And So The Michael Jackson Fairy Tale Begins

titsmagee
wrote on June 26 2009 @ 09:30 am: [report]

Agreed. Good post. I love love love his music but his f’ed up life led to f’ed up actions and we shouldn’t ignore that.

GreenAura
wrote on June 26 2009 @ 09:31 am: [report]

I think that his death forces us to look at his entire life, the good, the bad and the weird. IMO, MJ was the way he was because he was completely robbed of his childhood and forced into an unforgiving industry.  He stayed in that industry because it was the only life he knew, but he became more and more detached and isolated over the years and turned into the person we saw before he passed.  When he was a kid, his dad nicknamed him “Big Nose”.  Perhaps that could be the reason he altered his nose so many times over the years??  Seeing as how his children are all still very young, I hope they are able to grow up in a much less lonely world than their dad.

lea322
wrote on June 26 2009 @ 09:32 am: [report]

Agreed.

nikkiwikki
wrote on June 26 2009 @ 09:34 am: [report]

I agree, great article. However I don’t think it’s surprising that no celebrities are making statements saying poor things about Michael. While I’m not sad he’s dead, I think it would be disrespectful to his family to say bad things about him.

Raugiel
wrote on June 26 2009 @ 09:37 am: [report]

America has treated Michael Jackson very, very badly. Now we are trying to forget what he’s been put through and remember how much we liked what he did. If people looked back on the weirdness, then they would also have to remember that for every plausable accusation against him there were many more unfounded ones and that much of his wierdest behavior was probably cause by a) the stress of being a child star, 2) being a child star in a country with serious race issues, 3) his negative family life, 4) a combination of those things and possibly more. No one wants to think, “this guy probably needed help and we treated him like a side show until he died”. That is why its all peaches and cream about Michael now. It is a form of shame.

kw1223
wrote on June 26 2009 @ 09:40 am: [report]

Thank you!

joyy
wrote on June 26 2009 @ 09:43 am: [report]

Well put Amelia.

Mainer
wrote on June 26 2009 @ 09:50 am: [report]

I think the reason we are only focusing on his good is because that is general courtesy when someone dies. This is still someone’s family member. For us to say that its a good thing he died because he was weird and did inappropriate things is just poor morality and disrespectful. Yes, he did things we all were disgusted at, but the guy revolutionized the music industry, and not to mention the fact that he helped raise millions of dollars for charities. Please save your ranting non-sense that he is a bad guy and we should be celebrating his death rather than his life. Show a little respect. And we’re not denying any accusation against him, we’re just not celebrating it. When you are on your death bed, would you want people focusing on all your flaws and poor decisions?

keightee
wrote on June 26 2009 @ 09:50 am: [report]

@Raugiel Well, said.

Isabel K.
wrote on June 26 2009 @ 09:52 am: [report]

Well, I think in general, when people pass, it is respectful not to dwell on the negative of their life.  Especially when it’s someone like MJ who contributed more to the music industry than anyone else and is the biggest celebrity in the WORLD. 

I feel that his contributions to the music industry outweigh his shortcomings and that is why you have people focusing on the positive.  No one will ever be like MJ. RIP.. I hope he finds the peace in death that he never had in life.

bijouu
wrote on June 26 2009 @ 09:52 am: [report]

I agree with your article to an extent. I don’t think it’s denial or ‘‘rose-colored’’ glasses.  I think the immediate reaction of the “good” Michael is appropriate, as many are shocked.

The world is mourning a loss.  You don’t go to the family or friends of a recently deceased person and say “You’re son was a weirdo.  Remember the time he was accused of molestation twice?”  At least I would hope not, immediately.

I do think your article was accurate and well-written and I’m certain many more media outlets and celebrities will review the dark/slimy/kooky life of eventually.  Just not the day after Michael’s death.

Ultraviolet
wrote on June 26 2009 @ 10:15 am: [report]

Couldn’t agree more. His death does not change the fact that he was considered a freak until yesterday. I don’t so much mourn the man he was at his death but the boy in Jackson 5, the solo Michael Jackson of Off the Wall and Thriller era, his influence on future generations and my sadness at how it went from that to the “freakshow” that his life turned into. I think there was a little part of me that hoped that someday he would get the help he needed and now there’s no chance of that.

