Why don't we ever talk about Michael as an artist?

Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
1,013
Points
0
I was wondering why we never talk about Michael as an artist. Sure, on occasion there is the odd thread here and there discussing how Michael's singles are doing in different countries, or they'll be a poll asking some absurd question about whether Michael is still the King of Pop or not, and we all run and vote. Well, some of us do anyway, lol. Maybe I'm just bored, haha.

But I rarely come by a thread that discusses Michael's artistry, and when I do, it is usually buried under thread after thread of discussion relating to the latest person filing suit against him, or topics concerning where Michael is in the world.

Okay, that last one can be fun, and I enjoy reading them as much as anyone. But Michael Jackson is probably the most multi-talented performing and recording artist in history, and he is absolutely, undeniably, brilliant.

I mean, he's a real genius.

But we never talk about that it seems, we never talk about his outstanding abilities is so many different fields. And I would think, with someone as vastly talented as Michael is, we would be able to have endless conversations about each of his unique gifts.

My dad once said to me, while holding a conversation with me about Michael, 'Can you understand what it means to be as talented as Michael Jackson? Can you even imagine having that much talent?'

So, I guess my post holds two questions. One, why don't we ever talk about Michael's brilliant artistry, and two, do people really understand how gifted Michael Jackson is? Do people realize what that amount of talent means, do they grasp the actual level of his abilities?

To answer question two on my own, I don't think people in general really do understand how gifted Michael is. I don't think people understand that he is of unique ability. That's why, I feel, you constantly have people drawing comparisons between Michael and today's pop stars, these dime a dozen talents who have saturated the industry for the past 10 years. I know some may argue that it is done because people do realize how great Michael is, and they are simply flattering him by lining others up against him. But I always feel that it is a gross underestimate of Michael's talent, like a minimizing of what his level of talent actually is.

People do that, I think, because they fail to realize that Michael Jackson is peerless, comparisons cannot to made to him because he is a superior talent.

There are many jacks-of-all-trades running about. People who are fairly good at many things. But there is only one person that I can think of who is a master in everything they do and are, and that is Michael Jackson.

A master vocalist, a master dancer, a master songwriter, a master showman (he commands the stage like no other can or ever could hope to), an all around creative genius. That's Michael Jackson.

He's the only person in modern history that possesses a level of genius in so many different areas, to be the best in so many different areas, and I think it is worth discussion, honestly.

So why don't we?
 

cinderella

Guest
fior many, unfortunately, discussing his looks or personal matters seems to be far more interesting than talking about his musical and creative GENIUS....
tooooooooo bad :(

ps. as you see , no more replies to your thread.... can be counted as a proof....
 

TwinkleDust

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
1,965
Points
0
Location
Staten Island, NYC
actually, I think there have been many threads discussing his artistry and the real genius that is so underestimated by the public. In fact, it's discussed so much its become as redundant as the anti-oprah thread that pops up.

Just this past week there was a huge discussion specifically about his songwriting. THen there was one called " The true genius of Michael Jackson" and also a thread that spoke about the uniqueness of his voice and how no other artists possesses his vocal ability.

Theses threads remain active and high on the list for days until they are swatted away by somthing like "MJ spotted in Paris" bc thats exciting. We discuss his music then we wanna se him! lol

Plus, this is an interesting era for fans. Many of us are more concerned with his well being at this point than music. BUT as I said, it is still discussed very often here. i dont know how you miss it? I feel like I read about his genius on here evry day. He is a genius and it's hard not to after all.

so.....:blink:


PS: I love you, just saying :flowers:
 

terrell

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 27, 2011
Messages
9,540
Points
0
I was thinking the same thing. We dwell too much on the past trial mess.

Maybe when he brings out a cd, things will change. I hope so.
 

Mechi

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
4,473
Points
0
Didn't you yourself start those nice threads about his genius, his voice, his rythm as a dancer??? :huh:
not sure but I remember something like this! lol at least I would fill in your name, look in your profile and click an threads you started to find these topics! ;) I always loved reading them! :kickass2: not sure I took part though! :blush:
But these topics were discussed a lot I think!
 

eternitys_child

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
4,709
Points
0
Location
USA
I am still bemoaning the loss of mello's thread comparing Michael to Mozart. It was moved to the GD2 forum (where it quickly died) because someone complained that discussions comparing Michael to other artists did not belong on the GD& Current Affairs forum. (It was sour grapes because one of their threads got moved.)

