Susan Fast's "Dangerous": A Review (Part 4-Utopia)

Superbowl Time Always Brings A Resurgence Of Interest In Michael's Legendary Superbowl Performance-And No Discussion Of It Can Be Complete Without Acknowledging That Astounding Finale Performance of "Heal The World"
Superbowl Time Always Brings A Resurgence Of Interest In Michael’s Legendary Superbowl Performance-And No Discussion Of It Can Be Complete Without Acknowledging That Astounding Finale Performance of “Heal The World”

“Black dreams are not about utopia-how could they be?” (Elizabeth Chin qtd in Fast).

UTOPIA

Since it has been so very long since my last post, and because all of the attention to this weekend’s Superbowl has (as it inevitably does this time of year) brought a resurgence of interest in Michael Jackson’s legendary Superbowl performance, this seemed an especially timely opportunity to turn the discussion to another of Michael’s most endearing yet often most maligned and misunderstood tracks-“Heal The World.” After all, no discussion of Michael’s 1993 Superbowl performance can be complete without also remembering that jaw dropping finale. And the fact that all of this Superbowl timeliness just happens to also coincide with my review of Susan Fast’s “Utopia” chapter from Dangerous is, well, too good and too convenient to pass up. So even though the post is not “as” complete as I would like it to be at this time,  which will no doubt necessitate extending it to another post, I would at least like to get the topic rolling without further ado.

So, after six tracks of some of the hardest hitting, angriest, sexiest, and street savvy songs of Michael’s career, the pendulum abruptly takes a far right swing with “Heal The World.” Such an abrupt shift of tone, mood, and subject matter is exactly the very thing that led many critics, as well as a lot of fans, to label Dangerous as an uneven album. But this was a trend that Michael would continue to pursue-almost with a vengeance, it seemed-on every subsequent album thereafter. Since this seemed such a purposeful pattern, perhaps it is high time we stopped being so quick to rush to judgment (assuming this was all merely part of some ego-driven desire to stuff an album with everything but the kitchen sink) and take a closer look at the album’s overall concept; the master’s design, if you will.

Fast refers to “Heal The World” as the beginning of Michael’s “Utopia” segment of Dangerous. Whereas the album’s first six tracks hit like a harsh, brazen dose of reality, this track is a throwback to escapism, or what Fast refers to as a utopic desire for a better way. It is escapism in the sense that it is presenting an ideal, rather than “what is.” And this is true regardless of whether we are talking Michael Jackson’s “Heal The World” or John Lennon’s “Imagine.” I choose those two songs to juxtapose in particular because, while critics often praise the Lennon composition, Michael’s “Heal The World” has traditionally been derided as nothing more than sentimental pap. Yet they are both espousing the same idealistic and escapist view, asking the listener to envision what “could be” if we all worked together to make it so. In fact, I would go one better and say that Michael’s composition actually has the upper hand, since he is advocating real action (even if albeit non-specific action) rather than merely daydreaming, or “imagining” that better world.

heal the worldBut this goes right back to the point Fast is making, or at least the point that dominates much of this chapter’s opening. While critics often lambasted Michael’s music as serving no artistic purpose other than “escapism” they seem to have been conveniently forgetting just how deeply rooted those ideals of utopic escapism are in both pop culture and, indeed, our human psyche. The artificial divide between art and entertainment as an “either/or” (that it must provide either escapism on the one hand, or have a social conscious on the other, and that both must be somehow mutually exclusive) is, perhaps, the very barrier that Michael most sought to eradicate-and which, for that effort, he was most unforgiven. That the desire to be swept away to a “better place” is a basic fundamental human drive, perhaps one that is vitally necessary to our mental and spiritual health, is something Michael definitely recognized.

“Where would be without a dance, a song?”-Michael Jackson, Harlem speech, 2001

Of course, it’s not that I don’t entirely “get” why some critics may have had a hard time warming up to “Heal The World.” It’s straightforward earnestness and even simplistic (though purposely simplistic) structure immediatly put it at odds with a very jaded and cynical culture, and as Joe Vogel and other music critics have already pointed out, the 90’s in general was not a time openly receptive to earnest messages. Personally, I prefer the much darker, baroque, and dystopian vision of “Earth Song.” However, perhaps in keeping with the vision that Michael had for Dangerous, it becomes easier to understand why “Heal The World” ultimately became the album’s centerpiece, and not “Earth Song” which would eventually find its home on the much darker themed HIStory album instead.

