Social Question

SABOTEUR's avatar

Are the Jacksons relevant without Michael?

Asked by SABOTEUR (11939 points ) December 21st, 2009

The Jackson 5 (minus Michael) have a reality series on A&E. The show follows the brother’s attempt to stage a concert, of some sort, following the death of Michael Jackson.

Besides the fact that they seem direction-less in their pursuit to recapture the “glory years”, these “prima donnas” seem totally unaware that it was Michael that was the focal point of the group.

What is your reaction to The Brothers (as they refer to themselves) allowing “the cameras into their personal lives for the first time?”

Are you the least bit interested in seeing The Jacksons without Michael?

Where’s Randy Jackson, the brother that replaced Jermaine when The Jacksons left Motown for CBS?

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

31 Answers

TLRobinson's avatar

Relevant? Not at all. Entertaining? For all the wrong reasons. Jermaine feels he is and was the “star”; the other four battle back and forth as to who’s going to reel him.

If they must do this “brothers” schtick, it should be a revue and not new songs. No type of children support is going to help.

I think they each have ulterior individual motives and they have nothing to do with Michael. Said viewing in my opinion.

SABOTEUR's avatar

@TLRobinson I agree…especially where Jermaine is concerned.

I think I’ve seen 4 episodes so far. I’ve seen a lot of discussion, a lot of meetings, a lot of traveling, but no real organizing of the concert they’re contractually obligated to do in 4 weeks.

The whole thing is embarrassing. As protective of their private lives as they say they are, I’m bewildered at why they’ve allowed this tv series to proceed. It certainly doesn’t show them in the best light.

(They might pick up an endorsement for sunglasses, though.)

TLRobinson's avatar

@SABOTEUR- or hair wax and dye….

SABOTEUR's avatar

ROTFLMAO!!!

bunnygrl's avatar

There is a series running here on one of the bbc digital channels called “Move like Michsel Jackson” http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00p719p its a reality type programme with members of the public having a dance off, anyway, its judged by Jermaine Jackson. It just makes me feel quite queesy, its like they’re all leeching off the success that Michael had (and they didn’t) in other words just cashing in on their brother’s death. Just doesn’t seem nice.
hugs all xx

SABOTEUR's avatar

@bunnygrl I’ve read several biographies concerning the lives of the Jacksons (Michael in particular), and they all consistently mention how Michael was continually pressured to perform with “the brothers” just one more time. They seem to be victims of their own former stardom, making poor investments and trying to maintain lavish lifestyles despite the lack of steady regular income.

Jermaine, as you’ve stated, seems most adept at associating himself with anything related to Michael (TV appearances, tributes, etc.) and it’s reflected on the TV series. He’s more interested in doing his own thing and gloaming off of Michael’s celebrity than focusing energy on doing anything substantive with his brothers.

It’s really very sad to see.

bunnygrl's avatar

@SABOTEUR I agree it is really sad.
hugs xx

Buttonstc's avatar

They aren’t relative to me and I don’t find them entertaining, so… meh.

I do have some pity for all of them tho as primary examples of crappy self-centered parenting on the part of their father.

What a dimwitted, egotistical jerk. !

Zen_Again's avatar

Irrelevant and unentertaining. So sick of these reality shows. Barf.

Kelly_Obrien's avatar

They weren’t relevant with Michael.

I was never the least bit interested in seeing them with him, however, they did draw mega babes and hotties to their concerts!

Pseudonym's avatar

I don’t really think so. Some of them are talented, but none of them are anywhere close to the real Michael Jackson. I would be interested at seeing more about his life, not really the others’.

SABOTEUR's avatar

@Buttonstc : Yes…but tell us how you really feel…!

SABOTEUR's avatar

@Pseudonym : Well, that’s the problem. Michael eclipsed his brother in status. Thriller shot Michael to superstardom and rendered his brothers to footnote status as part of his legacy. I hold a fondness for them because I grew up with their music from the very beginning. It’s unfortunate they (seemed to have) remained content to live in Michael’s shadow.

SuperMouse's avatar

The Jackson Five was relevant when they were making records with Michael. As soon as he went out on his own they were history. It is kind of like Van Halen after David Lee Roth left, with apologies to Sammy Hagar inconsequential. I haven’t watched a single episode because I think the whole idea is a pathetic, desperate grab for notoriety that exploits their brother’s death. That is some messed up sh!t.

erichw1504's avatar

As in amount of accomplishments and fame? Hell no.

bunnygrl's avatar

I remember being quite young, 8 or so, and my Gran used to go off out really early on saturday mornings to get the paper, the Daily Record, because every saturday for a while you got a free poster. One week it was a Jackson 5 poster and the following week it was the Osmonds, and they kept alternating each week for quite a while :-)

I feel very old now lol, hugs all xx

Silhouette's avatar

I haven’t been able to make myself watch the show, I am embarrassed for them. To answer your question, yes they are unaware that Michael was and still is the focal point.

Darwin's avatar

I thought the concert ended up being canceled because they could never get it organized properly and then the company they were working with went bankrupt.

