estate are on the right track finally with this release.

And honestly, I think MJ fans as a whole are WAY too hung up on sales and have been ever since Thriller. Just enjoy a great release and be grateful that you have been given the opportunity to own it.
 
Commercial success obviously isn't everything. The reason why I'm interested in sales though is that they do say something about an artist's popularity and relevance. If nobody buys Michael's albums, doesn't that mean that nobody is interested in his music? That's the last thing I would want to happen. I believe Michael cared a lot about his legacy, I think he would love it if future generations discover his music too. And I care about his legacy too.

I'm not saying I want the Estate to release some garbage regardless of the quality just to get commercial success. I don't think any of us want for example a remix of Earth Song featuring Katy Perry and Justin Bieber, even if it did make it to #1. I just couldn't honestly say that I don't care about how much a new MJ album sells as long as I'm happy with it. Because it's not just about me personally, it's about Michael's legacy. And in the long run he does need new fans for his legacy to continue.

Bad25 is obviously a release mostly intended for MJ fans, and I think it's fine. It's a really great release for fans, and I'm very happy that we have it. Not every release needs to attract new fans. I just hope the Estate finds a balance between respecting Michael as an artist, keeping the fan base happy and attracting new fans.
 
This is an interesting topic, because I feel like unrealistic expectations is something that Michael had to deal with pretty much his entire life. He certainly seems to have set himself too high expectations that nobody could reach. I get that being a perfectionist is just part of who he was, but it makes me sad that he never seemed entirely happy with anything that he achieved.

And then there's the media of course. They're so eager to point out that Michael's albums after Thriller didn't sell as many copies. They're far less eager to mention that no album ever has sold as much as Thriller. It's like it's Michael alone who's supposed to always sell more and more and break records and be more successful than everybody else. Nobody can do that, and it's so unfair to demand something of Michael that nobody else can do either. I feel like it had to be an enormous pressure and burden on him when he was still here.

Sometimes I almost wish Thriller had not sold so big. It certainly put a big pressure on Michael and also made the media's and fans' expectations (and maybe Michael's own expectations) unrealistic. So Bad was considered a "failure", even though it produced 5 Nr1 hits and is among one the biggest selling albums of all times. Likewise Dangerous (which IMO was Michael's artistic peak).

Yet, until this day these albums are considered a "flop" and that is the perception that people have of them, not that they were very successful albums, among the most successful albums of all times. And these (false and unfair) perceptions also compromises their marketability compared to Thriller. Image is everything - even in the case of an album.

It has to be noted that the lead song of the successful ELV1S album was a remix, Little Less Conversation, that was a big hit at the time. So yeah, Elvis' was sold again on the back of a modern remix. The rest of the album were classic Elvis hits.

I'd have very ambivalent feelings about such a success in Michael's case. First of all, a remix made by others is not the original artist's work, it's someone else's. And while in Elvis' case it's bearable because he did not write that song, he just sang it, but in Michael's case we know that he was very much hands-on in the studio, writing his songs and having his own vision about them, so I do not really like to see people mess with his concepts.

I don't know how Elvis fans felt about the LLC remix. Maybe they thought if it helps people to re-discover Elvis and helps to sell the ELV1S album they can put up with it. Maybe they even liked it. IDK. But if such a remix of an MJ song would top the charts I could not really consider it an MJ song, to be honest. So my feelings would be at least ambivalent.

All in all, I agree with WildStyle that the most important thing for the Estate now is to focus on emphasizing Michael, the artist. Not to sell him cheap, not to cheapen him. That's why IMO the Michael album was such a mistake. IMO it cheapened Michael as an artist with the poor production, the poor cover art work etc. If you want to project the fact that Michael is a serious artist you don't put such a cover on his album, sorry. It may seem like a small detail, but even such details are important for perception. And I'd wish the production work on the album would have been a lot better. Again, if you want to show that Michael is a serious artist, you cannot afford cheap and sloppy production on his albums.

I agree that Bad 25 is the right track. I'm very happy with this release.

One more thing is: artists like the Beatles and Elvis have such an advantage in the media. They are always praised, no matter what and the Beatles virtually cannot do wrong for many critics. And that fact isn't just about the music, but about certain biases within the media. While in Michael's case we all know what kind of relationship he had with the media - and most of that too did not have to do with the music. So that's a big handicap because often that makes music journalists biased and unfair against him. I think something started with Joe Vogel and some others now on that front but that too needs to be encouraged. I have heard about academies now discussing Michael, the artist and hopefully that's a start of something good.
 
