henrietta. Posted November 27, 2010 Share Posted November 27, 2010 I think I get what you are saying...everyone can relate to a Heal The World, you're talking about personal vulnerability...like a TVR type situation...or am I completely wrong? lol You're right, and MJ doesn't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThatOtherFan Posted November 27, 2010 Share Posted November 27, 2010 FAIL. You're failing to look at the bigger picture. I'm asking you if MJ is such a 'musical genius' why couldn't he create music to rebound all the scrutiny? Why did he decide fly out to the Middle East and release Greatest Hits compilation after compilation? It's a simple question. Musical genius has nothing to do with his life. His musical genius and whether you believe him to be that or not is defined by his body of work...not his life. That is EXACTLY what I was saying to bzebabe. His life and celebrity is to muddied with his work for people to truly appreciate it and examine it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rock & Roll Hall of Game Posted November 27, 2010 Share Posted November 27, 2010 I think I get what you are saying...everyone can relate to a Heal The World, you're talking about personal vulnerability...like a TVR type situation...or am I completely wrong? lol i said exclude the hippie stuff but yea.. basically.. MJ doesn't have any music that he AND the average person can related to... that he penned/co-penned... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bzebabe Posted November 27, 2010 Author Share Posted November 27, 2010 and its not like Genius is such a power word anyway gen·ius –noun, plural gen·ius·es An exceptional natural capacity of intellect, especially as shown in creative and original work in science, art, music, etc. The genius of Mozart. STOP! what you will not do is come in my thread acting like you don't know what people mean when they use the word genius...don't start that "genius" is not a power word shit in here...I'ss let it slide this time cuz I heard you have a big dick....next time you post some shit like that, you gonna have to post some pics Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThatOtherFan Posted November 27, 2010 Share Posted November 27, 2010 you ---> you ------> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
henrietta. Posted November 27, 2010 Share Posted November 27, 2010 you ------> Game uses a picture of a mad kid and says it's you. You use a picture of a dude "beaming" and asking if "U mad" and says it's game. Do you see how you ed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rock & Roll Hall of Game Posted November 27, 2010 Share Posted November 27, 2010 Game uses a picture of a mad kid and says it's you. You use a picture of a dude "beaming" and asking if "U mad" and says it's game. Do you see how you ed :lmao: :lmao: :lmao: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bzebabe Posted November 27, 2010 Author Share Posted November 27, 2010 Musical genius has nothing to do with his life. His musical genius and whether you believe him to be that or not is defined by his body of work...not his life. That is EXACTLY what I was saying to bzebabe. His life and celebrity is to muddied with his work for people to truly appreciate it and examine it. to be honest, I think MJ lost confidence in his ability to produce great music somewhere along the road...I don't know what exactly sparked that, but I do beleive that he did...compound that with all his personal crisis....lawd hammercy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EphraimAdamz Posted November 27, 2010 Share Posted November 27, 2010 Personally his stage presence, voice, and music videos are just as important as the music to me. The whole point of music is to engage in a physical/mental response Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rock & Roll Hall of Game Posted November 27, 2010 Share Posted November 27, 2010 Personally his stage presence, voice, and music videos are just as important as the music to me. The whole point of music is to engage in a physical/mental response music is stage one... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
art Posted November 27, 2010 Share Posted November 27, 2010 Musical genius has nothing to do with his life. His musical genius and whether you believe him to be that or not is defined by his body of work...not his life. That is EXACTLY what I was saying to bzebabe. His life and celebrity is to muddied with his work for people to truly appreciate it and examine it. You don't get it. MJ's image took another hit in 2005. I'm asking why couldn't he put his "musical genius" to use to derive the public's view away from his lifestyle to his music? Since you brought R. Kelly up. I will use him as an example. R. Kelly was accused of child pornography in 2002. But rebounded the whole public scrutiny by putting his talents to use and releasing an album in 2003 which he wrote and produced that sold over 3 million albums worldwide and garnered hits. He continued to be a demand in the music world by working with other artists and creating hits for himself. So I'm saying despite MJ's allegations why couldn't he rebound with his talent if he's such a 'musical genius'? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angela Posted November 27, 2010 Share Posted November 27, 2010 It's weird with MJ. His biggest issue wasn't his talent, but his refusal to adapt to change. He clearly was VERY involved in some of his best music. He was very involved in a how song is composed a certain way he wanted it to sound. It's one thing to study music theory; it's another to properly incorporate it and bring out the best elements of multiple sounds to help create that song. And for that, the work he did with Quincy is imo, genius. It's something people hope to create time and time again but have failed. The problem is that once he found a certain sound that gave him his pinnacle of success, he wanted to stick with it even though the zeitgeist had changed. I think sometimes who you work with helps to bring out that genius with you. Hell, Quincy has worked with a multitude of artists, but he has never been able to replicate that kind of timeless music that he created with Michael. There was a certain type of synergy and creative genius that was involved in their process. Clearly from watching This is It, he didn't need help on the performing aspect. When it comes to performing, and the thought process behind it, he has no peer. Musically, he clearly had a vision and involvement, but it doesn't reach that stroke of genius, unless he has someone who can bring it out of him. You can be genius and be stubborn and resistant to change. And to me, that describes Michael. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EphraimAdamz Posted November 27, 2010 Share Posted November 27, 2010 STOP! what you will not do is come in my thread acting like you don't know what people mean when they use the word genius...don't start that "genius" is not a power word shit in here...I'ss let it slide this time cuz I heard you have a big dick....next time you post some shit like that, you gonna have to post some pics Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
art Posted November 27, 2010 Share Posted November 27, 2010 Game uses a picture of a mad kid and says it's you. You use a picture of a dude "beaming" and asking if "U mad" and says it's game. Do you see how you ed :lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bzebabe Posted November 27, 2010 Author Share Posted November 27, 2010 Personally his stage presence, voice, and music videos are just as important as the music to me. The whole point of music is to engage in a physical/mental response so a person must encompass all those things to be considered a musical genius? you can't consider them a genius without seeing them on stage or in a video? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThatOtherFan Posted November 27, 2010 Share Posted November 27, 2010 to be honest, I think MJ lost confidence in his ability to produce great music somewhere along the road...I don't know what exactly sparked that, but I do beleive that he did...compound that with all his personal crisis....lawd hammercy I have my opinions on that too... However that's not the topic. We're talking about whether he was a musical genius. That opinion is not and should not be influenced by his life and/or when he released music and when he didn't. We can have that conversation, about his personal life and how it impacted his music... but that should be totally separate from the subject at hand. When he recovered from a personal crisis to record and release music has nothing to do with the body of music he we're supposed to be judging. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EphraimAdamz Posted November 27, 2010 Share Posted November 27, 2010 music is stage one... Yea. but there are so many songs out there that don't make you get up and dance. Don't make you have memories of when/how you first heard the song. Don't remind you of your friends/family. I mean the man had blind, deaf, and people who don't speak english jamming to his songs. People who didn't have radios or tv's, but knew who MJ was Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThatOtherFan Posted November 27, 2010 Share Posted November 27, 2010 You don't get it. MJ's image took another hit in 2005. I'm asking why couldn't he put his "musical genius" to use to derive the public's view away from his lifestyle to his music? Since you brought R. Kelly up. I will use him as an example. R. Kelly was accused of child pornography in 2002. But rebounded the whole public scrutiny by putting his talents to use and releasing an album in 2003 which he wrote and produced that sold over 3 million albums worldwide and garnered hits. He continued to be a demand in the music world by working with other artists and creating hits for himself. So I'm saying despite MJ's allegations why couldn't he rebound with his talent if he's such a 'musical genius'? Musical genius has NOTHING to do with how fast he released music after a personal crisis though. Musical genius and whether he was one should concern ONLY his body work. The issue you are delving in is totally separate from the topic of the thread. We can discuss that, but it shouldn't be discussed as part why he was or wasn't a musical genius, because the two are totally separate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bzebabe Posted November 27, 2010 Author Share Posted November 27, 2010 It's weird with MJ. His biggest issue wasn't his talent, but his refusal to adapt to change. He clearly was VERY involved in some of his best music. He was very involved in a how song is composed a certain way he wanted it to sound. It's one thing to study music theory; it's another to properly incorporate it and bring out the best elements of multiple sounds to help create that song. And for that, the work he did with Quincy is imo, genius. It's something people hope to create time and time again but have failed. The problem