I hope this reader doesn't mind I share, but the words in this comment would echo my thoughts. I wanted to share this exchange with you because as conscious beings I feel there is a lesson in this:
AnonymousNovember 16, 2012 4:05 AM
I can understand why that author promoted he died a virgin. He was an odd soul indeed. Granted, I didn't know him personally yet here WAS a strange disconnect whenever you'd see him with women he was supposedly dating or even married to. First and foremost, he was groomed to be a consummate (pardon the pun) performer. Much about him seemed choreographed. I can see why he may have been inclined to stage or promote several circumstances. Was the timing (or exploitation) of marrying Lisa Marie Presley as child molestation accusations mounted meant to curb or repair his image? Factor in the self-proclaimed king of pop marrying the daughter of the king aka Elvis Presley? Seems pretty transparent that way. Or the various women he hired as surrogates to have his children? He couldn't (or wouldn't) father his own? Supposedly good father or not, what parent dangles their bazaarly-named infant child off a balcony or instills paranoia to the extent they are to wear air masks or strange costumes when paraded around in public? No sign of CPS getting involved for child endangerment etc, etc. Same goes for showing up in court in pajamas looking frail and being helped into the courthouse. Next thing we know, he's dancing on top of a limousine hood, making a complete mockery of the justice system. Was that 'victory dance' on the car hood meant to celebrate being exempt from accountability in this life? A series of freak shows and manipulation. What about his fascination with Emmanuel Lewis aka Webster, Macaulay Caulkin or even Bubbles the Chimp (not meant as humor) and then serious allegations of child molestation- showering with children, sleep overs, even spiking some child's soda can with wine during an airline flight? It's anybody's guess how many people were paid off to remain silent that may never surface. All of that, including a children's theme park as a substitute for lack of a childhood takes root thanks to a driven Joe Jackson subjecting his children to grueling schedules centered around performing? When Michael released his solo album Off the Wall in '79, he was quite handsome, looking genuinely balanced and happy. As the years progressed however, it was sad to literally watch his inner sadness become his outward appearance via endless plastic surgeries. It was alarming as his appearance became freakish and alien-like. The signs of mental illness and strange behavior became alarmingly apparent yet (even as an adult), the family couldn't find a way to intervene? I can see where all the denial comes into play. Seems many were enabling Michael Jackson yet not once, has his family ever held him accountable for his behavior or having the ability to have a broad range of people in his pockets to enable him. Why scapegoat Conrad Murray as the ultimate downfall of Michael Jackson? There was an entire succession of people Micheal Jackson probably shouldn't have had in his life yet did via his vast wealth and fame. However you look at it, it starts and ends with the source. People are responsible for their own choices and actions. Try telling that to Jackson's family as they divide and eat each other alive over Michael Jackson's estate. Amazing what money, power and influence does to people as to what they can have at their disposal. Denial and misdirected or selective blame comes in many forms, as does the downfall that ultimately presents itself...
ReplyDelete-
Dear Anonymous,
Thank you for your very well written comment. You make some very good points I won't contend with because I too agree. However, I look at his situation differently and feel it is a lesson for all of us and here is why:
Although I knew I was somehow connected to Michael I wasn't exactly sure why in the beginning. I had a disconnect and believed what was being portrayed by the media about him. I have a police officer for a father and by nature I am skeptical. I wasn't blinded by the Michael Jackson pop star image and screaming at his concerts. He perplexed me. There was a man in the media that did not resemble the man I felt I was connected to. The man in the media I thought was guilty of child molestation, I thought he was eccentric, I thought he was strange. The man I was connected to had a deeper voice, feelings and reasons for what was transpiring and not at all like what he was made out to be. He grew up in the limelight and knew what to do to get attention.. but my point is had it not been for my connection to him, I would have concluded that Michael Jackson was strange and weird - I would have written him off that way. But being connected to him like I was I found out differently.
That's why I think its important for all of us to realize the old saying is true. We can't judge a book by its cover and more importantly how a book is presented to us. In this age where we are becoming more conscious about who we are we have to also be aware of what we are being told and shown. Images and stories can be deceiving, even to ourselves. We can make judgments and decisions without even realizing that we have mistakenly perceived people and events that have transpired. I know because I've done it myself. That's really the point I am trying to make.
And, you are right, in the end it all comes down to ourselves - the man in the mirror.
