So I was thinking, and thinking this for a while: My blog is good for quick links, but I'd like some more substance, some more opinion in there. Well, I write editorials for the site thecelebritycafe.com on whatever entertainment story and figured I'd post them here as well to give a change of pace for readers (I think/hope youre there.) Here's my most recent (I'm talking minutes new), my take on Michael Jackson.
The world was saddened by the death of Michael Jackson this past Thursday, as T.V. 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 perspective’s on Jackson’s untimely demise — celebrating him as a pioneer or chastising his 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,” 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 contribution’s, but how he changed music and dance as we know it.
He’s been dubbed “The King of Pop” and king’s, like any leader, leave a lasting impression on their dominion. Do Usher, Chris Brown, and Ne-Yo become worldwide superstars without Jackson’s influence, without his music to move and inspire them? Do The Jonas Brothers debut “Lines, Vines, And Trying Times” at number 1 this week if The Jackson Five don’t already break ground for young family-centric bands? Do Beyonce and Jason Mraz find the creativity within them if Michael Jackson doesnt 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 accompany it (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 an other shoe to Jackson’s life. So if people chose 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 chose 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 though — a life was lost, and the world has lost one its greatest entertainers, with his gift and legend, however it may be remember, coming to an end.