In any case, I refuse to watch the show. It isn’t fun watching deluded adults try to get back a youth that wasn’t what they thought it was. LaToya and Janet have always been fortunate that they were never part of “The Brothers.” They learned how to stand on their own two feet.

jeffgoldblumsprivatefacilities's avatar

I cannot wait for the day when the world shuts up about Michael or any other Jackson. Get over it already.

SABOTEUR's avatar

@jeffgoldblumsprivatefacilities FYI, I remember when black people on tv was still a novelty. The Jackson 5 came along when a new spirit of black pride emerged. So, while I understand people who would rather not hear about them, I’d respectfully request that you get over it.

SABOTEUR's avatar

@Kelly_Obrien I beg your pardon? The Jackson 5 were the hottest young Motown act for many years. They were the last of the great acts from the Motown stable, before it went “corporate”. To say that “they weren’t relevent _with_Michael” denotes an ignorance of music history and black history in America. You would have come off looking better if you had skipped this thread and continued on to the Led Zeppelin discussion.

SABOTEUR's avatar

@SuperMouse : Actually, Van Halen fared a lot better without David Lee Roth than The Jacksons did without Michael, but I get your point. And, as much as I hate to say it, it is some messed up shit.

Thanks for the reply!

SABOTEUR's avatar

@bunnygrl : You feel old? I’m here telling people I remember when Black people on tv were a novelty, fer cryinoutloud! for crying out loud!

UScitizen's avatar

Of course not. And furthermore, they were not relevant when the pedophile was still living.

SABOTEUR's avatar

@UScitizen ~Thanks for your intelligent response.
I didn’t know they released the arse crevices so early…

Jeruba's avatar

Is any person relevant?

Darwin's avatar

@SABOTEUR – I couldn’t wait to watch I Spy because I thought Bill Cosby was the funniest human being on the planet (giant chicken hearts indeed!) and I really liked Cicely Tyson in East Side/West Side. There are a lot of other “firsts” that I remember, so possibly we are close in age. Are you old enough to have seen Ethel Waters in Beulah, on TV?

In any case, the Jackson 5 with Michael was an amazing phenomenon. The fact that the youngest of the brothers was definitely the star was eye-opening. And in hindsight, the number of songs they recorded that are classics is immense.

Later, as Michael went solo I did enjoy some of his work, but it never had the pure joy that seemed to be present when he was little. Then as his face eroded and his skin paled I simply felt sorry for him. I do see the effect his dancing and musical styles have had on popular music – it is also immense. However, he is now dead, too young and from unwise choices, and so we need to move on.

SABOTEUR's avatar

Beautifully said, @Darwin. I was tracking right along with you until “we need to move on.” Move on to what? What Michael did in his personal life doesn’t detract from the fact that he and his brothers left a strong legacy of music. Many of us will carry those songs with us the same way we do the songs of John Lennon, Frank Sinatra, Elvis Presley, Jimi Hendrix, Marvin Gaye and many others who left a legacy of classic music.

But we’re getting away from the point. The Jacksons are not the first musical group to lose a lead singer. We all (those who cherish the music of the Jacksons) recognize the enormous hurtle The Brothers face trying to move forward without Michael’s indelible contribution. But unlike those groups that precede them, the Jacksons have never made any real effort to forge an identity distinct from that of Michael. They’ve always seemed content to ride his coattails and from the looks of it (the A&E miniseries) they’re still not doing much to carry on the legacy they began in Gary Indiana. That, to me, is as tragic as Michael’s death itself.

As for your other observations (smiling) I’m not quite old enough to remember Beulah (I’m 52), but I am old enough to remember our family owning a black & white TV, and the rare occasions when a famous Negro (we weren’t Black then) celebrity would appear on a talk or variety show, and how excited everyone would be because “There’s a colored person on TV!” Anyone who hasn’t experienced that can hardly recognize how proud we were to see these 5 young men explode from the Motown factory of celebrated performers. The were us and they set a standard of excellence many young performers emulate to this day. Attempting to reduce that achievement by dragging out Michael’s adult eccentricities and legal problems is insulting to anyone who witnessed the emergence of the Jackson 5 and followed them throughout their entire career.

Darwin's avatar

“Move on to what?”

By move on I mean we need to let the man rest in peace, because his earthly troubles are over and were never really any of our business to begin with. We need to let his music live on, as well as treasure the great memories he and his music created for us. Then, too, we need to celebrate the new and upcoming musicians, a few of whom may change music once again.

And as I said above, LaToya and Janet have always been fortunate that they were never part of “The Brothers.” They learned how to stand on their own two feet. “The Brothers” never did.

I’m older than you are…

SABOTEUR's avatar

Thanks for the clarification, Darwin.
I’m with you 100%

Skaggfacemutt's avatar

The saying “milk it for all it’s worth” comes to mind. I have not seen this reality show, but it sounds almost as shameless as the Sarah Palin one. Anything for a buck.

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.
Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
or
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther