|
||
Jackson's Final Act: Sainthood
In death, Michael Jackson is suddenly some kind of a saint. A humanitarian. A philanthropist. A civil rights leader.
"Like our father Martin," said Martin Luther King III before a live television audience of millions around the world at the memorial. "He was indeed a shining light."
What a difference two weeks and sudden death can make.
While still alive, Michael Jackson was widely considered a weirdo. A presumed child molester. A pills-and-plastic surgery addict. For more than a decade, he'd been relentlessly mocked by the tabloids. He was Wacko Jacko.
He certainly seemed like something other than normal.
Now that he's gone, he's become someone who was "persecuted," as Bernice King said. "An American legend," said Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, giving a snappy salute toward his coffin.
"Maybe now," said his brother Marlon mournfully, "they will leave you alone."
We all know that it is unseemly to speak ill of the dead. But today's metamorphosis of Michael Jackson was nothing short of astonishing.
The ceremony at Staples Center was an historic moment in our contemporary social and cultural history. It may have come the closest to a worldwide communal event as we have ever seen.
An unprecedented cross between a Hollywood production and a somber memorial, it was watched by fans in every language, all over the world, giving it an ineffably global quality.
Pop stars sang. A preacher spoke. The gospel choir harmonized. The Jackson brothers, who we have known since their childhood, were dressed in dark suits, yellow ties and sequined gloves on their right hands.
Jackson's three children, finally unveiled and seen to be quite handsome if (seemingly) entirely Caucasian, sat between Jackson's parents Katherine and Joe.
Watching the ceremony was a two-hour tour through much of American pop culture of the past 20 years, since Jackson's life was lived on stage -- through his days as a precocious 10-year-old crooner, to his teenaged years alluded to by Brooke Shields, to his elevation to "king of pop" status.
At the same time, the event had a heartbreaking quality to it, occurring just a day before Jackson was meant to start his 50-date concert tour in London's 02 stadium.
At the very spot where he was rehearsing 13 days ago, Jackson's backup singers, a gospel choir and the orchestra that had rehearsed for weeks to perform with the singer instead played at his funeral.
Even the media elite seemed to be feeling regretful of having treated him so shabbily.
The oh-so-respectful tones of Katie Couric and Brian Williams, as they anchored their primetime, commercial-free coverage on Tuesday, were in sharp contrast to the mocking tones that usually accompany the words "Michael Jackson" when spoken from the anchor's seat.
Admit it: for the past decade, we all wallowed in the weirdness of Michael Jackson when he was alive.
Now in death, he seems frail and pitiable, rather than sordid and corrupt.
Rest in peace, Michael Jackson.
Follow Sharon Waxman on Twitter: www.twitter.com/sharon waxman
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Leave it alone for goodness sake ! He is not a saint .I don't I believe in saints ,,only good people who have done good things .
It is obvious that Michael was abused by his father and used by both parents as a bread winner and it effected his entire life . I also believe that his mother did not protect her children from their abusive father when she continued to live with the man . So as far as I am concerned if everyone wants what is in the best interest of the children then they should not live with the Jackson's . Michaels body was barely cold when his father was trying to make a deal with the promoters of his Europian tour to make money off Michaels practice sessions . This man shows no grief over his sons death , in fact he doesn't even call him his son .
Unfortunately when money is the central issue to whoever gets the children its never a great outcome for the children . Maybe the money should be held in trust until the children are of age and whoever raises them will have to raise them with their own money and out of love not out of greed . Now that would most definately assure that these children are with someone who genuinely loves them. A parent is not paid to raise their children so why should a surrogate parent ,"or in the case of Rowe a parent
I despise Joe Jackson...Nancy Grace is so lost,she didn't know what Narcissist meant,while talking about Cindy Anthony! She called MJ's mother a 79yr old "Grannie",imagine this? Then said "why does a father pick on a certain kid? Certain kid???You mean the Money Child? The Golden Goose.so-to-speak,MJ told Oprah 25?yrs ago that Joe beat him then said " I don't know,I guess he saw me as the golden.....but "I" used the word "goose" that we know as an expression! Back to BIO-MOM, having a baby,does not a mommy make! Look around you! Women like her,have them,give them up ,but ROWE became rich! She's still be working had MJ really looked at her for what she was,but he never saw the evil in anyone,Diamond's book "Be Carefull Who You Love" taken from Billy Jean[title] should have been "Be Carefull What Low-Lives You're Good To" or you'll e accussed of sexual abuse!all because Bashir went where Micael allowed him to,he was so clueless/innocent,he didn't realize the those words would be used against him! Dr.Murray,911? You're going to jail,they'll love you there,MJ's killer?
