|
| |
Putting the King of Pop in perspective
1-Jul-2009
Written by: Ted Simmons
How do his two images weigh against each other?
The world was saddened by the death of Michael Jackson this past Thursday, as TV stations aired memorials, artists made public statements and songs, and thousands of tweets declared that the music legend rest in peace. But, at least across my radar, there seemed to be an opposing opinion toward Jackson, one that judges him by his legal troubles, his bizarre lifestyle, and the general downward spiral that plagued Jackson long after his historic accomplishments. There appear to be two contrasting perspectives on Jackson's untimely demise—celebrating him as a pioneer or chastising him as a pedophile, regardless of a conviction.
"I'm pretty sure what he did in life is more important than how good his music was," a quote from my news feed read, and the stance isn't off base.
But as polarizing a figure as Jackson might have been, the argument for his music is undeniable. People point to "Thriller" or "Billie Jean" as such musical sensations that Jackson's later questionable entanglements should not be permanent stains on an otherwise straight-A report card. Of course, the sentiments of my friend call for character and morality as equally important classes to ace, but for a second, I'd like to look at not only MJ's literal musical contributions, but how he changed music and dance as we know it.
He's been dubbed "the King of Pop" and kings, like any leader, leave a lasting impression on their dominion. Have Usher, Chris Brown, and Ne-Yo become worldwide superstars without Jackson's influence, without his music to move and inspire them? Would the Jonas Brothers have debuted "Lines, Vines, and Trying Times" at No. 1 this week if the Jackson Five didn't already break ground for young family-centric bands? Would Beyonce and Jason Mraz find the creativity within them if Michael Jackson didn't force them to search for it?
Now, I certainly understand the point of those less moved by the loss of this musical icon. It's unfortunate whenever accusations are made, especially when peculiar behavior accompanies them (see Bubble's the chimpanzee, the vitiligo, the baby dangling). It's sad when we see O. J. Simpson in legal trouble, and it's sad to know there was another shoe to Jackson's life.
If people choose to focus on those chapters of Jackson's life, it is indeed their right and their prerogative. And they are justified in thinking that way. But the chapter that covers his stardom will be more detailed and better remembered than those on his misfortunes. And this is justifiable too.
What people who choose the former line of thinking fail to remember is that "the King of Pop" touched lives positively way more often then negatively. And for the gloved one, it's no wonder that the debate surrounds his good vs. bad touches. The bipartisan approach is universal—a life was lost, and the world has lost one its greatest entertainers, and his gift and legend, however it may be remembered, has come to an end.
Talk to other readers about this story on our Facebook page.
|
|
|
|
|
