"Who's Michael Jackson?"
Those were the first words out of Joe's mouth when I mentioned the Gloved One's passing to Himself over the dinner table. Grace echoed the question a second or two later: "Yeah. Who's Michael Jackson?"
Honestly, I was taken aback by this question. Having grown up in the 70s and 80s, I was immersed in the Jacksons (most of them) growing up. Even though I wasn't particularly a fan, there was no escaping the Jackson 5 in the 70's, MJ in the 80s and early 90s (and Janet in the rest of the 90s!). Michael Jackson had been everywhere when I was growing up. It was kind of inconceivable to me that my kids hadn't heard of him. In my generation it was immpossible not to hear of MJ. As a friend of mine once said in the late 80's: "These days, you can go to the deepest fookin jungle of Africa, and you will find a kid with a Coke can in his hand, singing a Michael Jackson song".
But thinking about it: Why would my kids have heard of him? Joe was born in the late 90's, a few years after MJ's initial and precipitous fall from grace. We never played his music in the house, because -although we had both admired his talent, we weren't fans. I guess I thought my kids would have heard some songs on the radio and TV, and maybe they have heard some, but looking back, I figure not many or often.
So I managed to answer the question by saying something like "Michael Jackson was a singer and dancer. He was very famous." They were unconcerned at his passing.
I left out the part where Michael Jackson also a child predator and molester. Because although the nuns told me not to speak ill of the dead, they also told me to speak the truth, and I honestly believe that -although acquitted- Michael Jackson was guilty of the crimes for which he was accused (more on this later).
On Friday morning, The Today show made mention that Thriller had jumped to the top of the iTunes download list in a matter of hours, Al Roker appeared surprised by this fact, maybe wondering who was downloading this album; who might be a fan but not have it already? The answer is simple: parents of teens and kids, who also grew up immersed in Michael Jackson's ...everything and were shocked to hear their children ask the same question that Joe asked me on Thursday night i.e. "Who's Michael Jackson?". I think some parents had the same knee-jerk reaction that I did: how could you not know? and then; with memories of dancing nieces / nephews, friends and neighbors blooming in their minds: But you're a kid! You have to see MJ! You will love him! So they downloaded Thriller and Off the Wall because they want their kids to hear and see how Michael Jackson was back when he was great.
...and he WAS great!
It is an understandable reaction, because the guy was a huge talent, and a lot of what he did both with the Jackson 5 and as a solo act is worth hearing/seeing. But then after the initial knee-jerk reaction, I got to thinking:
Should I?
I'm not being funny. There is a genuine moral dilemma here; and for me, it probably runs deeper than for most people. You see, when I was 8 ...9, 10, 11, 12 ...13 or so, I was the target of a child molester (yes it went on for years, until I grew boobs and an ass). He never actually succeeded in raping me (because seduction, not rape was his aim ...*shudder*); but the memory still haunts. A lot. A few years ago, I read the transcripts of the declaration that the kid -the initial MJ accuser back n 1993 made, and it made my blood run cold, because I saw... I recognized therein the type of manipulations and behavior patterns in which child predators engage, and I knew that the accusations against Michael Jackson were true. A kid can't make up something like that. I'm sorry. I know some people will blast me for this, but I a speaking what I truly feel in my heart here, based on an experience that few can (or want to) claim...
And now Michael Jackson is dead and my children don't know who he is. I could introduce them to his music posthumously, knowing that my son would be in no potential danger anymore. I could allow his memory to stand -to continue in our family- based solely on his music and talent.
Is it morally wrong of me to promote someone who I feel was a child predator to my children?
I know I am overthinking this, but the question is simple enough, Do I encourage my children to like someone that I believe was a pedophile, or do I allow MJ's memory to die in this family? I know my kids may discover him by themselves in time. But hopefully by then, they will be old enough to make their own moral determinations.
And I thought further about MJ's children and I decided that -sorry; but they are not my responsibility. My children are my responsibility and with that in mind, the TV and radio have been tuned to anything except the MJ coverage in their hearing. Food Network; Cartoon network... Anything!
Michael Jackson is dead -and for this family -while I have control, I am going to let his memory die too.
Rest in peace.
This is entirely up to you, and you don't need to justify your choices to anyone. But since you ask, I would say that as your kids grow up, they will have to learn that there's a difference between the artist and great art; they'll like the work of writers, musicians and actors who go on behave shamefully (though hopefully nothing *that* bad). But they'll learn that doesn't (or shouldn't) stop you enjoying a persons' work.
The music in itself is not corrupting or harmful in any way (although some of it was pretty nauseating). And now the man can't personally benefit from the purchase of any records (although I really wouldn't let his heirs' financial position trouble you either way).
However, you certainly don't have any responsibility to introduce your kids to Jackson's music - whilst he did some great stuff and very very famous at one point, he wasn't the greatest musician that ever lived. You'll naturally introduce your kids to the music you like yourself and let them explore their own tastes later on.
I'm very sorry about what happened to you as a child, and the fact it got stirred up like that.
Posted by: The Goldfish | June 27, 2009 at 04:36 PM
I really feel for you and am so sorry about what was done to you as a child. I saw Gary Glitter in my first ever concert, as a child, he had no real talent. MJ was a great artist/entertainer and he has made a great contribution to pop music. Although, his music is not to my taste. I find it hard to totally separate the music from the person. Pop stars are role models for young people and must be very careful about their public image.
