This Week in Magazines: Two Different Ways of Remembering Michael

Adoring Michael Jackson fans, and their many journalistic enablers, will gag over a stinging critique, "Michael," in the Aug. 13 New York Review of Books, a high-brow publication not likely to be found by their beds. They'll have to seek comfort, instead, in a reverential September Ebony, with the cover, "Michael, Our Icon."

New Yorker writer Hilton Als delves into Jackson's personal and professional descent in the New York Review, in part putting his life in the context of "the chokehold of black conservatism on black gay men" and a world in which "whiteness is equated with perversity, a pollutant further eroding the already decimated black family."

Clearly, this a take not fully agreed to by Michael Eric Dyson, whose "Freedom Fighter" essay in the Ebony homage (filled with some dandy photos from its archives) declares,

The reason Black folk never turned their backs on Michael is because we realized that he was merely acting out on his face what we collectively have been tempted to do in our souls: whitewash the memory and trace of our offending Blackness. We loved him because we knew that America rarely forgives a Black man his genius, and our greatest artists often pay the price for the acceptance of their gifts with tortured psyches, haunted spirits and troubled minds.

Well, the Als skewering finds melancholy insights into Jackson in a 1985 essay, "Freak and the American Ideal of Manhood" by the late black author James Baldwin. The author uttered the hope that Jackson would "snatch his life out of the jaws of a carnivorous success," in the process asserting that "freaks are called freak and are treated as they are treated--in the main, abominably--because they are human beings who cause to echo, deep within us, our most profound terrors and desires."

In the end, this argues that while Baldwin himself did in exile but "an artist, Jackson did not." His gifts as a singer and arranger became "calcified. He forgot how to speak, even behind the jeweled mask of metaphor."

Ultimately, concludes Als, he was a profile of "self-martyrdom: the ninety-pound frame; the facial operations; the dermatologist as the replacement family; the disastrous finances; the young boys loved, and then paid off. Michael Jackson died a long time ago, and it's taken years for anyone to notice." Ebony's Dyson clearly doesn't concur, echoing the eulogy-ridden claim that Jackson "was the greatest entertainer of all time."

Elsewhere in the New York Review, Roger Cohen's "Iran: The Tragedy & the Future" is a terrific account of what seem to have been the recently stolen president election and his belief that the preconditions for democracy are in place. And Michael Massing's "The News About the Internet" offers a broad, generally upbeat, overview on the Internet, underscoring some of the superior work being done but also leaving to another essay the tricky question of how quality work will be paid for on a consistent basis.

---The Aug. 10-17 New Yorker's "The Price of the Ticket" is a solid John Seabrook overview of the chaotic state of the concert music industry, with corporate consolidations, increasingly painful days for traditional promoters, the rise of secondary markets and questions about which acts will fill the big stadiums when the old war horses, like the Rolling Stones, are no longer around. Much of this ground was covered in low-profile congressional hearings but this is a good summary. And the most interesting tidbit may involve a slight puncturing of Bruce Springsteen's populist image via reminder of Newark Star-Ledger disclosures that, while berating meanie Ticketmaster for handling of tickets for a series of his concerts, the Boss was actually holding back a good chunk of the best tickets for chums and other VIP guests. His manager's defense is that in places like star-studded New York and Los Angeles, such is unavoidable.

---Aug. 1 Economist's "The Dark Pursuit of the Truth" starts with the premise that while Europeans tend to strongly repudiate torture, Americans are more divided and there remain tough policy choices for the Obama administration, including matters involving military commissions and indefinite detention for some prisoners. "The danger for Mr. Obama, as he seeks to overhaul the intelligence system, is that a fresh attack on the American mainland would immediately expose him to the accusation of being soft on terrorism."

