Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> Jim Henderson wrote:
> > Now as to whether MJ was a genius or not, well, personally, I don't think 
> > so.  His music always struck me as rubbish pop.  But that's just my 
> > tastes against his style.

> I think it's not unreasonable to look to the dozens of other famous 
> performers and composers who cited him as inspirational and geniusly talented.

  I must admit I haven't looked if MJ composed his songs himself, or whether
he just performed them. AFAIK he personally composed at least *some* (if not
most) of the songs he performed.

  IMO regardless of whether or not one *likes* the songs in question, one
cannot reasonably claim that they don't show compositional talent. Many of
the songs are quite complex in structure and content. So complex in fact,
that it can be very difficult for the average person to perform them even
nearly as well as he did. Yet they still manage to be good-sounding and
catchy.

  The music of the songs is also often complex and well-composed, IMO.
If you tried to play them eg. with a guitar, it would be quite difficult.
I'm thinking about songs like Billie Jean, Beat It and Black Or White.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Mueen Nawaz <m.n### [at] ieeeorg> wrote:
> On 06/28/09 12:36, John VanSickle wrote:
> > I did hear of a man who applied for work at a day care center. He was
> > regarded as a pervert trolling for victims.

>         Let me guess. He was probably single?

  I find it a bit ironic that the exact same photograph can be completely
legal and ok in a family photo album, and illegal in a single man's
personal computer. This even though the letter of the law probably doesn't
make the distinction.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

somebody <x### [at] ycom> wrote:
> The court may come to completely different conclusions if a partner in sex
> is 17.9 years as opposed to 18.1 years old. To me, that's more or less
> meaningless, and I have a much more smooth judegement curve, which takes
> into account the age differential between the partners.

  You mean if a 45-yo has sex with a 18.1-yo, that's ok, but if he has
sex with a 17.9-yo, that's not ok?

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

"Warp" <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote in message
news:4a47a147@news.povray.org...
> Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:

> > But I also hold the opinion (based on what was
> > reported, so arguably not a very solid foundation) that he had problems
> > as regards kids and that the jury let the "star factor" get in the way
of
> > an objective verdict in his case, just like happened with OJ's trial.

>   One interesting aspect is that even if he *did* like kids in the wrong
> way, that's actually not illegal. You can't punish people for how they
> think (not yet, at least; we are still not that Orwellian), only for what
> they *do*.

Correct. But *I* (as well the rest of society) can very well judge people
for what I think they think.

Post a reply to this message

somebody <x### [at] ycom> wrote:
> Correct. But *I* (as well the rest of society) can very well judge people
> for what I think they think.

  Then you are being prejudiced, and judging people on appearances.

  We'll just have to agree to disagree on whether this is an acceptable
stance or not.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
> Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> > Jim Henderson wrote:
> > > Now as to whether MJ was a genius or not, well, personally, I don't think
> > > so.  His music always struck me as rubbish pop.  But that's just my
> > > tastes against his style.
>
> > I think it's not unreasonable to look to the dozens of other famous
> > performers and composers who cited him as inspirational and geniusly talented.
>
>   I must admit I haven't looked if MJ composed his songs himself, or whether
> he just performed them. AFAIK he personally composed at least *some* (if not
> most) of the songs he performed.
>
>   IMO regardless of whether or not one *likes* the songs in question, one
> cannot reasonably claim that they don't show compositional talent. Many of
> the songs are quite complex in structure and content. So complex in fact,
> that it can be very difficult for the average person to perform them even
> nearly as well as he did. Yet they still manage to be good-sounding and
> catchy.
>
>   The music of the songs is also often complex and well-composed, IMO.
> If you tried to play them eg. with a guitar, it would be quite difficult.
> I'm thinking about songs like Billie Jean, Beat It and Black Or White.

Yes, excellent response.

No, I don't think he was the composer, he was mainly a lyricist and performer.
Perhaps melody and basic harmonic progression was his doing, but the detailing
and complexity of the arrangements and orchestration was left to real
musicians, like Quincy Jones and special guests like Eddie Van Halen or Paul
McCartney.

