非常感謝Charles Thomson能抽時間和我談話。Charles是一位獲獎的作者，他以對James Brown和其他靈歌音樂家的研究著稱。他在The Guardian, The Sun, Huffington Post, MOJO, Wax Poetics等多家出版物上發表文章，請訪問他的網址，http://www.charles-thomson.net.為什麼你會被認為是一個“Michael Jackson 專家?”
我是黑人音樂的歌迷，從年輕時起就發現了Michael Jackson。這些年來，我搜集了很多有關黑人音樂的書籍，雜誌，CDs, DVDs, 錄影帶等等。有幾個藝術家我總是很感興趣--象James Brown, Chuck Berry, Prince – 而Michael Jackson是其中之一。 像這樣，我花了近15年的時間研究--讀一堆堆的書，看紀錄片等等。
我僅僅是從去年開始成為一個Michael Jackson ‘專家’的。在2009年3月，我從Michael的團隊中的某人那裏得到一個線報，他給了我他到達倫敦宣佈他This Is It表演的特別細節。他們告訴我他會在那條跑道降落，什麼時間降落，以及他會在何處下榻。我的消息來源要我去洩露這些資訊。
我將這條線報給了英國最大的報紙太陽報，他們用這個消息拍到了Jackson離開他的私人飛機的獨家照片。因為我給他們傳遞了那種程度上的獨家消息，太陽報決定繼續和我合作，我自此後經常和他們共事。
我最近的有關Michael Jackson的貢獻是太陽報獨家揭露電影的製片人在‘This Is It’裏混入了他的以前的聲音。這個例子很好的說明了我的角色。當我看影片時，我立刻注意到在Earth Song後半部分的聲樂部分來自於Michael 1991年的一個錄音樣帶。只有一個歌迷或專家會注意到這點。同樣的，我注意到Billie Jean的歌詞變化並意識到這個聲音也是來自於另一個一個錄音樣帶上的。
我將我的筆記給了太陽報，他們雇用了一個音頻專家來確認這些聲音的確是以前的，並最終迫使一位Sony的代表承認了這個。
這聽上去也許象一個負面的報導，但是我不喜歡這其中的欺騙--為一部“紀錄片”售票，但是並沒有真的這樣做。一部紀錄片應該是真實和誠實的，它不應該混入不真實的影像。我還覺得那些混音可能是用來掩飾一些東西--一些可能會擊破製片人所宣稱的他們不知道Michael Jackson身體不適或使用藥品的話。我不認為我應該對此沉默。
你曾經在Michael Jackson幾尺之遙，你感覺到那種感覺嗎？他身上到底散發出來了什麼東西來引發那樣的大規模的暈厥，數百萬的紋身，瘋狂的愛戀，狂野的不合常理的性欲望，啜泣，忠誠，歇斯底里甚至癲狂?