That thread was a good one because it quickly got into all areas and aspects of Michael's genious. The thing for me is I said what I wanted to say there and don't feel like typing all that again. In that respect I think Twinkdust is right. Most of us have said what we wanted to say about it. After that when threads showed up about The true genius of Michael Jackson or is Michael Jackson a genious I really didn't feel like participating because I felt it was redundant. I think that is true for many of us and so there isn't enough momentum for keeping new threads on the topic going. The trouble is, the threads that discussed it first time around drop out of sight and new people never see them or participate in the discussion.

At the time I wrote to a mod and said I thought it was odd that we had a forum for such things as objectification (ie gold pants) but not one for his artistry. They said it was a good point and would pass it on to MsTenda but nothing came of it. In the admins defense, they did at one point ask us all for input as to what we would liked to see added or changed and none of us (me included) pushed for a Michael's artistry forum.
 

elmo1

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
30
Points
0
I agree with u wanna be starting something, people seem to have lost focus with michael's incredible talent as an artist.

They get too carried away with media stories of what clothes he is wearing today or where he was last spotted for eg. paris etc.

But im sure when michael makes his comeback we will all remember why we became fans in the first place.

Apart from being a master vocalist, master songwriter, master dancer,
master showman he is also talented in so many other fields that are often not even discussed.

Many of his gifts have come from travelling the globe, meeting people, learning new ideas, mixing with different cultures.

Most of all years of long hard work in the music industry from a very young age.

He truly is multi-talented.
A musical genius.
 

friend

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
3,179
Points
0
Hey WBSS :D great questions

So, I guess my post holds two questions. One, why don't we ever talk about Michael's brilliant artistry,

--some people do, but besides being able to say how much i like i song, i'm nowhere qualified to discuss it -- i know there are artists on the board, and that is probably a very interesting discussion for them, but it's a very technical one, and i don't know about the majority of the board, but i for one would be at a loss in no time -- i guess if people were to explain the terms for us non-artists as they went along so that we could follow, we might learn enough to be able to contribute at some point


do people really understand how gifted Michael Jackson is?

--no, i don't think so, mainly because i don't think he's really revealed it all to us -- for what we can see, yes, i still dont think we fully understand it, again, it's kindof like above, those who create will get it - but i think for most of us, we simply enjoy it without processing it, because we don't really have the foundation to do that

Do people realize what that amount of talent means, do they grasp the actual level of his abilities?

you're so funny -- something tells me you do, or that you're on the trail of it :) -- i've often wondered if you're a dancer or studied dance because of your detailed sense of understanding when you discuss Michael's dance, you often use technical jargon that i'm not familiar with -- maybe your just keenly interested -- i'm sure there are artists here who would really love to go into a discussion like what you're talking about - and i'd love to follow the thread if you all would be so kind as to clue me into what the heck ur talking about :)

nice topic -- he is due this credit - lead on :)
 

Dimity

Proud Member
Joined
Sep 19, 2011
Messages
1,061
Points
0
Wannabe, I'm a bit worried about you. Are you having a memory lapse? :lol: Just kidding! You start and contribute to threads about Michael's artistry all the time, or so it seems. When it comes to that subject you are more than an expert. I can understand you wanting to discuss Michael's artistry because it is a source of wonder to all of us. I have thoroughly enjoyed the threads that you and others have started on those topics. I'm sure that they will come around again in time, with new blood on the forum, and revitalized passion to discuss Michael's amazing artistry.
I am still bemoaning the loss of mello's thread comparing Michael to Mozart. It was moved to the GD2 forum (where it quickly died) because someone complained that discussions comparing Michael to other artists did not belong on the GD& Current Affairs forum. (It was sour grapes because one of their threads got moved.) [/b]
Actually I believe it was moved to Michaelmania and Miscellaneous Eternity. I made enquiries at the time too, as I couldn't understand the reasoning behind shifting such an interesting topic to a forum that is usually frequented by people who prefer light-hearted games and chatter, rather than deep and meaningful or intellectual discussions. Who knows why it was shifted, but apparently the decision was final!
That thread was a good one because it quickly got into all areas and aspects of Michael's genius. The thing for me is I said what I wanted to say there and don't feel like typing all that again. In that respect I think Twinkdust is right. Most of us have said what we wanted to say about it.[/b]
I understand how you feel. The thing is that one often expends a lot of emotional energy and time expressing how art affects one personally, and once spent, the energy is dissipated and one doesn't feel inclined to conjure up those same feelings again. Not for a while anyway.
In any case, Michael's artistry is still often raised randomly in other topics. For example, I wrote about my impressions of Slash's artistry in a thread about Guns N Roses in the "Music--non-MJ" forum today, and in that I also refer to Michael's artistry. It still happens, as the inspiration moves us.
 

