Reporting For Duty
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Categories
What would Ian Fleming have made of Michael Jackson's life and career?
Dragonpol
https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
Weird one this, I know. I'm a fan of both and I've been wondering about this lately.
I just can't help wondering what Old Ian would have made of the life of the King of Pop and I thought it was high time I asked this question of the good folks on AJB. I know that Fleming was a great fan of one of Jackson's major influences, Sammy Davis Jnr. (who had a cut cameo in the film DAF). Fleming also was a fan of black music like The Ink Spots, their music even features in some of his Bond novels.
I'm thinking of writing a piece on the links between MJ and JB for my blog as a bit of a left field subject for an article! (and the connections DO exist).
I think Fleming would have admired his talent and understood his complexity, as he was a very complex man himself.
So, I open the floor to your replies...
I just can't help wondering what Old Ian would have made of the life of the King of Pop and I thought it was high time I asked this question of the good folks on AJB. I know that Fleming was a great fan of one of Jackson's major influences, Sammy Davis Jnr. (who had a cut cameo in the film DAF). Fleming also was a fan of black music like The Ink Spots, their music even features in some of his Bond novels.
I'm thinking of writing a piece on the links between MJ and JB for my blog as a bit of a left field subject for an article! (and the connections DO exist).
I think Fleming would have admired his talent and understood his complexity, as he was a very complex man himself.
So, I open the floor to your replies...
This discussion has been closed.
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
As for MJ's "talent", he will be remembered but his music will quickly fade from history. He was an important cultural figure to be sure, ground breaking in many ways, but as a song writer and musician, he was above-average at best.
Let the flaming commence............
You talk about many looking objectively!?! Please inform me how it is that you are so special that you are pretty much the only person on the planet to have even a small amount of knowledge of MJs life?
This is the point about MJ and his life. nobody, apart from a few family members, really knew what he was like as a person. We sometimes hear how shrewd a businessman he was and how driven he was in his work, yet if we believed the media we would not think this possible of a 'weirdo' like MJ.
The simple fact is that nobody on these forums can give an accurate description of MJs character and it just shows ignorance to try to do so.
btw I am not a MJ fan but I don't hate him either, as I don't pretend to know him.
There's a lot of nonsense pedalled on this site, but this takes the biscuit.
Who's pretending here? Jackson was clearly addicted to certain drugs and more than one family had accused him of molestation. I wouldn't go so far as @ Quarrel to say he or his music and talent would be forgotten, that will never happen, but Jackson was a "weirdo" by many people's standards and with the good comes the bad if we're going to realistically answer this question.
You are the one who said "Quite probably a child molester" with no facts to back it up. The only facts on the child molesting case I know are that he was found INNOCENT on all counts.
I said "quite probably" in trying to be kind to the memory of one of the most talented performers in music history. I also say "quite probably" because, facts alert, he paid off
at least one family who accused him rather than go to trial. No one in their right mind pays off someone for something they are innocent of, or lives in denial of this like the rest of his sycophants who have an excuse for any and every strange thing he ever did. Assuming Ian Fleming was as normal as most people, he no doubt would have found the idea of a grown man having male children he hardly knew staying overnight with him, in his bedroom, as weird and creepy as most everyone else.
Look if I were you I would stop now as you don't know the facts behind the case. MJ did not pay off the family it was his insurer who did this. This a very little known fact but one that obviously needs repeating. MJs insurer and MJs friends (Elizabeth Taylor inc.) convinced MJ to pay out of court and he did.
I will leave it that, as I have said I am no MJ fan but I don't want to hear anymore rumours about someone who is no longer in a position to defend himself.
So was OJ Simpson, but we all know the truth there. Even if you know without a doubt that someone is guilty it means nothing if you have no evidence to back it up. Celebrities are lucky like that, and can afford the best lawyers around.
Why are we discussing such a random question?
What next? What did Cubby think of Jimmy Saville? What was John Gardners policy on Marvin Gaye?
I imagine Fleming may well have liked the odd song of Jackson but I doubt he wouldve owned any albums. He would also like the rest of us have thought he was something of a weirdo and likely as not also a paedo.
But I dont really see why we are debating it.
I really didn't want to say any more because I don't really care about Jacko, but I do care when hearsay is used to back up a point.
oh and Brady to say "Even if you know without a doubt that someone is guilty it means nothing if you have no evidence to back it up. Celebrities are luck like that seems a bit strange, as I thought that was how it worked...........Innocent until proven guilty, whether you are a celebrity or not??