我第一次近距離見到他是在2006年World Music Awards上，看到他的出現所引起的大規模歇斯底里是頗令人興奮的。那感覺象一個節日。當他終於出現在臺上時，整個會場象爆炸了一樣。他看上去當然很引人注目--與他的照片上不同。他不可置信的纖瘦，特別是考慮到他快50歲了。他的步子很威風，仿佛他在飄動。他的著裝無可挑剔，他的臉看上去我要說挺正常的--比他的大多數照片上看起來要好多了。但是對所有的那些狂熱，當他離開舞臺後，我感到有一點空虛。說實話，我認為1993年耗盡了他大部分的歡樂，而審判將剩下的也幾乎都抹殺了。他看上去僅僅是在走過場罷了。
在2009年3月的那個宣告有些東西就是感覺不對勁。我聽說Jackson原本應在一周前飛過來發佈這個音樂會的，但是他推遲了（你可以在Randy Taraborrelli計畫於今天夏天推出的新版本的傳記上讀到這些）。而且，他在發佈會的當天也遲到了很久（這你也可以在Taraborrelli的書中讀到)，而在發佈會現場的公關人員看上去也有一點緊張。
會後我和一群朋友O2的建築裏進晚餐，我們都同意有一點不對頭。他聽上去好像不願意在那裏 – ‘This is the final curtain call, OK?’ – 與其說感到興奮，我只是感覺到這整個事情從頭開始就是難逃一劫的。儘管我買了門票，希望演出能進行，內心深處我期望著演出會因這個或那個原因被取消。
我真的不認為我能夠評論為什麼Michael Jackson會在他的歌迷身上引發那樣的狂熱，因為無論那是什麼，1993年後其實那其實已經不存在了。這就像他的靈魂從他的身體中消失了，就像你看著 Michael Jackson的軀殼，但是他的精髓,在很久以前就已經消散了。
儘管我愛了Michael有將近四分之一個世紀，我實際上從來沒有想過當他去世時我的感覺會是什麼。我對這個我實際上從來沒有見過的男人感到絕望的毀滅性的悲痛。你認為Michael所呈獻出來的那種愛的能量，那種他本人愛我們每一個人的那種情感，是真的嗎？藝術能夠使它變得真實嗎？或者他的愛－－和我們的愛－－只是幻覺？
Michael對人們的感覺看上去是真誠的－－除非你真的相信那樣做的理由，你不會就這麼拿出幾百萬美元的。如果你不想，你也不會對陌生者打開自己的家門的。
然而，1993年以後他看上去不再與以前相同了。就像我先前說的，就好像所有的歡樂從他身上被趕了出去。他象以前一樣重複著表達情感的話語，但是它們現在感覺更像固定的短語而不是來自于心靈的資訊。他看上去幾乎在以重複新聞快訊的方式說著: ‘I love you more’，‘The best is yet to come’， ‘Burn the tabloids’. 就像他是在無人駕駛狀態。
說實話，我認為他感到厭倦，受夠了當Michael Jackson。我認為他只是想要一個安靜的生活，但是被強迫著一直做Michael Jackson。
什麼使Michael Jackson與眾不同？
作為一個藝術家，Michael Jackson是全能的。他能夠唱，舞蹈，寫詞和作曲。Little Richard曾經將Michael Jackson稱為他所知道的”最全能的藝術家“。Michael Jackson在他的巔峰時期將錄音藝術家和現場表演者的品質標準提高到了一個新的層次。
不過還有其他一些藝術家也能唱，舞蹈，寫詞和作曲。 James Brown 和Prince both是可以馬上想到的，不過那還有更多。但是，沒有一個人能象Michael Jackson激發那樣的狂熱和崇拜。我認為他的歌迷們真正感受的是他的人格。Michael Jackson和他的歌迷間的關係可不僅僅限於偶爾擺姿勢照相或簽名的。
比如， 2001M J在紐約開了兩場音樂會--一場在9月7號，一場在9月10號。恐怖襲擊發生在11號，很多飛到紐約看Michael Jackson的歌迷被困住且經濟困難。Jackson找到了其中的一些歌迷，替他們付錢，在他們被困紐約期間付旅館費並隨後資助他們回家。沒有多少藝術家會這樣做的。 你提到你有多麼悲痛。就世界上哀悼Michael的各種現象來說，你的體驗是什麼樣的呢？
悲痛（grief）是一個很重的詞－－我不認我說過我在Michael Jackson去世後感到悲痛。震驚，當然。還有悲傷（sadness）。不過，我總是以一種理性的態度看待Michael Jackson – 我帶來沒有感到與他有什麼個人方面的聯繫。我傾慕作為藝術家的他，但是也不怕指出他的缺點。我從來沒有為他的大量的對口型，讓孩子們進入他的臥室或那個把孩子懸在陽臺外的行為辯護過。
很多人將Michael Jackson視為他們生活中不可分割的一部分－－象朋友或家人－－但是我總是將他視為我所敬仰的以為藝人。我為這種損失感到傷心，我認為他的故事是讚歌也是悲劇性的。我為他不能看到他的孩子們長大感到遺憾，而他那麼拼命的從審判中倖存下來卻只多活了沒有什麼建樹的四年，這真是很可惜。但是我沒有沉浸在哀痛之中或計畫飛到洛杉磯。我在觀看電視裏的追思會時流下眼淚了嗎？當然，就像另外10億人一樣。
我相信對Michael Jackson的迫害和後來私刑樣對待很能反應了我們那種角鬥士時期的黑暗，宗教裁判所和火刑時代的幽靈以及我們過去對公開的絞刑和用石頭砸死等刑法所感到的快感。那麼，為什麼是Michael Jackson, 這個我們最愛的人?