"(seemingly) entirely Caucasian"
You have mighty poor eyesight. Look again: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/07/07/michael-jacksons-kids-pri_n_227210.html
She's cleverly using a "weasel word" to avoid any chance of liable. Thanks for the link, as I had not seen that picture. At least it confirms her assessment that the three are "quite handsome" is pretty accurate. They do have somewhat tan complexions, in my opinion, so maybe that gave her pause in making a statement about their apparent racial heritage. In any event, it is pretty plain that the three kids share none of MJ's DNA, whatsoever. That, of course, does not change the fact, as has been reported, that they are his children legally.
The Church of Neverland! Glory Hallelujah! Bigger than Jesus, Buddha, Muhammad, Martin, or Elvis, or The Beatles, or Sinatra ad infinitum... With his four bros' and Revs. Al and Jesse as apostles, and the kids forming a perfect Trinity. The Gospel of Pop will wash you of all transgressions. Watch out! or should I say Watchtower?!
Say Amen Somebody!!
And they don't stop! The muckophiles are still digging for stuff to entertain a public for whose intelligence they demonstrate contempt. Now, we are to be entertained by destroying Michael Jackson's children.
Freedom of The Press seems to give 21st Century license to entertain by destruction of whomever, by digging into private lives; to distort and create political and social thought by preemptively stating ... "the American public is thinking."
Media's non-self-critical, irresponsible free wheeling of its misconstrued freedom hinders the polity from forming fact based opinion, immobilizes government through unrelenting de-contextualized micro-analysis by press empowered experts and authors on everything. Hypnotized by its power with words and images, our press is oblivious to the instant reach of its own technology presenting us naked before friend and foe across the globe. The media babble and second guessing of government either reinforces or deconstructs diplomacy and aims of foreign affairs.
Where in the Constitution is there the right to seek out and destroy the lives and souls of others? Is there something written about privacy? or is it conditional privacy? If there is a right to seek out and destroy anyone that rises above mediocracy then such a right is reciprocal as we are equal under the law. We therefore need a public freelance personal research organization lawyered-up with press credentials and devoted to looking into intimate, real and imagined, lives of all media personnel who abrogate unto themselves these extended rights as privileged freedoms
Wow - beautifully written! And I totally agree with you - let's put the lives of the muck rakers under the loop and see how they like having their lives destroyed because of pure speculation, innuendo and entirely false rumour. Where is the anti-establishment organization that works to undermine the "journalists" who abuse the power of journalism!
I have always been appalled at how we tear our artist apart, pursue them as if they are prey, and invade their private lives with the idea of destroying them. They perform a job, as most of us do, and provide a service, entertainment, to us. Yet, we want to extract their very being. We do not allow them to be human and as such make mistakes, stumble, and fall etc. I think that is so wrong. Michael was a gentle spirit who loved and trusted everyone. However, many of those he loved and trusted abused his trust. I and all of the people in my circle, and most of those in the larger African Community, never believed the allegations. I have always wondered why it was always "trashy" people who sought to swindle Michael when we never heard allegations from the likes of Sean Lennon, McCauley Culkin, and Emanuel Lewis etc. It is sad that people would stoop to the level of the Jordan Chandler's of the world, who has recanted his story, to get ahead and in the process destroy a person’s life. These, and similar, leaches are the people that broke Michael's spirit.
Rest in peace Michael. The leaches can't hurt you anymore. Those of us, all over the world, who loved you and never doubted you, will always love you.