I agree that this probably isn't a topic for this forum (and yet, here I am anyway........go figure). But, to explain what I said about Jacko's music - just because a tune has a good beat and you can dance to it, doesn't make it a great composition. They were catchy little pop tunes, nothing more. And like all catchy pop tunes they will live on only as a "remember when" curiosity by the generation that grew up with them, and then forgotten.
Jackson's songs broke no new ground harmonically, melodically or rhythmically. They were arraigned and recorded in the standard way of his time - again, no new ground broke. And lyrically, well, I doubt anyone cares about his lyrics anyway, but let's just say he was no Bob Dylan.......or even Jacob Dylan for that matter. He was not ahead of his time, the way, say, Iggy Pop or David Bowie was. He did not change the rhythmic structure of pop the way James Brown did. He did not lead a cultural movement the way Dylan, the Beatles, or even Nirvana did. He made pop songs people danced to. Period.
Years from now students of music will still study the music of the Cole Porter, the Beatles, Radiohead and other artists who expanded the boundaries of what popular music could be. But Jackson’s tunes – as popular as they were – will not.
Jackson himself, of course, will live on in history as a cultural phenomenon. Much the same way Marilyn Monroe and Elvis Presley have. Monroe was far from a great actress. Plenty of people who can’t even name one of his songs, still know who Elvis was. But both are remembered because they were both cultural phenomena who impacted the popular culture.
Jackson was the same way. His music was popular but insubstantial (countless artists had hugely popular songs that have been forgotten). But the memory of his odd personality, the molestation charges (and the fact that he avoided custody for several weeks by escaping abroad) and the drug use – all that created a story of celebrity, almost a mythology, that will remain in our collective consciousness.
That’s why I said his music will be forgotten but the memory of Jackson himself will live on. Right now his songs are still being played because the generation that grew up with those songs are still alive. The true test of genius is whether an artist’s work lives on past the time from which it came.
Oh, and I think Fleming would have hated Jackson’s music.
No...I am referring to a situation where everyone on a legal team knows that the individual they have accused is guilty either because they know information that can't be proved or have seen footage and pictures that have either been destroyed or disappeared, yet since there is no evidence to prove their accusation, the person gets away clean.
It is funny to hear you say that you are innocent until proven guilty, though. Maybe in the old days (probably not even then), but surely not now.
A grown man having sleepovers with minor children in his private bedroom? Sick, sick, sick.
anyways, back on topic.
I think Fleming would have been disgusted, unless he was a paedophile himself. Which I DOUBT. But you never know with some people some people have dark secrets, as Michael did, but his were exposed.
What's next?
What would Jackie Collins have made of 2Pac's life and career?
What would King George VI have made of Oscar Pistorius' life and career?
What a joke.
Flagged.
First impressions are quite crucial and you are flunking with flying colors. Though it doesn't matter at this point, because I strongly feel you won't last long around here anyway. This flagging party is fun! Let me join in the party by flagging everything you post.
I understand your point on the legal thing now, you just worded it badly.
Very cynical of you to believe that people in this day and age are guilty until proven innocent and very hypocritical. You did use OJ as an example remember. Are you now saying that he had to prove his innocence? as this goes against what you stated earlier.
@Sirhenry
I couldn't agree more. MJ allowing his insurer to pay out does make him appear to be guilty but does not prove any guilt. It would have cost the insurer more to go to court for a couple of years so they convinced MJ to pay. Which again proves the point that he was surrounded by people who only cared about themselves and getting a hold of MJs money.
Sad but true.
I am just pointing out that more often than not you will be judged before you have the proper chance to speak in court, and have to go out of your way to prove you are innocent and not guilty. With the rise of social media news travels fast, and speculation rises to meet it, meaning that it is common for someone implicated in some possible criminal activity to be found guilty by the world before they have a day in court to speak on their own behalf.
As for OJ, he couldn't prove himself innocent in my eyes as I believe he did it. He just had great lawyers and fame behind him.
Its bad enough having to plough through your asinine spewings without wasting my time reading my own posts rehashed.
How about we cut a deal? I'll promise not to sue for plagiarism if you just stop inflicting your wisdom on the rest of us.