vanesa

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
76
Points
0
I wonder the same, wbss21, you know i will give you some answers, MTV is playing videos with special effects that makes ANYONE look as amazing artists, BUT that LOOK, which does not mean they are, and most people are not as sensitive as the truely gifted people like you and I who watch MTV. That's why Spears is like an amazing performer, Madonna the same, which is not, they are good but not as much as they make them
You know all that matters now is what is NOW on TV, Michael Jackson is not currently on TV right now, and he should, or should not. You see people this days are laizy, and they turn the TV on and see you know, Hilary Duff, Usher, Timberlake, because they don't have the chance to see The short films by Michael.
So the only time they see Michael Is on an report saying all the lies they said, but, you know, Mozart wasn't recognized as the genius he was in his moment. But who we celebrate nowadays as a genius, That's right Mozart. Personally I think if Michael Jackson get support from the ones who dominates the tv and radio, people young people, will get to KNOW HIM AS AN ARTIST.
BUt that would be only if Michael Realizes he HAS TO DO IT. He has to show the young ones why Michael Jackson is Michael jackson. And if you want it he should be More controversial, he should, he is but he should do it, Because unfortunatly controversy sales, but, of course bring an amazing song alonside the big controversy, Or leave the controversy behind and be reclusive, that bringsattention and never ever stop making music, and videos and choreaographies, and is all in HIS hands, it's up to HIM. Personally I will rather him to be reclusive and concentrate on music, and only Music, leave behind all the ones surrending him, and control everething HIMSELF a la Willy Wonka Style.
 

eternitys_child

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
4,709
Points
0
Location
USA
Wannabe, I'm a bit worried about you. Are you having a memory lapse? :lol: Just kidding! You start and contribute to threads about Michael's artistry all the time, or so it seems. When it comes to that subject you are more than an expert. I can understand you wanting to discuss Michael's artistry because it is a source of wonder to all of us. I have thoroughly enjoyed the threads that you and others have started on those topics. I'm sure that they will come around again in time, with new blood on the forum, and revitalized passion to discuss Michael's amazing artistry.

Actually I believe it was moved to Michaelmania and Miscellaneous Eternity. I made enquiries at the time too, as I couldn't understand the reasoning behind shifting such an interesting topic to a forum that is usually frequented by people who prefer light-hearted games and chatter, rather than deep and meaningful or intellectual discussions. Who knows why it was shifted, but apparently the decision was final!

I understand how you feel. The thing is that one often expends a lot of emotional energy and time expressing how art affects one personally, and once spent, the energy is dissipated and one doesn't feel inclined to conjure up those same feelings again. Not for a while anyway.
In any case, Michael's artistry is still often raised randomly in other topics. For example, I wrote about my impressions of Slash's artistry in a thread about Guns N Roses in the "Music--non-MJ" forum today, and in that I also refer to Michael's artistry. It still happens, as the inspiration moves us.
[/b]
I very much appreciated WBSS's threads on Michael's artistry. I saw them often when I first joined the forum and learned a great deal about Michael's talent from them and am grateful for that. I believe that learning about enhances rather than diminishes the experience of it. Like friend, I do not on my own have the technical knowledge in the musical field to discuss it at the level that WBSS did although like many I can can hear, see, and feel that Michael's music and dance is different. Sometimes I would add that comment because beyond his showmanship I believe that the ability of those non-musicians of us to 'feel' the difference in his music is what drives his emmense following, album sale, etc.

Yes, you are right Diminity. It was moved to Michaelmania. I always would forget and had trouble finding it after it was moved. Of course it would die out there for the reason you mentioned. That thread is not for serious discussion and is actually counter to what we were trying to do. It was moved when Denisrs complained that if his topic (if forget its content) was moved then mello's Mozart thread should be as well since the Mozart thread was about another artist or comparing Michael to another artist and 'was not news'. I thought about that because WBSS's threads were not moved and decided it was because she started each thread with commentary on Michael and 'serious discussions about Michael's music' are allowed on the main discussion forum. At the time I didn't want to ask the mods what was different about WBSS's thread from mello's because I didn't want to get WBBS's threads moved as well as a result. lol. Mello started her thread talking about Mozart instead of the other way around. It was all in the presentation since the actual CONTENT of the thread met the criteria for the main discussion board. The admin's response to my query about a forum for Michael's art was that serious discussions about Michael's music COULD be included on the main board so again it goes back to the presentation or even how the thread is titled. - Just thought I would mention that for future reference.