Michael Jackson's own acts and behavior gave rise to all the so-called media attacks. He needed to remain in the public eye in order to be who he was, and that always means a "devil's compact" with the media. Walking around with a face mask and shrouding his children certainly wasn't calculated to gain him favorable coverage. However substantial were Michael's gifts, his bizarre behavior nearly overshadowed them. Now that he is no longer physically with us, we can pick and choose which image(s) of him we will treasure, since they will no longer be confronted by the unavoidable reality of him, himself.
There's nothing else to say,as you are a true Christian, a loving entity who judges not,lest...I do not me an we cannot judge those who deserve to be..like the child molesters who do one year,then get out & graduate to murder! We're talking about "evil"..those who haven't the insight,to tell truth from a lie! ENTER: Martin Bashir...I watched "Living W' Michael Jackson/msnbc again do you think for one minute he'd have gotten away w/ that if he were interviewing,say Paul McCartney? Would he have asked Keith Richards why he's "still" shooting up after all these years?{I do love the "Rolling Stones"& am giving only a comparrison-like]Bashir got lucky,Michael never learned to be confrontational,that is why he let people go!Not because they ALL disagreed w/ him!We should take a lesson,instead of hanging on to those who never appreciate our help,MJ just cut them off,we don't know that he cut off such "great" people,like the media says...it is so stupid!He opened his doors to low-lives,he didn't see them as that,unfortunatly!
You know--all this talk about what constitutes a saint and what doesn't. Do people think Saints were these folks who walked around with a heavenly light on them while choir angels sang? No. They were human and flawed. I recall a sermon where the preacher talked about all the frailties of the great biblical figures and how each had a flaw. Jacob was a liar he said--Thomas a was cynic and a doubter...on and on he went, but he also wenrt on to say that, it was their heart and their service that made them great.
To that end, even Mother Teresa struggled with her faith as she grew older...
Mike was no angel but he did more and gave more financially and TIME wise to the disadvantaged than most of us will collectively in our lifetimes. There is a REASON billions of people marked his passing. People die everyday--entertainers die everyday.
People aren't mourning an ENTERTAINER -- they are mourning a man who touched the lives of thousands with generosity and compassion. I will not say he was a saint--but I will say he was a Humanitarian--which is something MOST of us cannot say.
http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-288836
To Sepiasiren,
Well said.
Since, naturally, you can disprove all the citations of Jackson's philanthropy, charitable activities and unheralded kindnesses to terminally ill children (not to mention the personal accounts of his decency from credible big-timers whom you'll never meet), you have every right -- from atop your pile of urgent showbiz gossip -- to join the rest of the opinionati soiling his grave.
It's this brand of supermarket-checkout 'journalism' that took the eccentricities of someone traveling far beyond the low orbit of gossipmongers and ginned them up into insupportable, broad-brush character defamation. It's time, I suppose, to reread all that prior dross for reference material, then lower the boom again... one last time.
He was a grat entertainer. Please don't make him a "Saint" Michael, because he wasn't.. The memorial service was very fitting. Michael was an entertainer and the memorial service was excellent entertainment, performed by known actors including the Reverend Sharpton....
And his daughter was a actor? All the billions of people crying the world over were actors? Could it be people genuinely were sad the man was gone? You people...You guys are so crude. A saint--no he wasn't--no SAINT was a true saint--they all had flaws. At the end of her days even Mother Teresa struggled with her faith in God--we are all flawed...
But at the end of the day a billion people said goodbye--whatever you think that means something..,.
Check out why the man is in the Guinness book of world records for the most CHARITIES SUPPORTED BY A POP STAR sir--and if you have given even a tenth of that time, effort to the hungry, homeless and poor--then you can come back and say who can and cannot be a saint:
http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-288836
Yes,he was,& is in the world of the truth now,should we wrap your words in a bow now,since you've neatly put almost 50yrs of MJ's life in one thought,which took "no" thought! You sound like a dj instead of leaving a comment! Everyone will answer one day to God,their crudeness,hard-nosed,self-centered..no doubt,you haven't any ear for music,nor rythum[s], rather a kill-joy mentality,who probably thinks Rowe should have kids because she's the BIO-Mom! Giving birth,does not a "mommy" make" Imagine the day that sweet little girl reads& hears Rowe say..."I didn't want them to call me mommy"ah,how nice..in the interest of the child...or just in Debbie's $Interest$$she'll never get them! Joe Jackson does not live w/ them! I'm sure you have more to add,please don't,because,nobody cares!Look around you,we know the truth!Perhaps Dr? Murray can have "you" for his defense!?