I often find it somewhat puzzling, in both a sad and ironic kind of way, that as a Michael Jackson fan my probably least two favorite compositions by him are the ones he seemed most personally proud of-“Childhood” and “Heal The World.” As a critical music fan, I know that Michael composed songs that were far superior to these, both lyrically and musically, so sometimes it’s hard to fathom why Michael seemed to view these as superior to all the rest.

In that regard, Susan Fast and I are very much on the same page as she writes in this passage:

“…Jackson claimed in an internet chat with his fans in 2001 that if he could only perform one of his songs for the rest of his life, this [“Heal The World”] would be it. And the trouble is, it doesn’t sound like an ironic statement. Really, out of all the astonishingly good music, this takes pride of place? My take is that ‘Heal The World’ serves as an important thematic pivot point on Dangerous, moving the listener from the wordly, noisy complications of the opening tracks into a somewhat troubling vision of utopia.” (Fast 77-78). 

But Michael did seem to feel that these kinds of songs came closest to capturing the essence of who he was, and that is no small thing to overlook. “Heal The World,” if anything, most represented Michael’s ideal of himself and of the world-the best of what both could be.  It makes sense, then, that if he could only perform one song for the rest of his life, which would he prefer? Something that took him to some very dark and troubled place, or something that reminded him of everything he most yearned for, and that could likewise empower others to strive for a perfect world? Given the option of only one song to perform for eternity, would you prefer bliss or torment?

Michael's Social Commentary Songs Represented The Best of Himself-The Ideals He Strove For In Himself, And Us
Michael’s Social Commentary Songs Represented The Best of Himself-The Ideals He Strove For In Himself, And Us

It reminds me of a very enlightening debate I once read between a Michael Jackson critic and a fan. The critic was going on and on about how, in his view, Michael was a hypocrite who didn’t exactly walk his talk. He went on about how Neverland was basically a carbon footprint on the land; how many resources were actually used in shooting the “Earth Song” video, how Michael was whisked around the world on private jets, and so forth. In other words, he didn’t exactly give up the superstar lifestyle to become a farmer grubbing in the dirt (but then again, could we not apply the same argument to all the celebrities who are involved in environmental causes?). Anyway, the fan managed to come back with a very good point, that while it may be easy to beat Michael up for his very human flaws (which, perhaps, sometimes did conflict with his idealistic, utopian views) what ultimately matters is not what Michael did or didn’t do. It was the ideals he set for himself-and the idealistic vision he strove to achieve for humanity-that defines who he was, and why he remains so universally loved, with millions of fans all over the world striving to live by his example. It’s not because he was perfect, or expected/demanded perfection in us, but rather, because he showed us the best in ourselves and what we are capable of being.

This was the message I took from his piece “That One In The Mirror,” in which he seems to recognize that the “one” in the mirror doesn’t always live up to his ideals. It is actually one of my favorite pieces by him because I think it is one of his most brutally honest:

“Wishing wouldn’t make it so-I knew that. When I woke up the next morning, that one in the mirror looked confused. ‘Maybe it’s hopeless,’ he whispered. Then a sly look came into his eyes, and he shrugged. ‘But you and I will survive. At least we are doing all right.'”-Michael Jackson, excerpted from “That One In The Mirror.”

As the piece progresses, he acknowledges a kind of separate detachment from himself and the image in the mirror. One feels the problems that are “out there”; the other merely “sees” the problems that are “out there” but doesn’t wish to acknowledge them.

“That one in the mirror winced and squirmed. He hadn’t thought so much about love. Seeing “problems” was much easier, because love means complete self-honesty. Ouch!”-Michael Jackson, excerpted from “That One in the Mirror.”

Here Michael seems to be facing and acknowledging multiple truths about himself. One seems to be a recognition that he has, perhaps, been more caught up in a faceless ideal-“I’m going to heal the world”-rather than honestly addressing his own needs for love, nurturing, and fulfillment. (You know the old adage: You can’t help others until you can help yourself. This seems to be a variation of that theme). Also, it appears to be an honest admonition of taking up causes, perhaps, for the wrong reasons, because it’s the “trendy” thing to do, perhaps, or enhances his own image. But that is only one side of the duality, as he is examining two halves of himself-one is an image that is being looked at from within; the other, an image that is being looked at from without. One acknowledges that what he feels for the world-its pain, its suffering, is all too real.