Regardless, I never said he was a musical genius -- while I truly do enjoy some
of his songs from a musical standpoint alone.  He was a performatic genius,
whatever that means.  He's also pretty much an embodiment of the 80's and left
a huge influence on whatever came after, specially on street dance.

I'm mostly a music snob, but having met Michael before the classicals may be
what has proven his music so enduring with me.  I still find his offerings much
better than most of the majority of pop music.

Post a reply to this message

On 06/28/09 13:11, Darren New wrote:
> John VanSickle wrote:
>> And let us all learn from it: Don't be a s**t to your kids (MJ's dad
>> reportedly was), and don't surround yourself with sycophants (which MJ
>> clearly did).
>
> Funny enough, all his actual close friends all thought he was a great,
> kind, funny guy. It's only those who wanted something from him that
> called him out.

	I think his point was that MJ surrounded himself with people who liked 
him, and he'd get quite upset at those who'd criticize (legitimately) 
his ways and habits, and probably wouldn't maintain ties with those people.

	In other words, he didn't have an effective feedback mechanism from 
which he could gauge how he was doing.

	(I'm not, BTW, talking about kids - more about his inability to take 
control of finances, medications, and some personality aspects).
	
-- 
For a while, she had a boyfriend with a wooden leg. Then she broke it off.


                     /\  /\               /\  /
                    /  \/  \ u e e n     /  \/  a w a z
                        >>>>>>mue### [at] nawazorg<<<<<<
                                    anl

Post a reply to this message

On 06/28/09 13:54, somebody wrote:
>> Here I disagree with you. Courts have nothing to do with it. I feel
>> that for serious charges, judgment should be suspended until there _is_
>> enough data to declare it.
>
> My mind does not work in a binary manner (gratefully).

	My paragraph did not imply a need to be binary.

>> See above paragraph. I personally need more data of being a racist
>> before coming to a conclusion that someone indeed is a racist.
>
> Do you believe that it's all black and white? That if MR crossed a certain
> treshold (say, 12 episodes of racist rants per year) that you'd consider him
> a racist, but anything below that you would not? Can you honestly say even a
> single episode will not change your mind about him just a little bit?

	Nope. Perhaps I wasn't clear enough.

	I need a certain threshold before I will even _consider_ whether 
someone is a racist. That's not being binary.

	My threshold isn't "one incident" (at least in MR's case).

-- 
For a while, she had a boyfriend with a wooden leg. Then she broke it off.


                     /\  /\               /\  /
                    /  \/  \ u e e n     /  \/  a w a z
                        >>>>>>mue### [at] nawazorg<<<<<<
                                    anl

Post a reply to this message

On 06/28/09 13:27, Darren New wrote:
> Great sig, btw. :-)
>
> Do Not Attempt to Traverse a Chasm in Two Leaps...
>
> /\ /\ /\ /
> / \/ \ u e e n / \/ a w a z

	Thanks. Don't recall where I got it from...

-- 
For a while, she had a boyfriend with a wooden leg. Then she broke it off.


                     /\  /\               /\  /
                    /  \/  \ u e e n     /  \/  a w a z
                        >>>>>>mue### [at] nawazorg<<<<<<
                                    anl

Post a reply to this message

On 06/28/09 13:15, Darren New wrote:
> somebody wrote:
>> shopping mall, and you'll instantly have a swarm of adoring females. You
>> won't see any similar flocking behaviour from men
>
>
> And, uh, which camp does MJ fall into, then? Not that I'm being totally
> serious, but given how many people make fun of him for his femininity...

	Well, hope no one minds the resumption of MJ jokes, but here's one I 
saw on Reddit. For context, people there often complain about things 
like missing white females get a lot more press and collective worry 
than missing black men.

A: Oh suuure. Rich white lady dies of a heart attack and the media is 
all over it. What if this was a black man?

B: Only in America can a poor black man grow up to be a rich white woman!

-- 
For a while, she had a boyfriend with a wooden leg. Then she broke it off.


                     /\  /\               /\  /
                    /  \/  \ u e e n     /  \/  a w a z
                        >>>>>>mue### [at] nawazorg<<<<<<
                                    anl

Post a reply to this message