Does it matter.......yes it matters. I think we all realize that Michael Jackson was a troubled human being. But it is still not okay to make inappropriate choices. He did a lot to revolutionize the music industry......but guess what this is not what is important. What is important is how one conducts oneself to the standards that are put before us. In other words the laws of the land .....both governmental laws and moral laws. He was acquited for many reasons that had nothing to do with him being guilty or not.
I do hope he is able to rest in peace. But judgement day comes for us all.
yes but he WAS acquitted--can you say he was guilty? Can I--the truth remains between him and God. Until someone says otherwise--I will go with what the law of the land said.
And he conducted himself as flawed human being who also did a lot for mankind--gave to charities--gave his time--visited the sick the poor and the homeless--soldiers at war.
Any one of you have done the same--or even half of this--then by all means--step and and denounce...
I for one will tell my little one not to judge and not to follow his lifestyle choices--but to emulate his spirit of compassion and charity...
The truth remains between MJ...God...AND his victims. I have visited the sick and I WAS a soldier at war. And I commend you for teaching your little ones to be wise. But MJ's generosity in philanthropy is overshadowed by exerting his generosity onto his victims to keep quiet and drop out of his life as well. And yes the mother/s of his children are victims of his distorted view of life as well. I hope for their sake that the court restores some sanity into his past by granting the biological mother/s of his children custody of the children they gave birth to. Michael Jackson is not a saint! Not by the definition we in America adhere to. God will never let him become a saint nor even enter heaven under the laws of Christianity. He may be in your mind or in billions of the worlds minds' a saint. His biggest violation was violating the temple of his body with drugs and who knows what else. I do not care if he gave 100 Trillion dollars to charity. God will judge him without his wealth.
"He was acquited [sic] for many reasons that had nothing to do with him being guilty or not."
You know this because you sat on the all-white jury, or are you citing the comments of two jurors who are seeking book deals?
When some people aren't busy waving the flag and tearfully worshipping the virtues of our system of trial by jury, they're dismissing the resulting verdicts they don't like as irrelevant.
(1). Do not speak ill of the dead. (2) For a list of his extensive humanitarian awards, go to Wikipedia. (3) Humanitarian activities included providing hospital beds for veterans. (4) Innocent until proven guilty: (a) there is no published evidence of crime, (b) interviews with jurors after his famous trial had comments such as "I don't know why we did this; there was absolutely no evidence." Stop repeating "allegations".
He was acquitted, right? Just checking. Good post.
EXACTLY and for conspiracy nuts--the jury was WHITE and NOT black...
His humaitarian acts include raising $63 million for famine relief.
He gave away $350 million in his lifetime to black and white people all over the world.
The press never tells you this. They are too busy telling you the man was crazy.
For instance, his son's name is Prince. Is he named after Prince the singer? No, Prince Scruse, the father of Katherine Scruse Jackson.
No, it's "PRESUMED innocent until proven guilty." Just because you PRESUME something doesn't mean it's true, and just because something is not sufficiently proven does not mean it didn't happen. People who are in fact guilty get away with it all the time, while the percentage of factually innocent people who are convicted is staggeringly small--and of those, most have their cases reversed on appeal. Instead of relying on the claims of jurors, who incidentally, weren't even privy to all the evidence gathered, you should read some of the pretrial statements, police reports, etc. before you repeat ridiculous claims of "absolutely no evidence." Allegations may be truthful, and in most criminal cases, in fact are. If you are ever the victim of a crime, and your claims are off-handedly dismissed as merely being "allegations," perhaps you'll understand that. Oh, and how about the 1993 case? I've been a lawyer for 20 years, and I've NEVER heard of ANYONE other than MJ who has willingly settled a case where criminal allegations are concerned for TWENTY MILLION DOLLARS! That goes way beyond settling a "nuisance" suit, especially when Jackson's fans are claiming there's "no evidence." If these cases are so weak, why would anyone even consider making someone a multimillionaire like that, other than to make them suddenly uncooperative for the prosecutor? That new millionaire kid previously was able to accurately physically describe MJ's genitals.