I think it's intended for music fans, not just MJ fans. Sales have been good in comparison to other releases of this nature. A quality release is a quality release IMO. I don't see how anyone could pick this up and not enjoy it. New fans, old fans and casual fans alike. I just think fans should lower their expectations a little bit sales wise.
 
Commercial success obviously isn't everything. The reason why I'm interested in sales though is that they do say something about an artist's popularity and relevance. If nobody buys Michael's albums, doesn't that mean that nobody is interested in his music? That's the last thing I would want to happen. I believe Michael cared a lot about his legacy, I think he would love it if future generations discover his music too. And I care about his legacy too.

I'm not saying I want the Estate to release some garbage regardless of the quality just to get commercial success. I don't think any of us want for example a remix of Earth Song featuring Katy Perry and Justin Bieber, even if it did make it to #1. I just couldn't honestly say that I don't care about how much a new MJ album sells as long as I'm happy with it. Because it's not just about me personally, it's about Michael's legacy. And in the long run he does need new fans for his legacy to continue.

Bad25 is obviously a release mostly intended for MJ fans, and I think it's fine. It's a really great release for fans, and I'm very happy that we have it. Not every release needs to attract new fans. I just hope the Estate finds a balance between respecting Michael as an artist, keeping the fan base happy and attracting new fans.

I hear what you say and I agree that Michael's legacy needs to live on. My point is that we should not panic if a release does not set the charts afire. Especially at this point when there has been an overexposure of MJ in the last three years. Even in the greatest cultural icons interest fluctuates over time. I don't think MJ will be forgotten. He's too big, too unique of a phenomenon to be forgotten. But he too might have periods when the interest isn't that big in him. Then there's a change in the public mood and his music is everywhere again.

(And one of my biggest wishes is that the public would finally see that he was innocent of the allegations. That would relieve a lot of people regarding Michael and make it again OK and not "embarrassing" to like him. I believe a lot of potential fans of his music and art are lost because of the allegations. Not, us, hard-core fans who made an extensive research in them and know that he was innocent, but those potential fans who would like his music but do not dare to associate with him because they are unsure about the allegations. It's pretty sad how these lies overshadow his career. I really, really hope one day the truth would become crystal clear for everyone.)
 
Last edited:
I hear what you say and I agree that Michael's legacy needs to live on. My point is that we should not panic if a release does not set the charts afire. Especially at this point when there has been an overexposure of MJ in the last three years. Even in the greatest cultural icons interest fluctuates over time. I don't think MJ will be forgotten. He's too big, too unique of a phenomenon to be forgotten. But he too might have periods when the interest isn't that big in him. Then there's a change in the public mood and his music is everywhere again.
Oh, I agree. I didn't mean to suggest that we should be worried about Bad25's sales, or panic if any future releases are not huge successes. It's just that the comment about fans maybe caring about sales too much got me thinking about why I even care about sales, so I was just more thinking out loud why IMO commercial success is important too. But I agree that there will probably be periods when people are not that interested in Michael, and it doesn't mean we should start writing eulogies to his legacy.

(And one of my biggest wishes is that the public would finally see that he was innocent of the allegations. That would relieve a lot of people regarding Michael and make it again OK and not "embarrassing" to like him. I believe a lot of potential fans of his music and art are lost because of the allegations. Not, us, hard-core fans who made an extensive research in them and know that he was innocent, but those potential fans who would like his music but do not dare to associate with him because they are unsure about the allegations. It's pretty sad how these lies overshadow his career. I really, really hope one day the truth would become crystal clear for everyone.)
Again, agreed. Those allegations and the media treatment of him have such a huge impact on Michael's image and career, it's so unfair and wrong but that's the way it is. The problem is not just that people don't know the truth about Michael, it's also that they don't even realise they don't know the truth about him. The media has portrayed Michael in a certain way so consistently for such a long time that it doesn't even occur to most people that what they think they know about Michael isn't actually true at all.

It all makes me so angry and frustrated, but I just don't know what to do about it. It all just seems so overwhelming. How do you change such a widely shared perception of Michael? I feel like I'd like to do something, as a fan, to help clear his image, I just don't even know where to start.
 