“He’ll get along. But I don’t feel that way. Those problems aren’t ‘out there,’ not really. I feel them inside me. A child crying in Ethiopia, a sea gull struggling pathetically in an oil spill, a mountain gorilla being mercilessly hunted,a teenage soldier trembling with terror when he hears planes fly over: Aren’t these happening in me when I see and hear about them?”-Michael Jackson, excerpted from “That One in the Mirror.”

B8dfVv1IIAENWXsEventually, in the poem, the image and the man merge as one. This, too, of course, is a representation of an ideal. The reality is that, as human beings, it is a day to day struggle to live to our fullest potential, or even to those ideals we set for ourselves. But I think what we have to keep in mind is that this ideal is sincerely who Michael wanted to be; what he strove to be, and, ultimately, wanted to be remembered as-not as some deity, saint, or martyr; not as some perfect man who healed the world with a song and a dance (and a few generous checks), but as a human being who dug deep within, who suffered much and sacrificed much, to give the world the best part of himself, even if he occasionally fell short.

But to return to the topic of “Heal The World,” the Dangerous album and Fast’s book, it is interesting that she chooses to refer to the tracks analyzed in this chapter (“Heal The World” and “Black or White”) as Michael’s “somewhat troubling vision of utopia.” Within the larger context of the album, however, this description makes sense. These tracks are placed squarely at the center of the album, a jarring and disconcerting shift (especially “Heal The World”) from the six tracks that have gone before, and only a momentary respite before we are plunged again into soulful despair with “Who Is It” and “Give In To Me” and the album’s coda which takes us back to the beginning. And, as we know, even the somewhat beguiling optimism of “Black or White” turns into a kind of false utopia, as it seems to acknowledge that racial harmony is really only an ideal (the catchy chorus aside, we know that by the time we get to the KKK references that this is no song about merely joining hands and singing “Kumbaya” but rather, a brutally honest statement about the ugly realities that will never allow this ideal to be fully realized).

Fast is probably correct, then, that “Heal The World” is meant to serve as both transition and respite. It is a momentary break from the world’s ugliness and reality, and also a momentary break from the more mundane and selfish concerns that have dominated much of the album-including love and sex, though one could certainly argue that even those themes could be utopic as well (for they are still representing a kind of escapism to some ideal place or state of being, at least in the “desire” songs that dominate much of the album’s first half).

Nevertheless, this transition represents the pattern, or motif, that will dominate most of Michael’s albums and all of his live performances thereafter, where the fun and good times eventually gives way to the serious, and where hard-bitten, human and personal emotions like anger and lust transcend to concern for the planet and humanity in general.

However, it is interesting that on Dangerous, at least, this transcendence is fleetingly brief. In performance, Michael often capped with “Heal The World” and “Man In The Mirror,” the tracks working together to create a kind of ultimate pinnacle for the audience, so that in the end, the concert becomes a truly uplifting and transitory experience. On record, however, Michael chose not to make “Heal The World” its closing track, but rather a song squarely in the middle. This would indicate that the intended arc of the Dangerous album is not one that is intended to take listeners to that pinnacle (as in the case of the live performances) but, rather, to offer it to them only as a kind of teasing interlude-a temporary oasis of hope in a world otherwise gone mad.

A pattern Fast establishes throughout her book is to begin every chapter with an appropriate quote. For this chapter, she chose the Elizabeth Chin quote which does seem fitting when we consider why Michael’s utopian segment of Dangerous also happens to be its shortest segment. After all, when John Lennon urged us to “Imagine” he had never lived a day in a black man’s shoes. Michael had-his entire life, in fact, and therein lies a crucial difference between the two artists that cannot be ignored, no matter how much modern scholars and revisionists may try to equate them. On Dangerous, at least, there emerges a somewhat disconcerting realization that any concept of “healing the world” may be a temporary and fleeting ideal, at best. It also raises an interesting question: Could it be that the pairing of “Heal The World” and “Black or White” are actually much more pessimistic representations of utopia than have been presumed?