The Michael compared to Mozart thread was good because it gave those of us who who have strong fealings about Michael's genious a place to join in the discussion even if we did not have a strong musical background. :D You are very correct though as well that it is hard to revive serious topics from scratch as there is a fair amount of emotional energy expended in the original postings. It is more than the 'typing' as I flipiently described it.
 

rayen

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
55
Points
0
Location
Norway
I've used the search function to try and locate the recently mentioned thread comparing Michael to Mozart, but without any luck. Would someone please post the link for me? And I like wannabestartinsomething21's initiative to shift some of the focus on MJ's private life to his art.

- Mark
 

vanesa

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
76
Points
0
Wannabess21 You are a genious, and you know it. :sarmoti
 

Chaos

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2005
Messages
21,756
Points
0
Location
Here
there aint much left to say about his art, wannabes has said it all already :p

we have to wait for new material :yes:
 

roxanne

Guest
they aint talking much about him as an artist cause what sells more are infos about his private life and made up stories about him.
 
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
1,013
Points
0
Lol, guys, I'm no expert, I just like to talk a lot. But I'm as clusless as ya'll no doubt, haha. I know we have discussions about Michael's art. But it always seems to tailspin into a comparisons and inevitably, arguments.

And I know I myself have started more topics on here talking about Michael as a singer, a dancer, and whatever, more then anyone. But those topics always seem to get washed away with few replies. I don't know.

I just thought we could have this thread here, and anytime someone makes some sort of observation about Michael as an artist, in any way, they could smack in right up in this thread.

It would be worth it.

Not just his career, but his art, and his artistry.

Whatever observations ya'll make.

lol friend, I'm no dancer, but my brother is pretty good, haha. I do draw however, and I come from a family of writers. I'm just super interested IN dance, and what it is that makes a technically great dancer.

But I agree that Michael hasn't shown even a fraction of his ability to the public. I can't understand why, but you can see that he is so much greater then even he lets on, as a singer, as a dancer, as a composer. I've heard strories from various people he's worked with or who know him say that he's so much greater in all of those fields then anyone knows. He composes classical, orchestral pieces, he can dance like Astaire, and he has a 4 octive range, etc... He just doesn't show off. Beats me why, lol.
 

SpAnKeY SmArTaSs

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
1,072
Points
0
Location
Brooklyn
well wannabe you are usually right smack in the middle of those arguments along with everybody else! :lol: :pth:


:innocent:
 
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
1,013
Points
0
I know, I know. I'm bad, lol. I try NOT to argue, I got it in me though. Well, I was bored yesterday, so I thought I'd start this thread, and everyone could just join in and create a big ol' mosh pit about Michael as an artist. But I guess it's all been said, haha.

Well, everyone is always making new observations. I thought we could use this as sort of a main thread for comparisons to past geniuses, or anything to do with his art. It's up to ya'll. I was bored, what can I say, haha.
 

Timmy84

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
12,245
Points
0
Location
Saratoga, North Carolina, USA
:lol: Laaaaawd, I think you're the one who put it out there for everyone to see... it's discussed in this board. ;) I think you're talking about boards that are not MJ boards but everyone will laugh at your tail if you talk about MJ being Mozart or something. They'd cuss you out on that. :rolleyes: IMHO, the man's a great talent and he's such a great artist. No one can take that from him.
 

TurtleDove

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
287
Points
0
Location
Chicago, IL
Yeah I haven't been here in awhile and I noticed that everyone is mostly talking about all the mess in the news or gossip online. . .

I'll be glad when we can get back to the music!
 

Timmy84

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
12,245
Points
0
Location
Saratoga, North Carolina, USA
Nah, I didn't say you, but I know IF someone came to the board and was discussing this topic and someone from the board compared MJ to Mozart, people from the other boards be like :blink: , you know? I mean, I rather not interfere since those kind of topics bring drama to sh*t on the net. LOL
 
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
887
Points
0
A master vocalist, a master dancer, a master songwriter, a master showman (he commands the stage like no other can or ever could hope to), an all around creative genius. That's Michael Jackson.

He's the only person in modern history that possesses a level of genius in so many different areas, to be the best in so many different areas, and I think it is worth discussion, honestly.

