Michael Jackson BAD - interesting facts and rumours!, ... did you know that...?

As we might know the first pressing of the Bad album is a different one. IJCSLY has a spoken intro. Is there someone who has this first pressing?? If YES can you make scans for me of the CD / front en back cover? I hope I will find it someday.... on a recordfair or ebay.
 
Where is the quote taken from?

LEAVE ME ALONE

written by Michael Jackson


"I worked hard on the song, sticking vocals on top of each other like layers of clouds," said Michael "I'm sending a
simple message here: Leave me alone! The song is about a relationship between a guy and a girl, but what I'm really saying
to people who are bothering me is leave me alone."

I think that quote is from Moonwalk. But maybe check to be sure :)
 
I know this is an incredibly old thread, but I feel like there is so much interesting stuff in here for anyone obsessed with the Bad era (like me) and enjoys archival materials...

There are some fantastic quotes and interesting commentary in here. But reading all of these newspaper clippings, it's really heartbreaking to me how bullied Michael was. He had a massive global fan base of people who absolutely adored him, who didn't think he was weird, or at least, weren't put off by thinking he was, and yet all the mainstream media did even then was act like everyone (the public) thought he was a total freak. Like it was common knowledge, somehow. An accepted fact. I don't get it. If people truly thought he was a freak, why would he have such massive appeal? Also, how has anyone ever deluded themselves into thinking someone could become as massive a star as Michael Jackson without having major sex appeal? It's naive to think anything else. So this is what has never added up to me. Who was/is benefiting from the hatred and cruelty slung his way when the public still actively adored him? I would argue that even today his fans FAR outweigh the people who think badly of him. But the mainstream media keeps pushing this narrative about him and just....why? Why then, especially, but why now still?

Another side thought I had when reading all this was that maybe it is just me, but like...even if all of the stuff about him buying skulls, John Merrick's bones, creating some weird museum on his property, etc were all true...umm...why would that be a problem? Lol. I mean, I would literally do all of that too haha. Like, I never understood why people made fun of the Bubbles thing. Whether or not you agree with exotic animals as pets is a separate issue. But who hasn't wanted to hang out with a chimp and would do so all the time if you could? Who TF wouldn't want to build the coolest ever home with an amusement park in their backyard? I guess I just think it's so strange that Michael was seen as so eccentric (whether these eccentricities were even based in reality or not, half the time) and yet I don't find a single thing off putting or strange. I would do all of that and then some. Beside, since when are eccentricities even a problem for rock stars and musicians??

Sigh. Is all of my rambling about this just proving how much racism played a part in tearing Michael apart? Or toxic masculinity? Or just the massive nature of his fame that made any mention of him flash dollar signs in the eyes of everyone who could venture to gain from him? I don't know. He was such a sweet person. So interesting and unique. Not trying to hurt anyone. What a messed up world.

This post sounds so depressing and it's not meant to. I loved reading these articles because of the context it afforded me. But if you decide to read them, just keep in mind that despite (overall) positive reviews of the music, most of the commentary on Michael personally is not very nice.

I will say there was one really great review of "I Just Can't Stop Loving You" that I found fun:

SINGLEOFTHEFORTNIGHT.jpg
 
So this is what has never added up to me. Who was/is benefiting from the hatred and cruelty slung his way when the public still actively adored him?
That is human nature. When something is big, successful, great, we want to find the worst in them to try to bring them down. While he had huge fan following, I bet many people just wanted to know how he is no better than us, or even worse than us and gobbled up such s***
 
That is human nature. When something is big, successful, great, we want to find the worst in them to try to bring them down. While he had huge fan following, I bet many people just wanted to know how he is no better than us, or even worse than us and gobbled up such s***
Is it human nature though? I guess that's what I"m getting at. His fans adored him, presumably to the point that they would read anything about him. That feels like human nature to me. To love something or someone and be endlessly curious and excited about it/them and having a constant craving for more. That I get completely. It's an extension of love. But, to me, it doesn't feel like human nature to want to destroy that thing you love. That's an abuse tactic. And even though I totally believe that envy and jealousy are natural human emotions, I don't think Michael's fans ever wanted to destroy him, or ever enjoyed the scrutiny he faced. Did they? How could they? And if they did, were they ever actually fans to begin with? It doesn't make sense to me.

So to me, in a way, it feels almost like the media just exploited the fascination his fans, and the world, had for him by writing whatever wild and crazy shit they could about him knowing that with someone as famous as MJ, his name would always generate sales. But if it was all positive and didn't feel like "scoop" how would they compete with one another to make the most of the clout that came with his using his name in headlines?

I mean, I don't disagree that there are people who do want to see others fail, or knock them off pedestals or whatever. But I guess I just don't get it still. He was globally beloved. Who thought it was a good idea to start calling him Wacko Jacko in every headline? Especially when tons of famous musicians were doing stuff just as, if not more weird than anything Michael was doing? Why him? Why the labeling, name calling and ridiculing? I guess what I'm asking is who popularized criticizing him so brutally when so much of the world just loved him? Why does it feel like only non-fans were writing for and editing these newspapers? Do you know what I mean?

