MJ’s bravest song

[mj_frenzy]

Although MJ was not the type of artist who provided (of his own accord) many details regarding his songs, I think some of them are pretty self-explanatory, for example:

‘D.S.’:

MJ never talked publicly about its theme, for his own reasons (legal matters, etc.) &, for me, that made a lot of sense. Also, MJ never disputed the strong connotations that extensively were being made around that time (by media/critics/fans, etc.) about its theme. This led me to believe that ‘D.S.’ unquestionably referred to that specific district attorney who had (for many years) a personal vendetta against him.

Unsurprisingly, MJ was heavily involved in its making. The lyrics are pretty intriguing & provocative while the gunshot at the end of the song puts the finishing touch to its anger.

‘Morphine’:

MJ sings in different perspectives (& vocal tones), but all of them seem to share one common thing: his (physical, mental, emotional) pain that was brought on by the 1993 allegations.

Unsurprisingly, he is referred again as the sole writer of this song.

In my opinion, this is a really brave song, painfully honest & undoubtedly very different from all the others that he has officially brought out during his career.

‘Stranger In Moscow’:

I am still astounded by the extent of alienation/loneliness that MJ felt while he was still performing in front of thousand people almost every night (during the period when he wrote it). In this song, MJ sounds very exhausted (emotionally) while the minimalist production along with the sad, slow-paced tone make this song one of the highlights of his career.

Needless to say, MJ is again heavily involved in this song’s making &, I dare say, for me, this track is perceived as a musical signature of him.

Finally, I have to admit that the visual concept of this song was really effective & in full accordance with its theme. The fact that MJ is portrayed like just an ordinary man who experiences loneliness, in the same way anonymous people do, is both brave & moving.

(official releases, written or not written by MJ)

 

[Dilan]

all threads sort sort of sound like the same thing reworded its sort of sad the lack of stuff to talk about since his departure

 

[rsggamer123]

do you know where your children are

 

[mj_frenzy]

all threads sort sort of sound like the same thing reworded its sort of sad the lack of stuff to talk about since his departure

Your negativity is extremely annoying & is getting even bigger day by day.

Also, it is really hilarious that you wasted your time writing nearly 600 posts in response to threads that you have found all of them boring.

Last but not least, you probably have not realized that people cannot take you seriously, let alone to ask about your opinion.

 

[SmoothCriminal1995]

The whole of the History album was brave!!

 

[Dilan]

Your negativity is extremely annoying & is getting even bigger day by day.

Also, it is really hilarious that you wasted your time writing nearly 600 posts in response to threads that you have found all of them boring.

Last but not least, you probably have not realized that people cannot take you seriously, let alone to ask about your opinion.

loooool woooah calm down! how can by negativity be getting bigger day by day if i hardly even post daily? I wonder if that personal dig at the end is some sort of insecurity thing you've got going on.

 

[mj_frenzy]

The whole of the History album was brave!!

I agree.

‘HIStory’ can be considered a very brave album even in its entirety.

That’s why two out of three songs that first came to my mind are from that album.

 

[MJInTheMirror]

I think all of the ones that were mentioned are very brave, specially the HIStory album, I would also include Superfly Sister probably because of its theme and I don't know if Abortion Papers could be counted as a brave song.

 

[Antwort]

The whole of the History album was brave!!

It definitely is so. An absolute masterpiece full of defiance, raw emotion and honesty, art in its highest form. Horrible, dreadful shame its autobiographical character was based on such a terrible experience.........They do say that some of the best art ever was created by troubled souls (Van Gogh easily comes to mind) or in their most turbulent of times (La Gioconda by Leonardo), but I think it's safe to assume that all of us who put Michael's life and good name above his 'day job', however exquisite it may be, would have preferred if life hadn't given him such terrible inspirations for many of the songs on the second disc.

We've had enough, Shout and Why you wanna trip on me are pretty brave as well. Little Susie also - both in terms of theme and delivery it is quite brave song and one of my favorites ever. It isn't the kind of song one would automatically expect from a "pop" singer, kingly as he may be. But then again, we all know Michael was soooo much more than that.



There are plenty of interesting threads, including this one, but Dilan is partially right - things just haven't been the same since Michael has been gone. There's no point in denying that.

 

[mj_frenzy]

I think all of the ones that were mentioned are very brave, specially the HIStory album, I would also include Superfly Sister probably because of its theme and I don't know if Abortion Papers could be counted as a brave song.