Legacy


Since his death, Tupac has become an international martyr, a symbol on the level of Bob Marley or Che Guevara, whose life has inspired Tupacistas on the streets of Brazil, memorial murals in the Bronx and Spain, and bandanna-wearing youth gangs in South Africa.


Vinyl Ain't Final: Hip Hop and the Globalization of Black Popular Culture[SUP][110][/SUP]​

<TBODY>
</TBODY>
At a Mobb Deep concert following the death of Shakur and the release of The Don Killuminati: The 7 Day Theory, Cormega recalled in an interview that the fans were all shouting "Makaveli,"[SUP][111][/SUP] and emphasized the influence of The Don Killuminati: The 7 Day Theory and of Shakur himself even in New York at the height of the media-dubbed 'intercoastal rivalry'.[SUP][112][/SUP] Tupac Shakur was also one of the few rappers that were paid a tribute during the Up in Smoke Tour that featured many west coast hip-hop artists.
Shakur is held in high esteem by other MCs – in the book How to Rap, Bishop Lamont notes that Shakur “mastered every element, every aspect” of rapping[SUP][113][/SUP] and Fredro Starr of Onyx says Shakur, "was a master of the flow."[SUP][114][/SUP] "Every rapper who grew up in the Nineties owes something to Tupac," wrote 50 Cent. "He didn't sound like anyone who came before him."[SUP][3][/SUP] About.com for their part named Shakur the most influential rapper ever.[SUP][115][/SUP]

To preserve Shakur's legacy, his mother founded the Shakur Family Foundation (later renamed the Tupac Amaru Shakur Foundation or TASF) in 1997. The TASF's stated mission is to "provide training and support for students who aspire to enhance their creative talents." The TASF sponsors essay contests, charity events, a performing arts day camp for teenagers and undergraduate scholarships. The Foundation officially opened the Tupac Amaru Shakur Center for the Arts (TASCA) in Stone Mountain, Georgia, on June 11, 2005. On November 14, 2003, a documentary about Shakur entitled Tupac: Resurrection was released under the supervision of his mother and narrated entirely in his voice. It was nominated for Best Documentary in the 2005 Academy Awards. Proceeds will go to a charity set up by Shakur's mother Afeni. On April 17, 2003, Harvard University co-sponsored an academic symposium entitled "All Eyez on Me: Tupac Shakur and the Search for the Modern Folk Hero." The speakers discussed a wide range of topics dealing with Shakur's impact on everything from entertainment to sociology.[SUP][116][/SUP]
Many of the speakers discussed Shakur's status and public persona, including State University of New York at Buffalo English professor Mark Anthony Neal who gave the talk "Thug Nigga Intellectual: Tupac as Celebrity Gramscian" in which he argued that Shakur was an example of the "organic intellectual" expressing the concerns of a larger group.[SUP][117][/SUP] Professor Neal has also indicated in his writings that the death of Shakur has left a "leadership void amongst hip-hop artists."[SUP][118][/SUP] Neal further describes him as a "walking contradiction", a status that allowed him to "make being an intellectual accessible to ordinary people."[SUP][119]
[/SUP]
Professor of Communications Murray Forman, of Northeastern University, spoke of the mythical status about Shakur's life and death. He addressed the symbolism and mythology surrounding Shakur's death in his talk entitled "Tupac Shakur: O.G. (Ostensibly Gone)". Among his findings were that Shakur's fans have "succeeded in resurrecting Tupac as an ethereal life force."[SUP][120][/SUP]