So why don't we?
[/b]
Mike is a master at many things. I've always wondered what instruments he plays well. I believe on some of his songs he's played some instruments. Does anyone know which instruments Michael plays? I know that on another popular non-MJ forum, this subject is brought up a lot. The conversations usually go something like this: Well you know so-and-so is a genius because he plays guitar and all the instruments on his album. Michael Jackson is just an entertainer. He's not a real musician. Therefore, so-and-so is so much better.

So since we're on the subject of artistry (and I know MJ is a master artist--in fact the best), I'd just like to know if anyone knows if he's proficient in any type of instrument?
 

sundayroberts1

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
959
Points
0
Yeh we should talk about his artistry because he is one of the very greats if not the best.
 

SHOCK

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
551
Points
0
Location
Somewhere.
Mike is a master at many things. I've always wondered what instruments he plays well. I believe on some of his songs he's played some instruments. Does anyone know which instruments Michael plays? I know that on another popular non-MJ forum, this subject is brought up a lot. The conversations usually go something like this: Well you know so-and-so is a genius because he plays guitar and all the instruments on his album. Michael Jackson is just an entertainer. He's not a real musician. Therefore, so-and-so is so much better.
[/b]

HA!

So-in-so huh?! :lol: I think I know who U're talking about.....LOL

I don't know....it all depends on what people value the most musically. Instrumentation is BIG for me. It's the soul of music in my opinion. Without it, there is nothing but voices. Which is cool....but acapella really isn't my thing. LOL. When I listen to a song I quickly like but am not familiar with, the first aspect I pay attention to are the individual instruments. Then I want to know who's playing them. Once I get that information, I go back and focus on the instrumentation as a whole...U know, paying attention to arrangement, melody, style, etc. Then I rewind again, and focus on the the entire song (vocals, etc), and replay more for my own enjoyment.

If I find out that one person is playing everything I hear on a track, and the overall music is of high quality...and I'm not just talking about a person who can play anything, but play anything within a small amount of time with more skill and experience than those already famous for excellence in certain instruments which took them years to master, I am immediately impressed. That's a type of musical genius in my opinion. Like the list of "geniuses" I saw somewhere on here, there are categories most people agree with. And in regards to music, I would go so far as to extend to subcategories in that field (which is why I used the phrase "type of musical genius."), because the field itself is too broad in my opinion for one artist (so far) to dominate the entire category.

Many people feel this way about music. Some value skilled multi-instrumentalists more than anything, and they have a right to call those artists geniuses. Some value special vocalists or lyricists more than anything, and they have the right to call those artists geniuses as well. Me...I value various forms because of musical talent I've seen. Michael Jackson is a type of musical genius in my eyes, not just a total "musical genius." The same goes for my other two: Prince and Stevie. They are each types of musical geniuses who, like MJ, excell in specific, but not all aspects of music.

To be real, in my opinion the first complete "musical genius" will be a combination of artists like MJ, Prince, Stevie, Quincy Jones, Mozart, etc...That person will be a musical genius because they will be able to do EVERYTHING possible in regards to music and composition at a level of excellence that hasn't been seen yet. Although I know this is an ideal statement, I sincerely feel it's possible.
 
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
1,013
Points
0
Michael can play, but not in the sense that Jimmie Hendrix or Elton John can play.

To play multiple instruments is a skill, but if you are not the best at any one of those, then I would hardly call it a form of genius, simply because there are a great deal of multi-instrumentalists on this planet, but none of them are the best in any one of them. And none of them inovate in the field of any one instrument either, because they do not have the dedication.

Again, the term jack-of-all-trades, master of none.

I have always believed in quality over quantity.

To be the best at one thing is better then to be good at many things.

That's what makes Michael unique, in my eyes. He is truly the best in all things he does. I'm not just saying that because I'm a big old fan of Michael's, I'm saying it from an objective standpoint. I knew that about Michael even before I was really a fan of the mans.

Playing an instrument is secondary to composing the song, always has been, always will be. I agree that musicians are needed to bring a composers music to life, but without the composer, the musician would have nothing to play.

They need each other.

But one IS more important then the other. After all, music came before instruments, it came in the voice, or in beating on rocks, or wood, etc...

I don't believe in this term "type of musical genius". You either are or you are not. A musical genius to me is someone who composes music on a higher level then that of a typical song writer, etc... It is someone who writes brilliant, organized sound.
 
Top