I agree &, personally, I would describe also ‘Superfly Sister’ as a brave song only because of its lyrics.

In my opinion, MJ (in this song) refers generally to how love affairs (between men & women) have evolved through the years underlining, in a very emphatic way, a tendency toward its superficial aspect which, of course, does not really flatter women. But, he probably could refer (also) to a specific group of women, for example, to ‘call girls’ (notice the line near at the end of the song ‘you really don’t want it&#8217. Also, its overly explicit lyrics resemble a lot many of Janet’s ones.

In any case, the fact that women are put in the box of objectification (through this song) makes this song lyrically a bold one.

Regarding ‘Abortion Papers’, I would describe this song as an upsetting one. Lyrically, this song is a close cousin to ‘Whatever Happens’ (notice the thematic similarity where, in both of them, couples experience discord in their relationships). In the case of ‘Abortion Papers’, things are clearer/more obvious & also other sensitive parameters are included in this song (for example, the religious ones).

 

[mj_frenzy]

It definitely is so. An absolute masterpiece full of defiance, raw emotion and honesty, art in its highest form. Horrible, dreadful shame its autobiographical character was based on such a terrible experience.........They do say that some of the best art ever was created by troubled souls (Van Gogh easily comes to mind) or in their most turbulent of times (La Gioconda by Leonardo), but I think it's safe to assume that all of us who put Michael's life and good name above his 'day job', however exquisite it may be, would have preferred if life hadn't given him such terrible inspirations for many of the songs on the second disc.

We've had enough, Shout and Why you wanna trip on me are pretty brave as well. Little Susie also - both in terms of theme and delivery it is quite brave song and one of my favorites ever. It isn't the kind of song one would automatically expect from a "pop" singer, kingly as he may be. But then again, we all know Michael was soooo much more than that.



There are plenty of interesting threads, including this one, but Dilan is partially right - things just haven't been the same since Michael has been gone. There's no point in denying that.

Regarding ‘Why You Wanna Trip On Me’, the fact that he decided to adopt that ‘new jack swing’ style, a genre that was prevalent but foreign to his musical style, can be regarded as a brave move in general. We should not forget that he was expected to continue a row of extremely successful (commercially) records & changing his style (to a significant extent) on that record it could have looked like an unwise move back then. My disagreement on that matter has to do with specific songs. For example, that ‘new jack swing’ style sounds overly generic on certain songs, like ‘She Drives Me Wild’ (MJ is in autopilot mode here) & ‘Can’t Let Her Get Away’ (in no way can I sympathize with him here), & I firmly believe that MJ went overboard with these two songs. But, in retrospect, I think generally he did the right thing by refreshing the sound of that record.

Concerning ‘We've Had Enough’, MJ sounds here determined but pleading at the same time. I think this song refers in general to various, sad events in an indisputably more effective way than, for example ‘Cry’. I have to admit also that the inclusion (on ‘Invincible’ album) of the latter at the expense of the former makes me wonder a lot. In any case, I can agree with you on that. Delivering such a message in such a vocal style makes me seriously think that ‘We've Had Enough’ could be listed among his brave ones.

In a similar vein, ‘Shout’ aims at various, distressing, social situations but in a broader way. Lyrically, I think this song has a lot of similarities with many of the points that he got across through the ‘Dangerous’ album. Also, he adopts a similar vocal style like the one on ‘Tabloid Junkie’ in an attempt probably to make the listener pay closer attention to his message(s), & musically such an attempt could be considered a brave (if not a risky) one. In general, I think not only is ‘Shout’ a brave song but also it is a proof that MJ remained (through the years) still socially aware of the problems that humanity persistently has been plagued by them.

In regard to ‘Little Susie’, I think the musical prelude (requiem) along with the presence of the little girl (that she sounds totally oblivious of what is going to follow) make this song sound gloomy & chilling at the same time. The fact that he included a totally unsuitable (commercially) song on his album is a move both brave & honest. Finally, I agree that his vocal arrangement is outstanding & without a doubt this song constitutes one of the highlights of his entire music catalogue.