我曾在2008年為一本現在已經停刊了名為Deadling的雜誌採訪過Aphrodite Jones，你可以在我的網頁上讀這篇文章。她在採訪中對這種公眾對名人們處私刑所感到的快感這麼評論道:"在人們日常生活中存在這麼如食屍鬼般殘忍的意向，以目睹名人們倒楣為快；這種看著比自己更成功的人被他們的成就所懲罰所感到的病態的快感。“
我認為Jackson成為媒體的靶子主要是因為他是這個星球上最著名的人。知名人士++ 爆炸新聞 = 高額收益。我也能理解在Jackson不停地指責媒體也使他們感到惱怒。在他的巔峰時期，Jackson不停的放出一些有關他自己的故事，然後又公開的對此抱怨，鼓動他的歌迷們抵制報紙！不難理解為什麼媒體這麼生氣了。
很多人認為他被攻擊是因為他的種族，我認為將這種可能性排除在外也使一種短視。我經常將Jackson和世界上第一個黑人重量級拳擊冠軍Jack Johnson相比較。媒體對Johnson的對待是毫無疑問的種族主義，而媒體對Jackson的做法也毫無疑問是相似的；扣帽子, 猖獗的歪曲事實，編造的故事，貶損的漫畫，對於刑事審判偏見的報導--如此等等。
就如同Johnson在50多年前種族隔離仍盛行時成為一個黑人世界冠軍一樣，Jackson在MTV仍不願在電視頻道上播放美國黑人音樂的時代其唱片銷量超過了Elivs並擁有了Beatles的歌。
你可以找出一條時間線來：在Thriller以前，Jackson已經做了手術，他的化妝已經開始變淡，他的聲音已經很高，他已經有年幼的朋友。只要Jackson的成功限於在他自己的種族範圍內，媒體不在乎那些。但是從Thriller打破白人記錄的那一刻起--他比Elivs賣更多的唱片並開始購買白人音樂家的出版物那一刻--媒體突然對他的手術，變淡的皮膚，他的高音和他的年幼的朋友開始感興趣了。當Jackson開始威脅到白人維持的現狀時，他開始成了靶子。
可爭辯的說，, 就像Johnson一樣，他被看成一個不知道自己位置的黑人。
不能否認的是在媒體的某些領域存在著對Michael Jackson進行盡可能頻繁的公然的合謀的詆毀舉動。事實常常被有意的曲解，而錯誤的消息被有意的當做事實來報導。這是毋庸置疑的。
我對於Evan chandler自殺的下意識的反應一點都不仁慈，儘管如果我根據每個人在生活中所犯的錯誤來評判一個人的話，我對自己的會是最嚴厲的。但是我不能否認我的第一反應是，”什麼？不能帶著那種罪惡感活下去呢？“當然，Chandler的健康狀況和破碎的家庭無疑也是誘因之一。我的問題是為什麼沒有人知道這個故事。就其聳人聽聞的程度這無疑應該出現在每一家報紙上頭條，而不是僅僅在第17頁 一兩 行。你談到媒體的偏見。為什麼沒有人聽說過Evan Chandler曾在幾年後嘗試用一個健身館的杠鈴擊殺 Jordan？ 這些故事不也能很轟動嗎？?