is that once he found a certain sound that gave him his pinnacle of success, he wanted to stick with it even though the zeitgeist had changed. I think sometimes who you work with helps to bring out that genius with you. Hell, Quincy has worked with a multitude of artists, but he has never been able to replicate that kind of timeless music that he created with Michael. There was a certain type of synergy and creative genius that was involved in their process. Clearly from watching This is It, he didn't need help on the performing aspect. When it comes to performing, and the thought process behind it, he has no peer. Musically, he clearly had a vision and involvement, but it doesn't reach that stroke of genius, unless he has someone who can bring it out of him. You can be genius and be stubborn and resistant to change. And to me, that describes Michael. my biggest issue with MJ is what I feel to be his lack of growth (more conceptually than anything) and experimentation...truly, both on stage and on his albums...so I fully agree with you about him being resistance to change...I feel like that stunted his growth Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angela Posted November 27, 2010 Share Posted November 27, 2010 my biggest issue with MJ is what I feel to be his lack of growth (more conceptually than anything) and experimentation...truly, both on stage and on his albums...so I fully agree with you about him being resistance to change...I feel like that stunted his growth I agree. He found something that gave him in a lot of ways unprecedented success and continued to stick with it in hopes that people would come back around to it. He was waiting for people to adapt to what he was doing, not the other way around. He was too stubborn in that regard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EphraimAdamz Posted November 27, 2010 Share Posted November 27, 2010 so a person must encompass all those things to be considered a musical genius? you can't consider them a genius without seeing them on stage or in a video? Yes it matters, regardless of the time or era that you live in. Im sure Beethoven didn't present his music in just any old way, modern technology or not. Cavemen too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bzebabe Posted November 27, 2010 Author Share Posted November 27, 2010 I have my opinions on that too... However that's not the topic. We're talking about whether he was a musical genius. That opinion is not and should not be influenced by his life and/or when he released music and when he didn't. We can have that conversation, about his personal life and how it impacted his music... but that should be totally separate from the subject at hand. When he recovered from a personal crisis to record and release music has nothing to do with the body of music he we're supposed to be judging. what I said had nothing to do with musical genius...that was more in response to was artiskey said about him not recording or releasing music Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rock & Roll Hall of Game Posted November 27, 2010 Share Posted November 27, 2010 Yea. but there are so many songs out there that don't make you get up and dance. Don't make you have memories of when/how you first heard the song. Don't remind you of your friends/family. I mean the man had blind, deaf, and people who don't speak english jamming to his songs. People who didn't have radios or tv's, but knew who MJ was u can't compare today's music with MJ MJ's not the only person blind people and non-English speaking listeners, listened to... and how does a deaf person listen to music? :blink: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bzebabe Posted November 27, 2010 Author Share Posted November 27, 2010 Yes it matters, regardless of the time or era that you live in. Im sure Beethoven didn't present his music in just any old way, modern technology or not. Cavemen too. so you can't hear a song on the radio and take it as is, you require a visual to determine the genius of the material? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
art Posted November 27, 2010 Share Posted November 27, 2010 Musical genius has NOTHING to do with how fast he released music after a personal crisis though. Musical genius and whether he was one should concern ONLY his body work. The issue you are delving in is totally separate from the topic of the thread. We can discuss that, but it shouldn't be discussed as part why he was or wasn't a musical genius, because the two are totally separate. Dude, I'm not speaking about how fast he releases music. R. Kelly could've flopped and been banned from every radio station known to mankind but he wasn't because the music he created appealed to listeners so Clear Channel kept adding his music to stations. The fact that he released music so fast could've kicked him right in the ass. It's not really a good thing that he did. Tbh, It was like playing Russian Roulette with his career. When did I say 'musical genius' shouldn't only concern his body of work? You're reading way too much into it. I simply stated that MJ hasn't released music since 2001 and his public image took another hit in 2005 but he couldn't refer to his body of work to sway the public's view of him back onto his music. I don't see how what I'm talking about is any different from the discussion at hand. If he was a 'musical genius' as you believe why couldn't he make the public love him again for being one with his music? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.