Many years ago, young boys with beautiful voices were castrated to preserve the gorgeous timber of their voices. How could society condone that? Music was the priority -- it was all for the glory and the beauty of the music.
Michael Jackson was a true, gifted talent, but unfortunately, he was a "castrato."
Last night, I caught the very end of Martin Bashir's infamous interview with Jackson. Michael spoke openly about how he wouldn't be upset if his children slept in a grown man's bed. He talked about how beautiful and non-sexual this practice is. He also described how Debbie Rowe allowed him to take the infant Paris from the birthing room before the umbilical cord was removed; before the baby was cleaned up. He said the children were Debbie's "gift" to him. He was naive, needy, uninitiated, unaware of how surreal he sounded. During an Oprah interview, when she asked him whether he was a virgin, he visibly blushed. Michael Jackson was a child.
Yet in his videos his body moves in a knowing, sexual way. He often grabbed his manhood while thrusting his pelvis. Even as a child, he could use his voice to make very suggestive intonations. How do we reconcile those two strange images: Michael talking in hushed, girlish tones and Michael gyrating, pouting and grabbing himself?
This is my concern about all this adulation of MJ: should we be mourning the man or the boy who never grew up? I think many of us feel for the boy -- that boy who we collectively learned was terribly exploited, but who gave us those lovely, uniquely high notes. To borrow from one of MJ's own songs, we should be looking at ourselves in the mirror. We know that our love of his music made us conflicted about Michael, but we need to go one step further: we need to say what happened to Michael shouldn't happen to children ever again.
Michael Jackson was a true, gifted talent, but unfortunately, he was a "castrato."
Last night, I caught the very end of Martin Bashir's infamous interview with Jackson. Michael spoke openly about how he wouldn't be upset if his children slept in a grown man's bed. He talked about how beautiful and non-sexual this practice is. He also described how Debbie Rowe allowed him to take the infant Paris from the birthing room before the umbilical cord was removed; before the baby was cleaned up. He said the children were Debbie's "gift" to him. He was naive, needy, uninitiated, unaware of how surreal he sounded. During an Oprah interview, when she asked him whether he was a virgin, he visibly blushed. Michael Jackson was a child.
Yet in his videos his body moves in a knowing, sexual way. He often grabbed his manhood while thrusting his pelvis. Even as a child, he could use his voice to make very suggestive intonations. How do we reconcile those two strange images: Michael talking in hushed, girlish tones and Michael gyrating, pouting and grabbing himself?
This is my concern about all this adulation of MJ: should we be mourning the man or the boy who never grew up? I think many of us feel for the boy -- that boy who we collectively learned was terribly exploited, but who gave us those lovely, uniquely high notes. To borrow from one of MJ's own songs, we should be looking at ourselves in the mirror. We know that our love of his music made us conflicted about Michael, but we need to go one step further: we need to say what happened to Michael shouldn't happen to children ever again.
Comments
Post a Comment