我認為Evan Chandler的死沒有被廣泛報導是因為沒有人瞭解他。大多數主要媒體談及了這個故事，但是所有的報導內容都是相同的，因為人們對此知道的很少。
唯一一篇我見到的有深度的報導是每日郵報的完全不合事實的文章，對此我向媒體投訴委員投訴它違反了業務守則的中的7個部分，包括它公開稱Jackson為‘一個聲名狼藉的孌童者’。毫不驚訝的，他們駁回了我的投訴。他們看上去對報紙毫無依據的指控一個無辜的黑人為孌童犯行為不感興趣。
可是，如果每日郵報將Paul McCartney稱為一個 ‘‘一個聲名狼藉的孌童者’, 我想媒體投訴委員恐怕會就此說些什麼吧。
那個Evan試圖謀殺他兒子的故事不合媒體的意圖。這將Evan描繪成了一個暴力的有陰影的角色，並暗示他們倆之間的關係遠不是親密的或正常的，為那個Jordy因為被他父親逼迫他在1993年撒謊而痛恨他父親的說法提供了可信度。那個Evan試圖用杠鈴擊殺Jordy的故事擊破了Evan作為一個為兒子尋求正義的慈愛父親的謊言。
那個故事的時機對媒體來說尤為糟糕，因為那發生在2005年Jackson審訊結束後不久，那期間大多數媒體慣常的歪曲證據和證詞來講Jackson描繪成一個罪犯。他們的第一個指控者再一次敗壞自己的可信度不太符合他們試圖描繪的圖像。
以輕鬆一點的話題結束，你最喜歡的Michael Jackson的歌，音樂錄影，時刻等是什麼？
我最喜歡的單人專輯是Off The Wall和Thriller，不過我還將Jacksons的專輯Destiny和Triumph與它們列在一起。Michael事實上在Destiny和Triumph中比 Off The Wall和Thriller注入了更多的創造力，我認為它們同樣出色 – 這些專輯是Jackson真正作為一位詞作家和作曲家的豐產時刻。他後期的作品對我來說顯得過於雕琢了。
就現場表演。我喜歡從Destiny巡演到Bad巡演的每一時刻。
Bad巡演是Jackson作為獨立表演者的巔峰時刻。他在那次巡演所作的是將人們所期望的一個流行音樂會的壯觀場面和Jame Brown式音樂會的音樂傳奇成功的融合了起來。就像那樣，你既得到了現場的音樂和演唱，同時你還看到了棒極了的服裝，舞蹈等等。此後巡演的重點從音樂移開，而偏向于壯觀場面，所以你看到坦克在舞臺上開動，或者天使從橫樑上飄下來--但是你失去了現場的演唱。我寧可看現場的體驗而不想要坦克。如果我知道音樂會會是對口型的話，我不會去買票的。
我最喜歡的音樂錄影時Thriller, Smooth Criminal 和 Remember the time。
Lorette C. Luzajic talks with Michael Jackson Expert Charles Thomson
Thanks so much to Charles Thomson for taking the time to talk with me. Charles is an award winningwriter best known for his work on James Brown and other soul musicians. He writes for The Guardian, The Sun, Huffington Post, MOJO, Wax Poetics, and more. Please visit him at http://www.charles-thomson.net.
Why are you considered a “Michael Jackson expert?”
I’m a fan of black music generally and discovered Michael Jackson at a young age. Over the years I’ve amassed a vast collection of black music books, magazines, CDs, DVDs, videotapes and more. There are a few artists who I’ve always found particularly interesting – people like James Brown, Chuck Berry, Prince – and Michael Jackson is one of them. As such, I’ve have had nearly 15 years of ‘study time’ – reading stacks of books, watching documentaries and so on.