But by law, he was acquitted, so legally speaking he was found NOT guilty...case closed!
You are a lawyer so you know about double jeopardy--too bad the media and folks like you will continue to prosecute a case long after it is over...
And for the record, his insurance company and advisers told him to settle the case for a myriad of reasons, one of them being they wanted him back on tour. He had more money than god at the time and could afford 20 million easily and so he did so--unwillingly and under protest.
He wanted to fight to clear his name...you so up on facts? Look those up smart guy--or is your only goal to prosecute the man and not learn the truth.
By the way, I can walk in on a man using the bathroom and adequately describe what I saw--this is your "proof?" Wow. Brilliant.
And I would expect, if I were going to accuse someone that people would want me to prove what I was saying whether it was on an affidavit or not, before rushing a man off to jail--wouldn't you?
I mean people swear on the bible and lie--can u be a lawyer and be this naive?
So your conclusion, after 20 years as an attorney, is that wrongful convictions and wrongful acquittals more or less cancel each other out... leaving the ultimate judgement of criminal guilt, in those cases, to the reliable "jury" of public opinion -- driven by a slobbering, self-feeding media?
Here's some "evidence", counselor. Proud of your assumptions?
http://www.usnewslink.com/framedjackson.htm
http://sjsandteam.wordpress.com/2009/06/28/jordan-chandler-admits-he-lied-about-michael-jackson/
I have to ask why would a parent ACCEPT money instead of wanting the person who supposedly molested their child in jail? The parents took the money and ran! Once they were paid off, all of sudden they no longer were willing to participate in the investigation or testify at a trail, that to me says all they wanted was money from the start. If it were my child, and i beleived Michael Jackson or anyone else had molested him, I would want justice! My child would not be for sale, if the accusations were true. People ask If MJ was innocent why did he pay, I say if MJ was guilty, why did the parents accept the money instead of seek justice, especially since they could have still filed a civil suit after a criminal trial.
I presumed you were innocent, until you proved yourself guilty of extreme bias. Jurors not privy to all the evidence gathered? You were and know that for a fact? If so, there was a legitimate reason why those pre-trial statements, police reports etc. were not allowed as evidence. Jurors, rightfully so, are supposed to consider only the evidence they are presented with. Isn't that the whole point of a trial..evidence proving a case beyond any doubt?
If allegations are proven not truthful even occasionally or only one person is wrongly convicted, that is TOO FRAKKIN' much and often when that is proven to be the case, it was because of judicial malfeasance on the part of the prosecution. That prosecution team in SB was out to get MJ any way they could for whatever reason and use/ coerce anyone they could, to make their case. We should all hope we never have to defend ourselves against ANY allegations from the likes of them!
BTW, when I was a kid, I could physically describe my bit-chin' camp counselor's genitals because a group of us girls "peeped" him in the shower and took pictures...NOT because he molested us! We could have extorted him for a handy sum, I dare say and he did nothing wrong..WE DID!!
You have the rules wrong. One is presumed innocent until proven guilty. But what happens after one is found by the trier of fact to be innocent? Res Judicata. Under our system, that is the end of the matter.
You were not there. You were not a juror. You did not examine the evidence. Your opinion regarding "probable" or "possible" or "hypothetical" guilt is irrelevant.
Your post suggested that the settlement of the civil tort suit was a type of "payoff" to prevent testimony in a criminal trial. You have thereby accused Michael Jackson, as well as his entire legal team of a serious felony.
In the end, your post is little more than speculation. Regardless of what your experience tells you, still there is no substitute for the judgment of the jury.