I have read the witness statement, of the child who made allegations against MJ. It describes incredibly well the stages of a paedophile grooming a young victim. That raises concerns about MJ's OWN children, artificially produced, bought and paid for. I suspect he was actually a frustrated pre-op transsexual. He could'nt have the full sex change due to his fan base. MJ begot his two children, by artificial insemination, which suggests he could not perform sexually with an adult female. This raises suspicions about his sexuality. He then paid her, to leave him alone, to raise the children by himself. Photographic images of him and his children almost look like mother and child. If MJ actually was a paedophile then what damage he has done to his children?
But I do agree with The Goldfish his music is not sexual and he can't hurt anyone in that way. My concerns are for MJ's children, if only, that they were raised a by an immature, drug addicted and damaged lone parent. Hopefully that's all...
Posted by: Jakey | June 28, 2009 at 09:02 PM
This is a tough call, but it's an issue a lot of people struggle with. Do you despise a good product when you despise the producer?
Wagner was a vicious anti-Semite, Jewish opera fans and performers probably have had a similar dilemma to yours. What do you do if you admire someone’s work, but think they were/are really evil in other ways?
Even Thomas Jefferson, who had a multitude of admirable qualities and did so many truly great things, was a slave holder. How evil is that, to purchase and own another human being? Treat people like they’re an object, just another possession. People are still fighting over how that should impact his legacy.
Like you, I also believe MJ was a monster. As I get older, I'm more and more horrified by how many people I know who were traumatized by an adult predator when they were a child. I'm so sorry you had to suffer for so many years with a monster of your own.
I was a fan of MJ's music, but that stopped during the first molestation trial. He settled a civil suit for multi-millions and then the criminal charges were dropped. Seemed pretty guilty to me.
I remember seeing that Bashir documentary with the last accuser, and being appalled by the way that little boy was seductively eye-shagging the camera like an amateur porn star. I thought it was pretty obvious something sexual was going on in his pre-pubescent life.
That poor, defenseless little boy had cancer and MJ still victimized him, consciously preyed on him. It's a relief MJ's no longer in a position to ruin people's lives with his selfishness.
That being said, I find myself being inconsistent about my boycotting. But you've given me a good way to look at things.
I won't go to a Woody Allen movie after reading Mia Farrow's book, I think he's a big fat perv. But, I’ve wondered why I don’t despise Charlie Chaplin in the same way. There's not as much detail but similar evidence he was guilty of the same thing as Woody Allen. It’s not really fair.
What you said about the villain being dead and not profiting makes sense, and is a good way to look at things, I think. And, nobody knows whether MJ can still enjoy his legacy, but you’re right, some innocent living people can benefit.
So if Joe and Grace ever show any interest in MJ, you could give them more info then and let them decide.
But since they haven't shown any interest in MJ, I would spend the energy introducing them to artists you prefer. . . You have gotten over that Michael Bolton obsession haven't you? I'd skip him.
Posted by: Wynda | June 28, 2009 at 11:08 PM
Goldfish and Wynda,
I agree with you about separating the art from the artists. There were many freaks, bastards and weirdos who have made great art/music. If I was to apply a filter and select only the art of the virtuous, I would be pretty stuck for enjoyment. However, My kids bring Aspie, are not able to separate the two right now; and maybe they will never be able to do it. So for now, I am keeping them clear of people I know to be particularly nasty.
Jakey,
Hmmm pre-op transexual? I never thought about it like that, but it is a thought. And you got some unwitting validation of your opinion from an unusual source:
The other night Grace, unable to sleep, came downstairs while I was watching some MJ stuff on the telly. Her timing was perfect. They were showing that seminal 1983 performance from Motown25 where the Moonwalk made it's debut. Despite all I had said, I didn't change the channel. It was too good to deny her: "Watch this" I said to Grace. She watched for a few seconds.
"Who's that?" she asked.
"Michael Jackson"
"*That's* not Michael Jackson! Michael Jackson is a LADY".
Not a woman, mind you: A lady. (so *that's* the distinction!)
...and Wynda: No. I still keep a Michael Boulton poster behind my closet door and play his music in the car when I am alone
-Like I know *you* do with Kenny G... :P
Posted by: One Sick Mother | June 30, 2009 at 01:09 PM
i was also target of a child molester (n yes it went on for years, until I grew boobs and an ass). n yes my stedaddy did succeeded in raping me. but i believe that mj did not do anything like that. he loved his kids n his fam. his daddy took his child hood from him so talk what u no.2 me i thing u need to get some help so real help. because u have not forgive the man that did this to u. i no because i hate all men even mj this is y i am a bisexual because of my stepdaddy. n u need to do some with u time to me u r a hateful bitch to post something like this over the net. n yes u r tryin to start someing. my son is 2 years old n he has a gife n he nos who is good n bad. n he luvs mj. n all i have to say is that i'm paryin 4 u n ppl like u. u need to get a life as a matter of fact i am going to do something with my time because ppl like u r just hateful n i don't really care for ppl of ur kind. god be with u .
Posted by: cc69 | August 11, 2009 at 01:09 PM
cc69,
I was going to respond to your comment, but I can't do incoherent, vituperative rambling anywhere near as well as you. So you have me at a rare loss for words.
Go with God. Please.
Posted by: One Sick Mother | August 11, 2009 at 05:46 PM