I only began working as a Michael Jackson ‘expert’ last year. In March 2009 I received a tip-off from somebody in Michael’s camp, who gave me specific details about his arrival in London to announce the This Is It shows. They told me which airstrip he was flying into, what time he was landing and where he would be staying. My source asked me to leak the information.
I worked on that tip-off with the Sun, which is Britain ’s biggest newspaper. They used the info to snap exclusive pictures of Jackson disembarking his private jet. Once I had delivered an exclusive of that magnitude, the Sun decided to keep using me and I’ve worked with them frequently since then.
My most recent Michael Jackson contribution was the Sun’s exclusive revelation that filmmakers had dubbed old vocals into ‘This Is It’. That story really illustrates my role perfectly. When I saw the film I noticed immediately that the vocals during the latter half of Earth Song were dubbed in from Michael’s 1991 demo. Only a fan or an expert would notice that. Similarly, I noticed the lyric change in Billie Jean and realized that the vocals on that track were also dubbed in from a demo.
I passed my notes to the Sun, who hired audio experts to confirm that the vocals were old and eventually got a Sony rep to admit it.
That might sound like a negative story but I didn’t like the deceit involved – selling tickets to a ‘documentary’ but not really delivering one. A documentary should be truthful and honest. It shouldn’t be dubbed to paint an inaccurate picture. I also felt that the dubbed vocals could be there to disguise something – something that might blow apart the filmmakers’ claims that they had no idea Michael Jackson was experiencing ill-health or using drugs. I didn’t think I should let it go unreported.
You stood within metres of Michael Jackson. Did you feel it? What is it exactly that is emanating off of him to cause mass faintings, millions of tattoos, crazy love, wild and absurd sexual desire, sobbing, loyalty, hysteria, even madness?
The first time I saw him up close, at the World Music Awards in 2006, was quite exciting because there seemed to be a mass hysteria around his appearance. It felt like an event. The place blew up when he finally appeared onstage. He certainly looked striking – different to his photographs. He was incredibly slender, particularly given that he was approaching fifty. He walked very majestically, almost like he was floating. He was impeccably dressed and his face looked, dare I say it, quite normal – certainly a lot better than it looked in most photos. But for all the hysteria, after he’d left the stage I felt a little empty. To be honest, I think that 1993 drained a lot of the joy out of him and the trial killed most of what was left. He seemed to just be going through the motions.
At the announcement in March 2009 something just didn’t feel right. I’d heard that Jackson was supposed to fly over a week previously to announce the gigs but had pulled out (you’ll read more about that in Randy Taraborrelli’s updated biog, due out in Summer). Also, he was very late on the day of the announcement (more on that in Taraborrelli’s book, too) and the PR people seemed to be slightly on edge in the press room.
I had dinner with a group of friends right afterwards inside the O2 complex and we all agreed that something had seemed wrong. He had sounded like he didn’t want to be there – ‘This is the final curtain call, OK?’ – and rather than feeling excited I just felt like the whole thing was doomed from the beginning. Although I bought tickets and hoped the shows would go ahead, deep down I expected the concerts to be cancelled for one reason or another.
I don’t really think I can comment on what it was about Michael Jackson which elicited the hysteria often exhibited by his fans, because I think that whatever it was, after 1993 it wasn’t really there anymore. It was as though all the soul had been stamped out of him; like you were watching the shell of Michael Jackson but his essence had long since dissipated.
Although I’ve loved Michael for nearly a quarter century, I never actually contemplated how I would feel when he died. I’ve felt desperate, devastating grief with the loss of a man I never actually met. Do you think the kind of energy of love that Michael put out there, the feeling that he personally loves each and every one of us, is real? Can art make that real, or is his love- and ours- an illusion?
Michael’s concern for people certainly seemed genuine – you don’t give away millions of dollars unless you really believe in the cause. Nor do you open your home to strangers unless you really want to.
