Was MJ a dancer who could sing or a singer who could dance?

Psychoniff

Proud Member
Joined
Apr 14, 2015
Messages
933
Points
0
What was his stronger artistic outlet? Was he equally good at both? Did reach his full potential with either? etc
 
My opinion is that he was great at both.
That's what made him so rare.
Many people can do both but not be that great at either, or they could be really good at one but not the other.

Michael is one of if not the most multifaceted artist in the history of music, and that sets him apart.

Michael's voice amazing is so iconic that someone could hear a vocal hiccup in a song and immediately think of Michael.
Michael's dancing is so amazing iconic that if you see someone stand on their tip toes you think of Michael.
 
Michael was an entertainer. A once-in-a-life-time creative genius. My immediate instinctive reaction is to say that he was a DANCER who could sing....and BOY could he sing! His dance skills were inate, instinctive, automatic.....he didn't have to think about them....he could watch a dance sequence just once and then do it better than anyone else. He moved with rhythm, in tune with the music, from a very, very young age. Vocally, his tone was like no other's; he practised and took vocal lessons and trained his voice, to make it what it was. I think, if a survey of just random people in the street could be conducted, by asking them, "Michael Jackson - singer or dancer?" Most would say "dancer" off the top of their heads......the visual images of his dance are ingrained deeply into everyone's mind....even those who are not mega-fans, like us. LOL.
 
I honestly think the fact that this question has to be asked is a testament to his prowess at dancing AND singing.
Most people are obviously better at one then the other, but MJ was so good at both that it's a question.
 
Last edited:
Michael was an entertainer. A once-in-a-life-time creative genius. My immediate instinctive reaction is to say that he was a DANCER who could sing....and BOY could he sing! His dance skills were inate, instinctive, automatic.....he didn't have to think about them....he could watch a dance sequence just once and then do it better than anyone else. He moved with rhythm, in tune with the music, from a very, very young age. Vocally, his tone was like no other's; he practised and took vocal lessons and trained his voice, to make it what it was. I think, if a survey of just random people in the street could be conducted, by asking them, "Michael Jackson - singer or dancer?" Most would say "dancer" off the top of their heads......the visual images of his dance are ingrained deeply into everyone's mind....even those who are not mega-fans, like us. LOL.

I think they'd say dancer ONLY if they thought of him in the adult phase of his life. But he was first known as a nine year old singing phenom. I think of him as a singer first, but you're right, his prowess was equal in both talents.
 
I thinking about this the other day.
Funnily enough Mike said it best in his autobiography, when talking about James Brown.

"Before he came along, a singer was a singer and a dancer was a dancer. A singer might have danced and a dancer might have sung, but unless you were a Fred Astaire or Gene Kelly, you probably did one better than the other, especially in a live performance. But He changed all that" (Page 50)

The parts in bold say it all
 
A singer with a dancers soul= he was good at both of them
 
Everyone else has kind of said, he was both, a multi talented performer, not just a single talent. But if you are making me choose, Ireally love his singing and his voice and its range are incredible, but Michael's dancing was just unique. His dancing ability was such that no one else came close at the time or after it. So maybe a dancer who could sing extremely well.
 
I think they'd say dancer ONLY if they thought of him in the adult phase of his life. But he was first known as a nine year old singing phenom. I think of him as a singer first, but you're right, his prowess was equal in both talents.

Excellent points, but don't forget he was dancing up a storm as a little kid too, the Jackie Wilson and James Brown moves he had down pat in the Motown auditions and of course he was showing the others how to dance even as a child. Joe "Watch Michael!" . Anyone who has seen the American Dream, will see Michael was obsessed with his moves at an early age, watching Jackie Wilson and the Temptations in the wings.
 
Excellent points, but don't forget he was dancing up a storm as a little kid too, the Jackie Wilson and James Brown moves he had down pat in the Motown auditions and of course he was showing the others how to dance even as a child. Joe "Watch Michael!" . Anyone who has seen the American Dream, will see Michael was obsessed with his moves at an early age, watching Jackie Wilson and the Temptations in the wings.

True. He was just all around gifted. I remember a choreographer saying that all you had to do is give him a rhythm and he could pick up on a routine, while professional dancers who had trained all their lives would have to work at it. But it was his singing that first captivated me, because I heard him before seeing him perform so a singer first is what he'll always be to me.
 
There's no point in trying to argue in favor of one or the other, imho. Michael Jackson was a performer, entertainer. He could write a song, sing and record the song and then dance to the same song in a way that nobody else could. And he did all of that equally well. He was a whole package in that sense. That's also what I admire about him. It's not like he was an amazing singer and an ok-ish dancer or an amazing dancer and an ok-ish singer - he was extraordinarily talented at both.
 
There's no point in trying to argue in favor of one or the other, imho. Michael Jackson was a performer, entertainer. He could write a song, sing and record the song and then dance to the same song in a way that nobody else could. And he did all of that equally well. He was a whole package in that sense. That's also what I admire about him. It's not like he was an amazing singer and an ok-ish dancer or an amazing dancer and an ok-ish singer - he was extraordinarily talented at both.

I don't think there's arguing on this one. Just good discussion.
 
gerryevans;4145263 said:
I don't think there's arguing on this one. Just good discussion.

I didn’t mean arguing in a negative way, like fighting. I meant picking a ‘side’. See, I don’t think MJ saw himself as strictly a singer or a dancer, so how can one tell if it’s this OR that, when it wasn’t his intention? But of course, this is just my answer to the question, everyone else is free to have their own.
 
Well it really all depends on how you look at it.
To me you have singers, dancers, (I left instrumentalist out of this because if you're giving your all singing and dancing on stage chances are you aren't playing an instrument), and then you have all around entertainers that are equally good at both (which is quite rare).
To me Michael was an all around entertainer.
He could dance, sing, write music, and in my opinion he was equally good at all three.
 
I think it's both. But without his own music, he would've had to dance to somebody else's music which - for me - just wouldn't be the same. So for me, the music is more important than the dance.
But the bottom line is that he was just a very very talented and gifted person and he cultivated both his music and dance to become one which is something that's happening very rarely among artists and entertainers.


*edit* - and we're not even talking about all those other talents he had and which he would've cultivated if he had the time (painting, making movies etc.)
 
Back
Top