To even raise the question is problematic because it seems that “Heal The World” is a track operating on two distinct levels of meaning-one as a separate track unto itself, and the other it may have as part of the overall context of the album and the album’s concept.  A lot may depend, ultimately, on how one interprets the remaining tracks that follow “Heal The World.” However, with perhaps the exception of “Keep the Faith.” the remaining tracks, rather than offering the easy transcendence of having found “a better way,” instead plunge us back to the depths of individual despair. Even “Keep The Faith” seems to be a message about holding on and “keeping the faith” that things may turn out better, rather than expressing any idealistic belief that they are better or likely to be better. In both “Keep The Faith” and “Will You Be There” the theme seems to be more about coping than, as we say, “rising above.” Faith can indeed help us to cope with suffering; to become stronger so that the suffering doesn’t pull us under.  But faith, in and of itself,  can’t “fix” what the problem is.

The Tracks That Follow "Heal The World" Seem To Hammer Home One Essential Point-Faith Can Help One To Cope, But It Cannot "Fix" The Problem.
The Tracks That Follow “Heal The World” Seem To Hammer Home One Essential Point-Faith Can Help One To Cope, But It Cannot “Fix” The Problem.

So where does that leave us in regard to “Heal The World?” This is an interesting question that I will continue to delve into in the next installment.

12 thoughts on “Susan Fast's "Dangerous": A Review (Part 4-Utopia)”

  1. Thanks, Raven–looking forward to the next post that deals with a more pessimistic or darker view of HTW–rather than seeing it as a ‘troubling’ utopian vision. The video sure didn’t pull any punches with the images of starving African children, and the lyrics make it clear that “there are people dying.” I do think there is a tendency to gloss HTW over and dismiss it as pie-in-the-sky wishing, but it acknowledges suffering and pessimism (if not cynicism):
    “And The Dream We Were
    Conceived In
    Will Reveal A Joyful Face
    And The World We
    Once Believed In
    Will Shine Again In Grace
    Then Why Do We Keep
    Strangling Life
    Wound This Earth
    Crucify Its Soul
    Though It’s Plain To See
    This World Is Heavenly
    Be God’s Glow ”

    Yes, it’s an exhortation and maybe MJ hoped that ‘Heal the World” would become a mantra for change, while knowing that it was not likely to happen. After all, he exhorts us in Tabloid Junkie not to “read it,” but knows that we will “keep fooling ourselves.” He asks the question “Why?” a lot, in Earth Song, HTW, TJ, etc. I think he had a hard time understanding WHY we would choose the destructive and hurtful path humanity so often chooses.

    Regarding “Imagine”–it is a much more palatable song for the realists and the non-religious–it advocates no religion, for example (nothing to kill or die for, and no religion too.) It doesn’t talk about “heart” or love or God.

    1. Thanks. Yes, this analysis will get into more depth in the next post. But I was realizing the other day, gosh, it has been almost a month since the last post and that is a long time with no new content, so I wanted to get something up for Superbowl weekend. I usually tend not to be as prolific during the school semester because I teach a heavy load, but a month is quite a long stretch, lol.

      I am really enjoying the fact that reviewing this book is giving me an opportunity to really explore these songs in ways I haven’t thought of before.

  2. P.S. Thinking about MJ asking WHY a lot in his songs, I realize he does this also on Why You Wanna Trip on Me–which is the 2nd song on the album–and where the refrain really hammers on the WHY question. MJ points to the lunacy of focusing the world’s attention on his nose, lifestyle, skin color, etc instead of real-world problems like poverty, illiteracy, drug addiction, gang violence, disease, etc. I don’t think Fast discusses this particuar song in depth, does she?

    1. It was discussed in the “Noise” chapter but I think the discussion of it got a little overshadowed by the “Jam” analysis.

  3. Yes, thanks. I looked at my copy, briefly scanning for remarks on Why You Wanna Trip on Me and it seems Fast uses it as a way to discuss and critique neoliberalism–going into an analysis of the role of the individual in the larger political system, and the intersections of public and private. She discusses the opening wailing guitar riff as not musically connected to what follows (its noise creates disruption and disorientation) and sees as ‘banal’ and conventional (not interesting?) a reading of the song as a ‘diatribe’ abaginst the tabloids. I agree that Fast merges Why You Wanna Trip into a discussion of Jam that it gets a bit neglected in its own right. There’s such a fantastic beat on this song and the WHY repeated with such emotion is significant. More than an answer, it’s a question.