However, after 1993 he never seemed quite the same. As I said earlier, it was like all of the joy had been stamped out of him. He reiterated the same sentiments as before but now they felt more like catchphrases than heartfelt messages. He seemed to speak almost entirely in repetitive soundbites: ‘I love you more’. ‘The best is yet to come’. ‘Burn the tabloids’. It was like he was on autopilot.
In truth, I think he was bored and fed up with being Michael Jackson. I think he just wanted a quiet life but felt under pressure to be Michael Jackson all the time.
What makes Michael different?
As an artist, Michael Jackson had the complete package. He could sing, dance, write and compose. Little Richard once called Michael Jackson the ‘most complete artist’ he ever knew. Michael Jackson, at his peak, raised the bar for quality as both a recording artist and a live performer.
But there have other artists who could sing, dance, write and compose. James Brown and Prince both spring to mind but there are plenty more. However, none of them inspired the same hysteria and adulation as Michael Jackson. I think it was his personality that his fans really bought into. Michael Jackson’s relationship with his fans went beyond posing for the occasional picture or signing the odd autograph.
For instance, in 2001 he played two concerts in New York – one on September 7th and one on September 10th. The terrorist attacks happened on the 11th and many fans who had flown to New York to see Michael Jackson were left stranded with little or no money. Jackson tracked down some of those fans and covered them financially, paying for their hotels while they were stuck in NY and then funding their trips home. There aren’t many other artists who would do that
You mentioned how hard your own grief was. In light of the many interesting the world mourned Michael, what course did your experience take?
Grief is a strong word – I don’t think I’ve ever said I experienced grief after Michael Jackson’s death. Shock, certainly. Sadness too. But I have always taken a very rational approach to Michael Jackson – I never felt personally connected to him in any way. I appreciated him as an artist but I wasn’t afraid to address his shortcomings. I’ve never defended his prolific miming or his decision to let kids into his bedroom or the baby-dangling incident.
A lot of people saw Michael Jackson as an intricate part of their lives – like a friend or a family member – but I always saw him as an entertainer whose work I admired. I was saddened by the loss and I think his story is as tragic as it is triumphant. I feel sorry that he will miss watching his children grow up and it’s a shame that he fought tooth and nail to survive his trial only to die four years later having not done a whole lot in the interim. But I didn’t get dressed up in mourning gear or make any plans to travel to LA. Did I shed a few tears during the televised memorial? Of course I did. But so did an estimated billion other people.
I believe the witch-hunt and eventual lynching of Michael Jackson speaks volumes about our gladiatorial darkness, the spectre of the Inquisition and the Burning Times, the joy we used to take in public hangings and stonings. So why Michael Jackson, the one we loved most?
I interviewed Aphrodite Jones in 2008 for a now defunct magazine called Deadline. The article is on my website. She made a comment during the interview about the public’s enjoyment of the ‘lynching’ of celebrities: “There’s this ghoulish sense of everyday people taking pleasure in witnessing the downfall of celebrities; this morbid sense of glee at watching those better off than ourselves being punished for their success.”
I think Jackson was targeted by the media primarily because he was the most famous man on the planet. Big name + big story = big revenue. I think it also irritated the media - understandably – that Jackson kept stitching them up. At his peak Jackson was forever planting stories about himself, then publicly whinging about them and urging his fans to boycott newspapers! You can see why that would have got up their noses.
Many think he may have been targeted on account of his race and I think it would be shortsighted to rule that out entirely. I often compare Jackson to Jack Johnson, the world’s first black Heavyweight Boxing Champion. Johnson’s media treatment was unarguably racist, and Jackson ’s media treatment has been unarguably similar; name-calling, rampant misquoting, bogus stories, derogatory cartoons, biased coverage of criminal allegations – so on and so forth.
Just as Johnson was a black world champion more than fifty years before segregation was lifted, Jackson was a black man who outsold Elvis and owned the Beatles in an era when MTV still didn’t like putting African Americans on its TV channels.