 

[SoCav]

Regarding ‘Why You Wanna Trip On Me’, the fact that he decided to adopt that ‘new jack swing’ style, a genre that was prevalent but foreign to his musical style, can be regarded as a brave move in general. We should not forget that he was expected to continue a row of extremely successful (commercially) records & changing his style (to a significant extent) on that record it could have looked like an unwise move back then. My disagreement on that matter has to do with specific songs. For example, that ‘new jack swing’ style sounds overly generic on certain songs, like ‘She Drives Me Wild’ (MJ is in autopilot mode here) & ‘Can’t Let Her Get Away’ (in no way can I sympathize with him here), & I firmly believe that MJ went overboard with these two songs. But, in retrospect, I think generally he did the right thing by refreshing the sound of that record.

Hmm, I would not really call MJ's decision to adopt new jack swing brave. It was one of the hip genres of the time, plus he was working with the genre's hottest producer and one of its pioneers. If he had released a new jack swing record in, say, 1988 without Teddy Riley, then it would be a different story. Although he was not used to working in the genre, I don't think it was entirely foreign to him either. With the exception of hip hop, new jack swing obviously had its roots in several genres that MJ was already very accomplished in.

Now, don't get me wrong, I really enjoy the new jack swing tracks on Dangerous (I seem to be one of the few around here who really like Can't Let Her Get Away, lol). I consider these songs the genre's finest, although I think Michael added something to these tracks that makes them sound different from the general new jack swing records, so perhaps they are not most representative of the genre. But where it concerns being brave musically (ignoring the lyrics which are a different matter), I think the second half of Dangerous, specifically a track like Who Is It, offers much more in that regard. I see that much more as a venture into new and undiscovered territories, and a development of his own particular style.

Though I must say it is not entirely clear to me what you mean by 'brave' in this context.

 

[mj_frenzy]

Hmm, I would not really call MJ's decision to adopt new jack swing brave. It was one of the hip genres of the time, plus he was working with the genre's hottest producer and one of its pioneers. If he had released a new jack swing record in, say, 1988 without Teddy Riley, then it would be a different story. Although he was not used to working in the genre, I don't think it was entirely foreign to him either. With the exception of hip hop, new jack swing obviously had its roots in several genres that MJ was already very accomplished in.

Now, don't get me wrong, I really enjoy the new jack swing tracks on Dangerous (I seem to be one of the few around here who really like Can't Let Her Get Away, lol). I consider these songs the genre's finest, although I think Michael added something to these tracks that makes them sound different from the general new jack swing records, so perhaps they are not most representative of the genre. But where it concerns being brave musically (ignoring the lyrics which are a different matter), I think the second half of Dangerous, specifically a track like Who Is It, offers much more in that regard. I see that much more as a venture into new and undiscovered territories, and a development of his own particular style.

Though I must say it is not entirely clear to me what you mean by 'brave' in this context.

I know that you disagree but I think by releasing an album that half of its songs heavily revolved around the ‘new jack swing’ genre can be considered in general a pretty brave decision. For example:

First, as you know, that genre had already been a trend even few years before the release of ‘Dangerous’. By adopting that style, MJ could have been labeled as an artist that swum with the tide, & we all know, MJ when it came to his music, was always trying to be (or at least be perceived as) a pioneer.

Second, ‘new jack swing’ being a musical trend at that time, there was a great risk in becoming extinct (or at least outdated). By releasing a record that half of the songs were essentially that style could have been against his wish for high sales, or even timelessness when it came to his music.

Third, blending songs of a particular style (‘new jack swing&#8217 with other musical styles, it could have led to musical unevenness, & there is no doubt that for MJ along with his producers (as I noted earlier in my previous thread) cohesion was a matter of high importance/priority.

Also, regarding ‘Can’t Let Her Get Away’ I think it sounds too soulless (in terms of production, mainly). No charm, no personal character, no twists but just a repetitive (if not annoying) sound.

Finally, the word ‘brave’ refers to almost anything (lyrics, sound, vocal style, timing of the release, & so on).

 

[SoCav]

Interesting discussion, mj_frenzy.

First, as you know, that genre had already been a trend even few years before the release of ‘Dangerous’. By adopting that style, MJ could have been labeled as an artist that swum with the tide, & we all know, MJ when it came to his music, was always trying to be (or at least be perceived as) a pioneer.

Second, ‘new jack swing’ being a musical trend at that time, there was a great risk in becoming extinct (or at least outdated). By releasing a record that half of the songs were essentially that style could have been against his wish for high sales, or even timelessness when it came to his music.

I think at the time that he was working on the record there were no signs that it was getting outdated yet. He was working on these NJS tracks primarily in 1990/1991, during the heyday of the genre. In the end, Dangerous did indeed turn out to be one of the later (though not the last) new jack swing hit records, but I think that had more to do with MJ being a perfectionist and taking his time with the album rather than him taking a daring chance to release a record in a style that was becoming outdated. If anything I feel the latter applies more to Off The Wall, with its disco elements during the time disco was losing steam.

As far as Michael trying to create timeless music, certainly, that was his goal. But he was not afraid to work within the popular conventions of the time either. I get the impression that he had the idea that if a song was good enough it would be timeless regardless of the particular style used during that period. Yeah, he wanted to be a pioneer and try new things, but he also wanted hit records. To me it seems he always tried to strike a balance between the two, both at the level of the album (having a combination of more obvious hit songs and tracks that were less likely to storm the charts) and the level of the individual song (he'd use popular elements of the time but in such a way that it would not sound cliché/would maintain a level of timeless excellence). Where exactly he placed that emphasis differed from album to album. To me he generally managed to balance both desires amazingly well, with Invincible being the only exception.

Third, blending songs of a particular style (‘new jack swing&#8217 with other musical styles, it could have led to musical unevenness, & there is no doubt that for MJ along with his producers (as I noted earlier in my previous thread) cohesion was a matter of high importance/priority.

It could have and according to some people (not me), it did. But when that unevenness is created by one half of the record being a cohesive set of songs in a very popular genre and the other half being a set of songs that vary much more in style, I think the inclusion of the latter half is more daring.

 

[MAQ]

The first song that came to my mind was We've Had Enough - as it directly addresses wars and armies and the destruction they cause. I mean, he basically told the stories of the Middle East and Palestine (without explicitly mentioning it of course). This song imo would've been almost as controversial as They Don't Care About Us particularly and majorly in the US.

 

[mj_frenzy]

Interesting discussion, mj_frenzy.


I think at the time that he was working on the record there were no signs that it was getting outdated yet. He was working on these NJS tracks primarily in 1990/1991, during the heyday of the genre. In the end, Dangerous did indeed turn out to be one of the later (though not the last) new jack swing hit records, but I think that had more to do with MJ being a perfectionist and taking his time with the album rather than him taking a daring chance to release a record in a style that was becoming outdated. If anything I feel the latter applies more to Off The Wall, with its disco elements during the time disco was losing steam.

As far as Michael trying to create timeless music, certainly, that was his goal. But he was not afraid to work within the popular conventions of the time either. I get the impression that he had the idea that if a song was good enough it would be timeless regardless of the particular style used during that period. Yeah, he wanted to be a pioneer and try new things, but he also wanted hit records. To me it seems he always tried to strike a balance between the two, both at the level of the album (having a combination of more obvious hit songs and tracks that were less likely to storm the charts) and the level of the individual song (he'd use popular elements of the time but in such a way that it would not sound cliché/would maintain a level of timeless excellence). Where exactly he placed that emphasis differed from album to album. To me he generally managed to balance both desires amazingly well, with Invincible being the only exception.


It could have and according to some people (not me), it did. But when that unevenness is created by one half of the record being a cohesive set of songs in a very popular genre and the other half being a set of songs that vary much more in style, I think the inclusion of the latter half is more daring.

In my opinion, that makes the risk even greater.

I mean when you adopt that trend especially during its heyday & bring out at that specific point an album heavily relied on it, then your decision can be considered a brave (or a risky) one. We have to take into account that a trend (‘new jack swing’ here) from its heyday onwards is very likely to take a rather downward direction in the subsequent years.

Moreover, I think when it comes to a trend (musical or not), this specific risk (regarding its extinction) always exists.

Additionally, concerning the cohesion issue you mentioned I think a trend (with a risk of becoming extinct) could literally have damaged the overall coherence (or concept) of that album, no matter how good (or cohesive) the material of its second half was.

Finally, I agree that he was striving for excellence, hence the large periods between each new release, & I also agree with the ‘Invincible’ issue you mentioned.

 

[001FAB]

- They don't care about us
- Morphine (although I didn't realize at the time)

What a song to release, knowing it was his daily routine before going to sleep.

 

[KOPV]

The first song that came to my mind was TDCAU!! But as I think of other songs that come to my head there are definitly a good number of brave songs and yes I agree with everyone saying HIStory was a brave album... They Don't Care About Us, This Time Around, D.S., Scream!!! those are the ones that rush my brain