  4. For some reason, this reminds me of an article I read that discussed the Waco, TX situation where the negotiations with the Branch Davidians broke down and why they did (it was an article earlier in 2014 I think in Atlantic Monthly). The writer gave the example of a negotiator offering milk to be delivered in exchange for the release of some of the children, and the woman on the other end of the phone being aghast that there would even be a question of witholding milk to children or trying to bargain for it. The writer made the point that the Branch Davidian was coming from a values-based perspective, whereas the negotiator was coming from a more pragmatic and quid pro quo perspective, and that’s where the negotiations broke down b/c the negotiators simply did not understand the values-based approach that the Branch Davidians had. I just wonder of this is also true for MJ–I think he was very much a values-based person in his thinking. I will try and find the link to that article.

    1. What a sad piece, but so fascinating and important, too! It really illustrates how most of the tragedies of humanity have come about as a result of ideologies and the fact that most cannot accept value systems that are different from their own. When you think about it, hasn’t this been the cause of most wars throughout history?

      I can definitely see the parallels of the Branch Davidians to the life of Michael, in the sense that Michael was persecuted for holding true to values that were not necessarily shared by the status quo. It also falls right in line with what we have been discussing here (mostly in the comments to the previous post) about why Michael’s “otherness” caused him to be a target. What Michael represented in “Ghosts” was somewhat similar to the tragedy of the Branch Davidians (in turn, he was inspired by his own experiences as a persecuted victim at Neverland). As The Maestro, he is eccentric and “different” but content and happy in his home full of ghouls, and harmless. Yet the mob comes to drive him away; to flush him out. It has a much happier ending than what happened at Waco, of course, but the implications are the same.

      The fear of anything or anyone who is perceived as “different”-whether it be their appearance, race, religion, values, etc-seems to be something deeply ingrained in human nature. The tragedy, however, is that this fear has so often historically led to violence and witch hunt hysterias, rather than towards any attempt at bridging those gaps. It is usually only in hindsight-and sometimes decades or even centuries later-that we realize the folly of our ways, and how great tragedies against inhumanity might have been avoided with simply a little understanding and patience. Yet it seems we never really learn from the past, and history is always doomed to repeat itself.

      Even now, those who do not “get” Michael often brand his fans as cult followers. This seems to justify a kind of superiority. They jokingly throw around terms like “drinking the kool-aid” to describe the fan mindset (the irony being that they don’t seem to realize that they, too, are exhibiting all the traits of a “group” mentality). I understand that some people genuinely believe that the child molestation allegations render Michael’s values as hypocritical (if they believe he committed those crimes) but we can’t forget that the very reason those allegations came about in the first place was as a direct result of the fear and misunderstanding that was brought about as a result of those who did not understand, and even mocked, the values he espoused.

  5. Thanks for your great comments, Raven! I agree with your insights into our human tendencies, and the connections you draw to Michael’s life experiences and what happened at Waco. Yes, Neverland was under siege in much the same way as Waco–both attacked by the power of the state. Even though in Michael’s case shots were not fired, the prosecutors sure swarmed the place and turned it inside out. I mean, he never lived in his own bedroom again after they ransacked it.

    You make an excellent connection to Ghosts–the Mayor trying to gather the townspeople against The Maestro and throw him out of his own home!

    Re the values disconnect, I read an article in CNN today re lab chimps held by the government that have already been promised to be released to sanctuaries but have not been– after waiting 18 months. Basically the gov’t wants to get credit for deciding to release them without actually releasing them!! So they ‘agreed’ to this but are dragging their heels, and meanwhile 34 of the large number of chimps that were supposed to be released have died in captivity already. This just makes me heartsick as most countries no longer do ‘research’ on primates like chimps, considered higher intelligence species. Neverthless, these gov’t scientists (paid by taxpayer $$) say they need to choose 50 chimps before they release any more and that it will take them YEARS to make that choice!!

    I bring this up as another example where Michael’s values were totally misunderstood– Bubbles came from a research lab–and who knows what his horrible fate would have been if Michael hadn’t taken him out of that situation. The chimps are infected with diseases like HIV and Hep C–it is not pleasant–there’s a lot of suffering. They never know what grass is and spend their lives in cages–some even go psychotic. Yet Michael was ridiculed for having Bubbles. Just one more example of how he was mocked and criticized for the good he was doing and did–for values that did not get approval from the media and other arbiters casting judgment, and that were then twisted and miscast into something sinister or weird.