You can trace it on a timeline; Before Thriller hit, Jackson was already getting surgery. His make-up was already lightening and his voice was already high. His friends were already young. As long as Jackson was only successful within his own racial parameters, the media didn’t care. But the moment Thriller broke white records – the moment he outsold Elvis and started buying white musicians’ publishing – the media was suddenly interested in his surgery, his light skin, his high voice and his young friends. The moment Jackson threatened the status quo, he became a target.
Arguably, like Johnson, he was seen as a black man who didn’t know his place.
What is undeniable is that in certain areas of the media there is a blatant and concerted attempt to slander Michael Jackson as frequently as possible. Facts are intentionally misstated and false information is intentionally represented as truth. That much is unarguable.
My knee-jerk response to Evan Chandler’s suicide was hardly charitable, though if I judged everyone for the mess they made out of their own lives, I’d have to judge myself most harshly. But I can’t deny that my immediate response was, “What, couldn’t live with the guilt?” Of course, Chandler ’s health and fractured family were no doubt contributing factors. The question here is why no one knows this story. Surely, it should be slathered over every paper, not meted out in a page 17 dribble, given its sensationalism. You talk about media bias. Why has no one heard about Evan Chandler trying to kill Jordan , a few years back, with a gym barbell and some mace? Wouldn’t both of these stories pay big time, too?
I think the primary reason Evan Chandler’s death wasn’t widely reported is because nobody knew anything about him. Most major outlets covered the story but all of their articles contained exactly the same information because so little was known.
The only in-depth report I saw was a totally factually inaccurate feature in the Daily Mail, which I reported to the Press Complaints Commission for breaching about seven sections of the Code of Practice, including an overt reference to Jackson as ‘a common paedophile’. Unsurprisingly, they found no merit to my complaint. They don’t seem to be interested when newspapers baselessly accuse an innocent black man of paedophilia.
And yet, if the Daily Mail referred to Paul McCartney as a ‘common paedophile’, I think the PCC would probably have something to say about it.
That story about Evan trying to kill his son didn’t suit the media’s agenda. It portrayed Evan as a violent and shady character and suggested that the pair’s relationship was far from tight-knit or functional, lending credibility to claims that Jordy despised his father for apparently forcing him to lie in 1993. That story about Evan trying to kill Jordy with a barbell – it shattered the myth of Evan as the doting father who just wanted justice for his son.
The timing was particularly bad for the media as the incident happened shortly after Jackson ’s 2005 trial, during which most outlets had routinely skewed evidence and testimony in order to portray Jackson as guilty. Their first accuser discrediting himself [again] didn’t quite tally with the picture they’d been trying to paint.
Ending on a lighter note, what are your personal Michael Jackson faves (songs, videos, moments, etc.)
My favourite solo albums are Off The Wall and Thriller but I also rank the Jacksons albums Destiny and Triumph alongside them. Michael actually had more creative input on Destiny and Triumph than he did on Off The Wall and Thriller and I think the albums are just as good – those albums are where Jackson really flourished as a lyricist and a composer. His later work becomes patchy for me – too processed.
In terms of live performance, I like everything from the Destiny Tour up to the Bad Tour.
Bad Tour is easily the pinnacle of Jackson ’s career as a solo performer. What he did with that tour was to successfully merge the spectacle you expected from a pop concert with the musical legitimacy you expected from a James Brown concert. So you got all live music and vocals, but you also got great costumes, great dancing and so on. On subsequent tours the focus seemed to shift away from the music and towards the spectacle, so you had tanks driving onstage or angels floating out of the rafters – but you forfeited the live vocals. I would rather have the live experience than the tank. I’d never even consider buying a ticket to a concert if I knew it was going to be mimed.
My three favourite videos are Thriller, Smooth Criminal and Remem
沒有留言:
張貼留言