Perhaps this is where my idealism is the most apparent. I just don't understand any of this.
 
So to me, in a way, it feels almost like the media just exploited the fascination his fans, and the world, had for him by writing whatever wild and crazy shit they could about him knowing that with someone as famous as MJ, his name would always generate sales. But if it was all positive and didn't feel like "scoop" how would they compete with one another to make the most of the clout that came with his using his name in headlines
I was talking about the non-fans. Media printed all that nonsense because they knew it will sell, and it will sell much more than printing the good stuff. They could have made up the good stuff too, or tried to find the good stuff about him. But it's human nature to see the worse in people who are better than us, and to want to believe they are no better. It happens at every level, not just at MJ's mega scale.
 
I was talking about the non-fans. Media printed all that nonsense because they knew it will sell, and it will sell much more than printing the good stuff. They could have made up the good stuff too, or tried to find the good stuff about him. But it's human nature to see the worse in people who are better than us, and to want to believe they are no better. It happens at every level, not just at MJ's mega scale.
Oh no, I knew you meant the media and non-fans. I guess the part I'm questioning is the human nature part since that makes it sound almost like it was inevitable, when it feels so intentional and calculated. I know it happens at every level of life, because you see it even in peer groups when people tear each other down over jealousy. I think it happens a lot with women tearing down other women, sadly. So I guess I'm not really sure what I'm contending with 😂 Maybe it just seems strange to me that the media all seemed to, at the same time, decide that Michael was a freak, ugly, bizarre, etc. They all started calling him names, dehumanizing him, etc all at the same time and they continued to through the rest of his life as if it was just a common belief everyone shared, when clearly everyone did not share it. It's the treating it like it's a fact, rather than an opinion, that shocks me.

I think I get so hung up on this because I've spent a lot of time studying media and language and I've never really seen anything quite like the treatment Michael faced. And because I was someone who bought into a lot of the bad stuff about Michael before becoming a fan, I remember being so shocked that I found him sexy, and then even more shocked that it seems that 95% of his female fans (and a lot of male fans) go insane for him. Reading the comment sections on YouTube is what really opened my eyes to how beloved he is. I literally had no idea that the man who was torn down so vehemently for his appearance, for example, also had the biggest fan base in the world, a huge portion of which were women who lusted after him. It's just an incongruent reality with what I've been fed my whole life. And it makes me wonder why, in spite of his hoards of female fans feeling this way to this day, that narrative was pushed so hard for so long.

Anyway, I'm rambling a lot about this, sorry. I'm just endlessly fascinated by all of this.
 
Listen to the bassline of the song.
Well, I tried. Did my best. Can't hear it. Even listened to two isolated bass line videos. Still can't hear it. 🤔

Cyndi says he borrowed it so, if she says so, I'll take it as fact. I'm not a musician but she is so she knows what she's talking about. Cyndi is awesome.
 
Well, maybe I ought to elaborate.

The (main) bass line of Bad is a pentatonic blues scale, it just goes up from the tonic to the dominant via an altered (raised) fourth. The bass in Cindy Lauper’s song does the same, but the figure doesn’t stop there – as in Bad – but continues. And that’s not trivial, because that pause in Bad’s bass line is what makes it distinctive!

So you really cannot say that Michael “borrowed” the bass line from Cyndi, because – again – it’s just a pentatonic scale. Cyndi did not invent those, as far as I know. 😅
 
@zinniabooklover

I did not catch it

I’m listening to she bop now. I guess there is a slight similarity, nothing I would notice if unless it gets mentioned
 
Oops, “Cyndi”... too many vowels to keep track of! Did I get the last name right?
 
Well, maybe I ought to elaborate.

The (main) bass line of Bad is a pentatonic blues scale, it just goes up from the tonic to the dominant via an altered (raised) fourth. The bass in Cindy Lauper’s song does the same, but the figure doesn’t stop there – as in Bad – but continues. And that’s not trivial, because that pause in Bad’s bass line is what makes it distinctive!

So you really cannot say that Michael “borrowed” the bass line from Cyndi, because – again – it’s just a pentatonic scale. Cyndi did not invent those, as far as I know. 😅
Thank you for this. I don't understand it, lol.

And yet, I do. And it makes sense to me. Bc I can hear the difference even if I don't know the tech stuff. To me they do just sound different.

This was awesome! Thank you so much.
 
@zinniabooklover

I did not catch it

I’m listening to she bop now. I guess there is a slight similarity, nothing I would notice if unless it gets mentioned
Exactly so. I would have said, 'yeah, sure, slight similarity there'. Maybe. Hardly news in the world of music.

I know both songs well, never heard anything to connect them in such a strong way. Or at all, really.
 
Oops, “Cyndi”... too many vowels to keep track of! Did I get the last name right?
Yeah! Cyndi Lauper. Very important to get the 'y' in the right place. It's a punishable offence, didn't you know? :ROFLMAO:
 
Back
Top