AnonyMISS
wrote on June 26 2009 @ 10:17 am: [report]

sure he was weird.  obviously the skin bleaching and the pedophile allegations were alarming.  however he was also an icon, hope and an inspiration for young black children in the 60’s who were amazed to see a young black face on television, one of the greatest entertainers ever, and so much more.  i feel as if during the last 15 years or so of his life the media and the general public focused much more on the weird and negative aspects of his life rather than his AMAZING accomplishments.  now that he’s passed the media and people for the most part have decided to focus on his AMAZING accomplishments again.  its as if it took his death for people to really understand all of his positive contributions to music, people, charities and the world as a whole.  i’m actually surprised that the mainstream media is painting such a glowing picture of MJ.  he deserves it and its unfortunate that the last 15 or so years of his life was clouded with such negative press. “don’t just place flowers on a casket at a person’s funeral.  remember to also give them flowers while they are still living.”

writergirl
wrote on June 26 2009 @ 10:18 am: [report]

Thank you!  I had the same thoughts.  On facebook where yesterday and this morning a good portion of my friends’ status updates were relating to this, one would have thought he was a candidate for sainthood.

He wasn’t.  He was an excellent muscician, but I don’t think anyone would give him props for his accomplishments as a human being.

AnonyMISS
wrote on June 26 2009 @ 10:19 am: [report]

@ raugiel

co-sign.

sailor_girl
wrote on June 26 2009 @ 10:22 am: [report]

MJ did a lot of good in the music world and he should be remembered for that but his personal life should not be excluded.  The fact is he wasn’t a great person.  He did things that should absolutely not be celebrated.

My beef with this is that celebrities get so much attention when they die even if they weren’t the best people or maybe didn’t do much to better the world.  When a soldier/airman/marine/sailor dies on duty it seems like no one cares, that everyone turns the other cheek.  When in actuality you couldn’t have the entertainment industry or its stars if you didn’t have men and women giving up their lives for freedom.  They’re the ones that should get the magazine covers.

CraftLass
wrote on June 26 2009 @ 10:31 am: [report]

@ Raugiel: Exactly!

There is, and always should be, a mourning period where we think only of the positive.  How many funerals have you gone to where people harp on negative aspects of the deceased’s life?  It just doesn’t happen.  The memories that flood the brain are the ones that make you smile.  It’s the proper way to say goodbye and maybe console yourself a little while you’re at it.

I see it a little like sitting shivah (sp?).  Everyone should get a week of being remembered for the good they spread before the cattiness of our tabloid culture takes back over.  Nobody is purely good or bad.

It’s both out of respect for the dead and those that mourn him or her.  In this case, that means it’s out of respect for MILLIONS of people.

maroon
wrote on June 26 2009 @ 10:44 am: [report]

Thank you for posting this- it solidifies that I’m not a cold heartless biatch for not wailing or beating my chest because he died yesterday.  It’s not only that his faults have been entirely overshadowed by his Pop Kingdom in mourning (seriously, one person in my building “forgot” to come into work today because she was so torn up over MJ), but his passing has also completely trumped the other loss that the entertainment and charity world suffered yesterday with the passing of Farrah Fawcett.

H. Blue
wrote on June 26 2009 @ 10:59 am: [report]

I felt similarly when Nixon died..  he was the epitome of slimy politicians, but in his death he was painted in a very golden light.  The hypocrisy pissed me off then, but I also recognized that he was a human being, someone who was very much in the public eye, and it’s sad when someone dies, pretty much no matter who they are.  He had family and friends who, despite what he’d done, loved him.  The same goes for Michael Jackson.
As for MJ, I mourn the loss of a celebrity who was a huge part of my childhood.  Thriller was my first album.  I loved his early music, and he was indeed an icon.
But, like others have said, I also mourn that beautiful little boy that was so corrupted by things out of his control to the point that he became freakish to most.  He was dealt a really bad hand, and while that doesn’t excuse what he may have done, he was a human being, with great potential, and a lot of that potential was squashed by people that should have been his biggest support- his parents.
I felt more of a personal connection to the death of Farrah Fawcett yesterday, having lost my mother-in-law to something similar 6 years ago.  I also mourn her death.  Yesterday was just a sad day.

resullins
wrote on June 26 2009 @ 11:32 am: [report]

I have to disagree with this one. While he did both good and bad things in his life, and no one will deny that, when someone dies, you mourn the loss of something good. There’s no point in mourning the cad, that’s not the point of grief.

I don’t think there’s anyone in this world that will ever forget the bad (people still talk about JFK having multiple affairs), he just dies yesterday. We SHOULD be mourning the loss of someone that contributed greatly to music, dancing, philanthropy, and pop culture in general.

In everyone’s life, and death, there is a time for mourning, and there’s a time for reality. The man still has the #1 best selling album of all time… give him at least 24 hours to be praised for what he did do.

retro chic
wrote on June 26 2009 @ 12:32 pm: [report]

Sorry, no rose-colored glasses here. I have perfect real-time recall of an individual that was not that much older than me. Am totally with resullins on this one, esp ¶1 and sentence 1 of ¶3: “In everyone’s life, and death, there is a time for mourning, and there’s a time for reality.” Well said.

Speaking for myself, I am sad for any loss of life of any human being. Every one of us is changed when someone leaves this earth when their lifeforce is sucked away, no matter who they are, and whether we knew them, or what we thought about them. But, then anyone who’s lost someone would understand this process. This phase is just part of the normal cycle of grasping death, esp a sudden one—much like a whiplash where the head hasn’t yet caught up with the body. So, thank for calling everyone stupid, and for your realty check. There is plenty of time for that, now, isn’t there.

crustee
wrote on June 26 2009 @ 01:07 pm: [report]

Um, I don’t know if you saw the various programs that were on the news last night, but ALL THEY SPOKE ABOUT WAS PLASTIC SURGERY AND HIS TRIALS!  I was actually so horrified, I had to turn it off.  He was so much more than these aspects of his life, but he was exploited over and over by Barbara Walters, Diane Sawyer and Martin Bashir.

In this country, you are innocent until proven guilty.  The only thing Michael was guilty of was of having a supremely traumatic childhood and an insane amount of vision of talent.

MissChaotic
wrote on June 26 2009 @ 01:21 pm: [report]

How many of you would be upset if your relative/friend died and people continued to talk negatively about them, as if nothing happened?

I’m sure the majority of you would be pissed.

America is known for being the land of the apologetic post-mortem. Notice how they’re just now apologizing for slavery?

But yea. The man is dead. Can we pay our respects to him without dissing his personal life. Yea, he was a little strange. But I’m sure if we were to stick cameras to your life, people would find a few habits of yours grotesque and strange as well.

Michael was human. He was emotionally scarred, and imperfect. Yet, because he was exploited for his talents, people expected him to be a deity, when in reality, he was just mortal.

To write an article saying that we shouldn’t be respectful of the dead is disturbing. I’m appalled at the attitude you are taking for someone who died. I don’t care how you felt about him, you have to think about his family that may be reading this, or his friends, or anybody that was touched by the man.

So instead of criticizing his past of ill-made decisions and assumptions made by outsiders, why don’t you look at the man for what he has contributed to music and society, and who he was, and how great he was.

This should go without saying for anybody, whether they’ve passed on or not.

retro chic
wrote on June 26 2009 @ 01:56 pm: [report]

Here’s an idea: Why doesn’t theFrisky do a series of articles on the the public’s post-mortem fascination and mythologization of dead celebs and their sanitized memoriums. Lord knows there’s puh-lenty of fodder there—Marilyn, Garland, Elvis, Lennon, Cobain, and on—even the Grey Gardens Two Edies. In fact, an entire Web site could be launched on that topic alone, if it hasn’t been already. But, *do* haul in some experts and contributors, tho, who can actually weigh in on this phenomenon. Just not now. Thank you.

CheeeeEEEEse
wrote on June 26 2009 @ 02:07 pm: [report]

@retro chic: Don’t stop there, why not include alive ones as well.

retro chic
wrote on June 26 2009 @ 02:18 pm: [report]

^So, you still answer to “Fromage”? OK, then, alive celebs, too, since, for some, it can be hard to tell which are which, anyway.

float
wrote on June 26 2009 @ 10:52 pm: [report]

Love,
Michael Jackson was diagnosed with vitiligo and discoid lupus in 1982. There is factual evidence out there that confirms this. No need to “my ass” it anymore.

Sad that the man has to die in order for the truth to be known. More and more people are beginning to realize they were wrong.

resullins
wrote on June 29 2009 @ 07:55 am: [report]

@float: I’ve seen vitiligo. My mother’s had it all her life. It creates patches and spots, usually on the joints, not lightening of the skin all over one’s body. It would have made him look like this: http://www.d-scam.com/images/VitiligoPicturesandImages-VitiligoMan.jpg

This would have completely devoid him of pigment in some places, effectively making him an albino. Had he bleached the rest to match, he would have ended up looking like Powder, not a white guy. So, in effect “my ass” was a proper statement.