In "From Thug Life to Legend: Realization of a Black Folk Hero", Professor of Music at Northeastern University, Emmett Price, compared Shakur's public image to that of the trickster-figures of African-American folklore which gave rise to the urban "bad-man" persona of the post-slavery period. He ultimately described Shakur as a "prolific artist" who was "driven by a terrible sense of urgency" in a quest to "unify mind, body, and spirit".[SUP][121]
[/SUP]
In Holler If You Hear Me: Searching for Tupac Shakur, Michael Eric Dyson indicated that Shakur "spoke with brilliance and insight as someone who bears witness to the pain of those who would never have his platform. He told the truth, even as he struggled with the fragments of his identity."[SUP][105][/SUP] At one Harvard Conference the theme was Shakur's impact on entertainment, race relations, politics and the "hero/martyr".[SUP][122][/SUP] In late 1997, the University of California, Berkeley offered a student-led course entitled "History 98: Poetry and History of Tupac Shakur."[SUP][123]
[/SUP]
In late 2003, the Makaveli Branded Clothing line was launched by Afeni. In 2005, Death Row released Tupac: Live at the House of Blues. The DVD was the final recorded performance of Shakur's career, which took place on July 4, 1996, and features a plethora of Death Row artists. In August 2006, Tupac Shakur Legacy was released. The interactive biography was written by Jamal Joseph. It features unseen family photographs, intimate stories, and over 20 removable reproductions of his handwritten song lyrics, contracts, scripts, poetry, and other personal papers. Shakur's sixth posthumous studio album, Pac's Life, was released on November 21, 2006. It commemorates the 10th anniversary of Shakur's death. He is still considered one of the most popular artists in the music industry as of 2006[SUP][update][/SUP].[SUP][124][/SUP]
According to Forbes, in 2008 Shakur's estate made $15 million.[SUP][125][/SUP] In 2002, they recognized him as a Top Earning Dead celebrity coming in on number ten on their list.[SUP][126]
[/SUP]
On April 15, 2012, a "hologram" of Tupac Shakur (technically a 2-D video projection[SUP][127][/SUP]) performed his songs "Hail Mary" and "2 of Amerikaz Most Wanted" with Snoop Dogg[SUP][128][/SUP] at the Coachella Music Festival, the effect was created using an optical illusion called Pepper's ghost.[SUP][129][/SUP] The video footage was created by visual effects company Digital Domain.[SUP][127][/SUP] The Wall Street Journal reported Dr. Dre and Snoop Dogg were in talks of a possible tour involving the two rappers and the hologram version of Tupac,[SUP][130][/SUP] which was later turned down by Dr. Dre.[SUP][131][/SUP]
 
Just out of curiosity, does anyone know how fans of these other artists reacted to the success (or lack of thereof) of their posthumous releases? Like, if a posthumous release didn't sell well, were fans disappointed? And what was the general public's or media's reaction if the releases weren't hugely successful?
 
It's hard to tell, because back in the 80s and early 90s there wasn't Internet yet. And again: what is success and lack of success in the case of a re-release by a dead artist and what is norm?

BTW, wasn't Thriller 25 the most successful re-release of an album ever in terms of its peak on the charts (or at least would have been if it had been allowed on the main charts at the time)? I'm not sure but I remember to have read that somewhere. But then Michael was still alive.
 
Last edited:
Thanks a lot for this!

I actually did the same thing - checked other legendary artists' posthumous performance sales-wise.
MJ is doing pretty well, on all accounts.

We have to remember also that we are now in the internet generation - that anyone can easily look up in you tube for MJ's songs, even the ones in BAD25. I would say many did not buy copies of BAD25 too coz they are happy just listening to the songs the cost-free way (youtube, etc.)

Elvis, Beatles (post-John Lennon), Freddie all posthumously enjoyed the period when it was still very popular to buy the physical copies and there was no convenience at all to look up and listen to their songs in the internet.

Plus, nobody sold like MJ after he died (and of course, even before).
 
Now imagine a Bad 25 release consisting of the original CD and the DVD in a 2 CD package. They could of course still release the Deluxe version as it is, but just imagine the DVD being released together with then original album! We could have had a 25 year old nr. 1 album all over again.

Yes, I know, woulda, coulda, shoulda...
Or maybe the DVD AND the CD Live? I would have jumped on that.
 
With people in general today being more into streaming than buying a physical product, most new popular acts don't sell a lot of CDs/records/tapes. So expecting reissues of old stuff to get huge sells is not realistic. The RIAA now considers a certain amount of streams as a "sale" when nobody actually bought anything, not even a download. A lot of younger people do not even own a stereo to play something on and CD or tape players are not put in newer cars as a default. There's a reason new acts get signed to 360 deals where the major record labels get a part of touring & merchandising money. That didn't usually happen pre-internet. Napster was the beginning of the end. There's an entire generation that has grown up with free music. So there is less value in music compared to music fans pre-internet. Yet video games sell millions of discs today and people camp out all night when a new console or a new game in a really popular series comes out. Grand Theft Auto 5 has sold more than any other entertainment item in history including the Thriller album. GTA5 has also made more money than any movie.
 
Back
Top