---Aug. 10 Business Week's "Obama & Business" has a full and strong interview with the President in which he forcefully rebuts the notion of himself as anti-business, along the way rather acerbically noting the tons of federal money which is keeping folks in the private sector afloat. The issue also includes, "The Hard Sell on Anti-Aging," a look at how certain online advertisements for resveratrol, said to extend life, are wrongly quoting David Sinclair, its discoverer, as endorsing various products. And at times exuberant discussions of resveratrol by the likes of Oprah Winfrey can also be found embedded in such ads, then linked to products she and others have never mentioned.

----Aug. 10 Time snared its own interview with Obama on health care, with a handy user's guide appended on the potential impact on you of certain major reform proposals. Meanwhile, Aug. 17 Newsweek's "True Crimes" cover features a good idea, if not all that well-executed, via an essay on our fascination with crime by the wonderful novelist Walter Mosley. "We need forgiveness and someone to blame. So the story of crime fills our TVs, theaters, cinemas, computer files, and bookshelves. We are fascinated with stories of crime, real or imagined, because we need them to cleanse the modern world from our souls."

---Aug. 7 The Week's "The Drive for Fast Trains" is a nice overview on the prospects and utility of a high-speed rail system in the U.S., where train travel is in a sorry state. "As quality has deteriorated, so has quantity. In 1930, the U.S. had 260,000 miles of rail. By 2000, that total had been reduced to 100,000 miles -- the same as in 1881." While Obama has pledged $13 billion to jump-start such a new system, some estimates of how much it would really cost to do it right are around $100 billion.

---August-September Relix features music critic Dave Marsh musing on the significance of the Woodstock music festival 40 years later, in the process somehow tying it all in to Barack Obama's challenges:

"Meanwhile, I suppose that the real legacy of the Woodstock Nation is felt in the battles to create an American health care system, to end the nation's various wars and to save the lives and communities devastated by the finance industry swindles and 40 years of benign governmental neglect." And Marsh is certainly not too happy with the coming of the Internet, in particular social networking sites claiming Woodstock as their inspiration:

Make a radical political comment and watch what happens. If the owners don't banish you, the rest of the network will try. After all Obama's reality is not unlike Woodstock: The promise of Eden and the certainty of deluge and filth, with greed at the bottom of it all.

---"Are We Done Yet?" by Fred Kaplan in Slate is a smart look at the ambiguities of a U.S. military withdrawal from Iraq by 2011. Relying in part on a war game oversees by top Pentagon officials, and attended by about 350 military folks from around the globe, he concludes:

One could argue, from this, that the U.S. troop pullout should be accelerated in order to shorten this treacherous period of transition and get down to the level of 25,000 advisers--and thus restore stability--as quickly as possible.

"This argument might have validity, or it might not. No war game can predict how long the transition period would last. In any case, unless we're hellbent to get out regardless of the consequences, the question is not entirely in our control. It depends on how strongly the insurgents or other dangerous elements react to the U.S. withdrawal. If the war game proves prescient--if, during this in-between period, our troop presence is large enough to irritate Iraqis but too small to stabilize the country--they're likely to exploit the moment and gain as much advantage as they can.

If that does happen, U.S. commanders and policymakers will face a choice: whether to withdraw more quickly--to keep our troops out of danger and let the inevitable instability play out--or to hold firm and try, perhaps futilely, to restore order.

Either way is risky. It's disingenuous to deny that; the question is which risk to take.

Comments

[nisha]

I just read the Hilton Als article. So, okay, he's a Prince fan-- whatever. I like Prince too, he's fun, but not comparable, sorry. But Als claims that Michael Jackson died a long time ago, NOT. He was busy being a single parent bringing up three kids while dealing with nefarious lawsuits comprising trumped up charges and taking refuge abroad. Als manages not to weave that in.

[singforpeace]

"Adoring Michael Jackson fans, and their many journalistic enablers, will gag over a stinging critique, "Michael," in the Aug. 13 New York Review of Books, a high-brow publication not likely to be found by their beds. They'll have to seek comfort, instead, in a reverential September Ebony, with the cover, "Michael, Our Icon." "

Does this presume that I, as an "adoring fan" for four decades, could not possibly be intelligent, engaged, intellectually curious, politically aware, or culturally competent enough to read a "high-brow publication" like the New York Review of Books? Many of us are able to be both fans of Michael Jackson, and thinking, rational, informed citizens who recognize MJs many human frailties. I welcome both the 'stinging critique" and the "reverential" so that I can, through my own discernment, figure out what is worthy of my time and attention. Michael's legacy remains whether he is analyzed by those who admired him or by those who eschewed him. Much will continue to be written about Michael precisely because he was a cultural icon the world over.

[StillAmused]

Beyond all the discount pop psychology, remote-control psychoanalysis and arrogant, sweeping judgements about this unique and transcendant talent, one thing seems quite clear:

The shallow dullards cranking it out most likely never stumbled over a musical instrument, sang a song in key or moved their feet any more ambitiously than is required to depress a gas pedal.

It's almost axiomatic that, when someone with a public podium can't begin to comprehend what an exceptional artist (in any genre) delivers, the utility alternative is to set up shop picking apart that artist as a human being, based upon his or her own droll, artless frame of reference.

Ask a musician. It didn't (and doesn't) get much better than Michael Jackson and his fortuitous, unparalleled collaboration with Quincy Jones. The ultimate judgement of Jackson's live performance was offered, with stunning grace, by Fred Astaire.

Wonder what personal demons and inadequacies are being worked out by some of the less charitable scribes cynically picking over their collection of tabloid clippings in an urgent effort to be on the record -- saying SOMETHING -- while anyone still notices.

[Abd-ul-Latif]

The real tragedy is that people seem to think this pop garbage is "music." Anyone who thinks so knows absolutely nothing about genuine music. Michael Jackson was just another self-indulgent celebrity with a talent for entertaining the ignorant masses, not for producing anything that could ever be called art.

The really disgusting phenomenon in all this has been his fans' total unwillingness to even entertain the idea that Jackson actually may have done the things he was accused of. His trial had barely begun when legions of screaming fans showed up with signs attesting to Jackson's innocence, even though they themselves had no knowledge of his guilt or innocence. Before the trial had properly begun, they had made up their minds. As with O.J. Simpson, celebrity and fame count for more than simple justice. Entertainers and athletes and other celebrities are treated as deities who can do no wrong. Where is the logic in that?

[StillAmused]

"The real tragedy is that people seem to think this pop garbage is "music." Anyone who thinks so knows absolutely nothing about genuine music."

You've just written off most of the popular music community.

What do you play? The one-string fo.ol?

... or are you one of those atonal "afficionados" who pretends to understand the classics so he can look down his nose at everything else?

You've utterly confused fan hysteria with the talent of the artist. Figures.

[blaqntelligence]

"The really disgusting phenomenon in all this has been his fans' total unwillingness to even entertain the idea that Jackson actually may have done the things he was accused of."

Let's reword that correctly, shall we?
The really disgusting phenomenon in all this has been his detractors' total unwillingness to even entertain the idea that Jackson actually may have been innocent of the things he was accused of."
Even after a jury acquitted him.
Even after one accuser admitted to lying at his father's behest.

[Cyclone]

"A Stinging Critique" of Michael Jackson? Mr. Warren, people writing " stinging critiques" of Michael Jackson is a cottage industry. I'm sure Mr. Als is a talented well respected writer with amazing insite based on his reading of James Baldwin. However, unless he sites documented first hand knowledge of Mr. Jackson and his personal affairs I'll pass. You write as if we dare not read it or our bubble will burst. I assume Mr. Als is Black but it really doesn't matter. He didn't write this article for our consumption, he wrote it for yours. We in the Black community have a complex relationship (for good or ill) with Jackson and his family. Many people can't and will never understand and so what? As a practical matter the man is DEAD. For those who think he was a freak what exactly is the lesson to be learned from this new "stinging critique" ? We're not in denial or delusional Mr. Warren. We're actually quite clear. Clarity has been critical to our survival in this country. So when it comes to yet another article "explaining" Michael Jackson...­........be­en there, done that..

[nkadzi]

Wao Cyclone, you hit the nail on the head!!

I

[MikeDu]

"However, unless he sites documented first hand knowledge of Mr. Jackson and his personal affairs I'll pass."

Well, I recall there *was* that sworn court testamony by a Jackson servant that they spotted the fellow fellating child. I understand the age of consent in California is considerably above nine. Oh, don't tell me. The servant was 'lying' and Jackson was 'pure'. Perhap if it had been your child.

[blaqntelligence]

Because that "Jackson servant" never saw fit to speak up before his/her/its "sworn court test[i]mony", they are even more deserving of a jail cell.
An adult witness a child being sexually molested and not speak up?
Kinda like accepting a $20 million dollar payoff and a record deal in lieu of prosecution for molesting my child.
Both are BS.

[jade7243]

Regarding the Michael Jackson articles. The "truth" lies somewhere in between.

Michael Jackson was not just another "song and dance man," as described by cable pundits. And until someone comes along to eclipse him, he is the current titleholder of "greatest entertainer of all time." He did have global fame, fans and frenemies. His life and death was celebrated around the world. To black America, Michael (and his family) symbolized more than great musical talent. They "made it" -- worldwide success -- at a time when music was barely integrated. (Think about it: when their success was flagging, who did the Osmonds copy?)

Was Michael gay? We don't know. It's speculation. Why Michael Jackson changed his outward appearance is a secret whose truth is known only to him. Others speculate but their guesses are just that, a guess. (Will we question why Joan Rivers has multilated her face to the extreme after she's gone? Or why other celebrities became walking billboards, tatted from head to toe? Was it to hide some psychological insecurity? Or mask some illness that would end a career in a New York minute? Will we wonder why Barbra Streisand couldn't stand the color orange?)

If you didn't like him, you'll find NYRofB more your style. If you did, read Ebony.

[Cyclone]

That was what I was trying to say but you did a much better job. Thanks.

[nkadzi]

I better check my Ebony copy in the mail!

[MikeDu]

"...he is the current titleholder of "greatest entertainer of all time."

Holy Crapoly! The GREATEST entertainer of all time?
I thought that title was held by Elvis! Oh, no wait, I think it's 'officially' held by Liberace. No no, I'm wrong again - Rudy Vallee was the REAL "greatest entertainer of all time". Or am I thinking Bing Crosby? No no, its definite now - Al Jolsen was most definitely the #1 greatest entertainer of all time... except for Enrico Caruso and the Beatles and Bruce Springstein. Could Michael Jackson even play an instrument?

[Nommo]

Your championing of Elvis, et.al., doesn't ring true at all. Play an instrument? Obviously you never heard his voice. Not one of the Beatles, not Jolson, not Bing Crosby, not one of your heroes put it all together as MJ did. The funny thing is that most of your heroes would discount such criticism as yours, because they would be closer to MJ and have a bit more empathy than you could ever generate.

So when you go about trying to denigrate MJ's work, don't look at the sales figures. Particularly the world wide figures. It is bound to be entirely depressing. One difference between MJ and Elvis is that MJ acknowledged his predecessors and gave them their due.
Elvis, the thief would not have been capable of that.

[Sl Bryant]

We do know. MJ said straight up ... "I'm not gay." Check the YouTube clip of a deposition he was giving in 1996, where he talks about the rumors he wants to "set straight." I'm quoting him, no pun inteneded.

[Anastasia]

Would someone please explain why Barack Obama had trouble being considered "black enough", while according to some, Michael Jackson was a black "freedom fighter"?

[blaqntelligence]

singforpeace, StillAmused, Cyclone, Nommo
Elegant, beautiful, heartfelt. Thank you.


I will not contribute to this discussion. The sour prose of another hellbent on painting Michael Jackson with the brush of perversion, is not worth the energy to pound out a rebuttal. I've done this dance before....­I'll sit this one out.