I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt in a lot of places (see my last comment), but not that one. You spend 26 years staring at your Mother’s spots wondering if you’re going to end up with such bad patches on your hands that you won’t even want to wear your own wedding ring, and you’ll be able to spot it a million miles away.

Ogbu
wrote on June 29 2009 @ 12:05 pm: [report]

I just have to make a point here.

Recently my brother died. He was going to be 21. He did some extremely shady things in his life that I know for a fact happened. He could be abusive. He dealt drugs. Our grandmother who raised us favored him which caused a lot of resentment. But I loved him. I may not have liked him a lot of the time, but truly he was a NICE guy. I’m just saying no one is pure evil. We grew up in a small town, and half of it showed up for his funeral, including everyone who was in his class.

No one spoke of his indiscretions, because why should they? What do they matter now?

But several weeks later I went to vist his grave alone and I found someone had messed with it, thrown the flowers around and left trash on top. I didn’t tell my grandmother or my siblings because it would only hurt worse.

I am a bit biased as I believe he didn’t do it. But even if he did, EVERYONE is loved by someone. Even if that love is misplaced, family and loved ones should be given respect after a death. Chances are, they are very much aware of anything wrong they did. Why bring it up? No one has forgotten it.

really_white_chick
wrote on June 30 2009 @ 12:41 pm: [report]

To those who doubt someone with vitiligo could look as white as/have the complexion of MJ, I offer my story. I am a young white woman, born to white parents of French decent (some Native American in there, too)—normally somewhat tanned-looking people. Beginning at age 9, I began losing the color in my skin in the blotchy manner some posters describe above. Each summer, the white parts would burn and the normal parts would tan, leaving me with a raccoon mask, white hands, elbows, arms, knees, feet, etc. For years I prayed to be just one color.  As I aged, each summer I had less and less tan skin left, and eventually, when I was 21, a summer came when I had no color left at all—anywhere.  I now have complete vitiligo, and by natural means—no drugs or bleaching.  And thank God (except for being the whitest person anywhere and drawing stares at the beach) I look really quite normal.  I have to wear long sleeves and sunscreen all over every day to protect my skin, which has lost its natural protection.  As a result, I am really quite blank. My body hair is even starting to turn white. So, (1) Some people (like me) do turn out all-white without bleaching drugs, and look pretty normal afterward. (2) please give MJ the benefit of the doubt. Vitiligo is very hard to live with. So what if he did bleach himself? If he did so to avoid our harsh stare at his multi-colored hands and face, doesn’t that say more about society’s cruelty than his sanity? Give the man a break.

resullins
wrote on June 30 2009 @ 01:14 pm: [report]

@really_white_chic: You could be right, but how long did it take you to get from splotchy to all one color? There would at least be pictures of him looking like he had vitiligo. And Vitiligo takes away all pigment when it strikes, making one an albino. MJ is NOT an albino, he’s white… big difference. I believe he was a great man, someone who contributed GREATLY to pop culture in every way, and someone that raised a LOT of money and awareness for causes. But seriously, look at the evidence. The man has spent a small fortune on cosmetic procedures… what are the chances that this WASN’T one of those.

I’ll believe a lot of good things about him, but NOT that one.

really_white_chick
wrote on June 30 2009 @ 03:51 pm: [report]

@resullins…

Yes, it took me several years to go from splotchy to all one color…several years of make-up, spray tanner (paint type, not chem-tan type), long clothing and avoiding cameras—so much so that I only have 5 pics of myself from High School. Certainly MJ’s make-up artists were more skilled than a 17-year old with foundation from Walgreens. Also, ever see him in short sleeves?  I haven’t…

Actually, vitiligo is *not the same* as albinism, nor are its results.  Vitiligo generally does not “take away all color” when it strikes.  Albinism is a genetic condition wherein the individual is born without melanin (or with very, very small amounts only).  Vitiligo is a disease of the immune system, wherein your body’s defense system goes haywire and attacks your skin’s melanin as if it were an intruder.

I have vitiligo-bleached skin, but my hair (on my head) and eyes are still dark brown. And yes, my body hair is beginning to turn white—even my eyebrows—but this happens over years and years, and in most people never happens at all (thank God for hair dye!). For most people, vitiligo effects only certain portions of the skin—usually not the whole skin, and almost never the hair.  I’m just an odd duck.  I told my story simply to demonstrate that MJ’s skin condition can occur without medical intervention.