    BTW, there was a loathsome Daily Mail piece on Michael yesterday that again dredged up the ‘100 surgeries on his face’ crap in another effort to ridicule and demean him. Many comments were hostile to the Daily Mail for putting out a trash article about a deceased artist of such stature–so that’s good.

    I agree there’s a good question re who is actually drinking the kool-aid here!

  6. On a sidenote. Talking about books about MJ it seems that Frank Dileos business partner Lamicka is going to release the book Dileo was about to publish before he died, titled “Dileo: I am going to set the record straight” , compiled from records and notes left behind by Dileo.
    Lamica said the book will also name and shame all those – including family members – who took advantage of Jackson and his multi-million pound fortune.

    The irony is that Lamicka is a fraud who together with Dileo took advantage of Michaels name , presenting himself as Michaels manager, making deals left and right behind Michaels back , while he was alive and even after he died . Both were sued by multiple parties for taking money from concert promotors for MJ tribute cocerts and other artists which never took place . Here is an article about their modus operandi.
    http://www.atlanticbusinessmagazine.net/article/stage-fright/

    ……..Regardless, both sides have acknowledged working to end the stalemate. “The parties are also currently exploring ways in which the matter may be resolved by settlement,” said a May 5 joint status report signed by lawyers for both Sussmeier and Summerside.
    Further complicating matters is the status of other defendants in the Summerside lawsuit. Dileo, Lamicka and Krashna have all been involved in other civil suits alleging similar problems.
    Concert promoters won a default judgment against Lamicka in Oklahoma for $250,000 plus $50,000 in damages in relation to a 2007 KISS show that didn’t take place. According to court documents filed this May, the plaintiffs — even with the aid of a private investigator — haven’t been able to locate Lamicka.
    Dileo, Lamicka and related companies are also facing civil action in relation to a failed Eddie Griffin and Jamie Foxx comedy tour in 2008 and 2009; the plaintiff is seeking $171,000 in unreturned payments.
    And Dileo, Lamicka and Krashna are among those sued in 2010 for $300,000 by a Trinidad-based promoter for a Michael Jackson show. The cash was wired a week before Jackson died in 2009, according to court documents, but never returned. Lawyers for Dileo — who has been in an irreversible coma since March 21, 2011 — have asked for an extension to file rele-vant court documents. (Dileo’s attorneys have also filed a notice of motion to dismiss Sum-merside’s complaint.)
    Meanwhile, Sussmeier did not return e-mailed messages about the Summerside lawsuit — which as of the
    magazine’s late June deadline, remained before the courts.
    – Rob Antle

    Wouldnt you be paranoid if no one around you can be trusted.
    Someone should name and shame Lamicka !

    1. I heard about the book. I wouldn’t trust it to be 100% factual. But like so many books of this nature, it may offer up some interesting pieces of the puzzle. I am long past, however, believing that any one source (let alone any one individual) can be trusted as a reliable source. When it comes to the people who actually knew Michael, almost all of them have an agenda of some sort so I’ve learned, especially in the case of tell-all books, to take most everything with a grain of salt. Also, it’s a bit suspect for Lamicka to be coming out with the book now, almost four years after Dileo died. Can we trust that he hasn’t embellished the manuscript in any way? The one thing I WOULD be really interested in is what he may have to say about Tohme during the last year of Michael’s life.

  7. Money is the only driving factor to put out a tell all book on behalf of a deceased . Its very convenient too, you can make a deceased say whatever without being helt accountable and without repercussion. We don’t know what records Lamicka has to base the book on, but if his own track record is an indication of the credibility of the book, I consider it a sick joke . I don’t like to speak ill of the deceased, but if a deceased can write a tell all book it is totally legit to question him.

    What I would like to know is where Dileo stood towards Michael in the whole AEG debacle, who hired him, what exactly was he managing and what did he do for Michael to get the money he was paid. Which for the time he was engaged was more than the finders and managers fee Tohme asked for or Murray for that matter. How come he had no scruples to go behind Michaels back making deals left and right for his own benefit. Knowing the situation Michael was in , how vulnerable he was and after barely entering Michaels business sphere after more than a decades absence. Whose idea was it to include Cascio tracks on an MJ album. Was that the karma he had wished on Michael after he was fired?. But most of all knowing Michael as long as he did ( and apparently still caring ) why did he ignore Michaels condition, just recommended to give him a bucket of chicken, and then lied about knowing..

Leave a Reply