As an attorney, you are sworn to uphold these standards. If you continue to deprecate our legal system, then it leads to a lack of confidence on all sides, and this way leads to disintegration of judicial credibility.
After the jury has spoken, you should let this go, at least in public fora.
RES JUDICATA.
Get the record straight.
These kids have nicknames like Jackie (Sigmund) and Tito (Toriano)
The childen of Michael Joseph Jackson
Michael Joseph Jackson Jr (Prince)
Paris Catherine Jackson
Prince Michael Jackson (Blanket)
His Mother
Katherine Scruse
Grand-parents
Prince Albert Scruse, b. ... 16 Oct. 1907, d. East Chicago, Ill., 21 Jan. 1997
+ Martha ("Mattie") Upshaw, b. ... , d. ... name changed 1934 to "Martha Bridgett"
GREAT-GRANDPARENTS
Prince Scruse, b. ... , Ala., ... [ca. 1880], d. ... [living 1920]
married. ... [ca. 1898]
Julia ... , b. ... , Ala., ... [ca. 1883], d. ... [living 1920] 24
Great-great-grandparents
Prince Scruse, b. ... , Ala., ... [ca. 1828], d. ... [living 1880]
m.
25 Mary ... , b. ... , Ala., ... [ca. 1850], d. ... [living 1880]
Stop judging people so harshly!
Michael was a recluse almost from the beginning even when he was wildly popular. Does anybody really know why? Evidently not.
because he liked his provocative--he was in the spotlight all his life--even as a kid--and being wildly popular would DEFINITELY make you want some time alone, wouldn't you?
Does it matter?
I keep asking the same question! Nothing matters once we're dead! All of the speculation re child molestation, the money, the "legacy," - none of it matters anymore and it certainly doesn't matter to Michael! I just wish they would bury the poor man and allow his body and soul to rest in peace!
Maybe because he was mobbed everywhere he went since he was 10?
Maybe because people were always accusing him of fathering children that weren't his?
If Michael was lets say--a bus driver--not famous at all, whom friends said was weird and eccentric--but he had provided to as many charities in TIME ALONE not even money, as MJ did--would you say the man was undeserving of attention and love?
MJ GUINNESS BOOK FOR CHARITY:
http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-288836
But because he was a well known entertainer this negates his contribution to the world--to the hungry, starving, poor and disenfranchised. To the soldiers at war? If you have money and give it means less? Is your time less valuable--how many of you have visited the sick and homeless like MJ did?
He didn't have to do any of it ya know. There are plenty of rich folks who cross the street when they see a poor man--many sick MJ fans who met the man said he actually held them and talked to them with respect and love whether they had money or not.
Incredible--you people are incredible.
There is a reason why people OF EVERY RACE, COLOR AND HERITAGE mourned him worldwide--if you can't see why, fine, but let those who do see it get on with our celebration. It is over anyway so be still...
The real trajedy was Michael Jackson's lack of quality Natural Health Care. The King was imprisoned in his own Castle, while living in the Oasis of Integrative Medicine--the irony of life.
Melatonin, Passion Flower Leaf, Acupuncture and CranioSacral Therapy are very effective for insomnia.
A $100 brain wave entrainment device would entrain his brain to the various restful and regenerative sleep patterns, alpha waves and delta waves.
What a tragedy--
Instead of a Cardiologist he really needed a Chiropractor, an Acupuncturist, an Herbalist or a Naturopathic Physician.
i think the MD Cardiologist fell asleep on the job and/or the oxygen bottle ran out and he should have had an anesthesiologist
I had the same thoughts. Always seek a herbal remedy before going to a string drug. it is incomprehensible that no one around him took him down that path. He should have gotten a Migun bed or a Nuga bed too with his kind of money. it was all very simple. His family, friends, and handlers completely failed him. A terrible tragedy.
Michael Jackson was found innocent.
Nothing more needs to be said about those falsehoods.
OJ was treated better by the press.
People tend to forget that about the Jackson case. That's why I appreciated what Sharpton and Lee had to say.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