More importantly, don’t miss my point on tolerance. If he did bleach his skin, why? Maybe he just wanted to finally be one color and stop hiding from the world—just like my wish for all those years.

bumbler
wrote on June 30 2009 @ 04:25 pm: [report]

I understand not saying something hurtful about his past behavior in front of his family or in the public sphere where they may be exposed to it out of respect for their feelings but I’ve seen the same whitewashing on facebook and in private conversations.  Personally I’m not as concerned with his addiction to plastic surgery or penchant for wearing odd clothes as I am with his behavior towards children.  Regardless of whether or not you believe he actually molested children his behavior towards them (sleeping in the same bed?) was inappropriate and potentially damaging.  I understand he had a tragic upbringing and no doubt emotional problems but his fame allowed him to continue behavior that would have put any other man in jail or an institution.  Sadly there are always parents willing to endanger their children for a paycheck. I see no reason to deny that the man needed help and the children (his and others) needed more protection than they received.

sstephs
wrote on June 30 2009 @ 05:35 pm: [report]

Excuse me if I’m saying what someone else has already said but I’m not going to read all 30-something posts. lol…

He was an amazing artist. One of, if not THE best.
His trademark style (singing, dancing,wardrobe)
has been replicated by many popular artists today
but cannot be duplicated. He had “it” (star quality) more than any other celebrity.

I watched a performace of Billie Jean on an awards show just last night and there were no backup dancers, special effects just a microphone, a spotlight and his dancing. The end result was a standing ovation. That is a rarity in show business today. He is much more than a the King of Pop. He was and always will be an icon.

As for his skin lightening… Maybe he did have Vitiligo. And let’s be honest with ourselves (if he REALLY did have the disease) would be honestly want to see a celebrity like that? I think I can safely speak for the collective society and say the answer would be a resounding “no”. Look how we treat overweight people.

I equate his skin lightening to cosmetic surgery. Back then plastic surgery was taboo. Even today, when celebrities get nose jobs they use “deviated septum” as their excuse..And if he lied about it because he wanted to change the way he looked then who cares?! I equate his skin lightening to cosmetic surgery. Back then plastic surgery was taboo. Even today, celebrities use medical conditions such as “deviated septums” as their excuse. Who are they lying to please? It shouldn’t be anyone’s business but their own. People get breast augmentation and various other cosmetic surgery simply because they don’t like what they’ve been given all the time.

As for the “alleged” pedophila- We don’t have hard evidence that ever happened (or didn’t). We live by “innocent until proven guiilty” and yes, in the 2nd case there was enough evidence to try him in a judicial system but there was never enough evidence to sentence him. He was never proven guilty but society treated him like he was.

As for the 1st case, if my child had been sexually abused there would be ABSOLUTELY NO AMOUNT OF MONEY that would shut me up until I saw to it that the abuser was sentenced so that in inself is questionable.

Now, of course I have no proof he didn’t I’m simply saying he was never actually sentenced for a crime. He was a millionaire and there are a lot of dirty people who would take advantage of a person with his meek personality.

I’m not even going to mention (although i should) the abusive childhood that I’m sure did major psychological damage to him.

I, along with the rest of the world, am mourning the loss of an icon of 40 year, that many generations (including Amelia and myself) grew up with.

Sorry, I’m realizing now that this is wayyy too long for anyone to read.

sstephs
wrote on June 30 2009 @ 05:43 pm: [report]

copy & paste in my 5th paragraph or me wanting to make the same point twice? a little bit of both!

Whoops! sorry.

sstephs
wrote on June 30 2009 @ 05:54 pm: [report]

Ok…. YES I AM going to talk about his abusive childhood, damnit. If you’ve ever studied Freud you know he believed that if a child was abused when he was let’s say, 12, he would maintain that age mentality for the rest of his life.
What millionaire with a 12 year old mentality wouldn’t LOVE to have an amusement park complete with zoo animals and slumber parties with friends who you can actually relate to.

Am I saying it’s right? Absolutely not. I’m saying it’s was a psychological issue that should have been dealt with
and not perpetuated by the media making a mockery out of it by calling him “Wacko Jacko” and looping footage of his “insanities” that may have been crys for help. Shame on everyone who took part in that. I can see clearly now that I was part of the problem.