I am going to disagree with you on this. I love the song and that picture is of a man on the left holding the hand of a woman on the right.
The bodies are shaped differently, the body on the left has muscles...masculine looking and the arm on the right is more slender, the hand appears smaller and more feminine, look at the wrist. All only IMO of course.
hmmm feminine body with no waisteline <!-- s;) -->;)<!-- s;) -->
To me this could have been clarified if they had shown a full body silhouette (head to toe) - then you would know conclusively it is a man and woman. But they did not do this, so it seems it was very intentional that the wanted anyone looking at it to get a "different meaning" out of the song, something more than just the simple act of holding hands. People have commented that this song could represent humanitarian or brotherly love---so then if you take that meaning from it, why would they show just a picture of a man and woman's silhouette holding hands which would indicate it is a "romantic song" instead? You can't have it both ways.... <!-- s:? -->:?<!-- s:? -->
It's like his song "Leave Me Alone"- the video was about Michael being harrassed by the media and all the things they critcized him for, yet the lyrics of the song are about a woman. So you can't conclude "Hold my hand" is one dimensional...
I think the artwork related to this album is going to be just as interesting as the songs themselves. and there is more to this song than it seems.
To me it sounds like a calming, soothing song which symbolically could stand for us and Michael, he's holding hands with us, leading the way to the light. No matter when it actually was leaked first, it just fits into the phase of the whole hoax ( upcoming controversy ) we are in right now. I don't see any gay context or connection.
Thanks for all your insight on this, guys. I had heard the original version of this song a long time ago, so when I heard the version with MJ I was kind of disappointed that it sounded exactly like the original. Nothing new. Not a bad song, but I would have to agree with it being somewhat "weak" (in MJ standards, which are high). I didn't initially get the homosexual vibe, BUT...I just remembered an interesting convo I had with a friend the other day about the new song "Do you know where your children are". I sent the link to my friend in Chicago to check it out. He said he'd have to listen to it a bit later but he asked me what it was called. When I told him the title, he's like "whoa, really? that's an interesting choice for a title..." hinting towards the child molestation charges. The song itself is simply amazing and not creepy in any way, but certainly someone had to realize that giving it that title would raise some eyebrows unfortunately. Perhaps that is the point though.
I am going to disagree with you on this. I love the song and that picture is of a man on the left holding the hand of a woman on the right.
The bodies are shaped differently, the body on the left has muscles...masculine looking and the arm on the right is more slender, the hand appears smaller and more feminine, look at the wrist. All only IMO of course.
hmmm feminine body with no waisteline <!-- s;) -->;)<!-- s;) -->
To me this could have been clarified if they had shown a full body silhouette (head to toe) - then you would know conclusively it is a man and woman. But they did not do this, so it seems it was very intentional that the wanted anyone looking at it to get a "different meaning" out of the song, something more than just the simple act of holding hands. People have commented that this song could represent humanitarian or brotherly love---so then if you take that meaning from it, why would they show just a picture of a man and woman's silhouette holding hands which would indicate it is a "romantic song" instead? You can't have it both ways.... <!-- s:? -->:?<!-- s:? -->
It's like his song "Leave Me Alone"- the video was about Michael being harrassed by the media and all the things they critcized him for, yet the lyrics of the song are about a woman. So you can't conclude "Hold my hand" is one dimensional...
I think the artwork related to this album is going to be just as interesting as the songs themselves. and there is more to this song than it seems.
so maybe we can all look at anything and see if differently according to our preconcieved notions?
i am off to look at leave me alone again <!-- s:D -->:D<!-- s:D -->
I have personally never gotten any homosexual vibes from this song EVER. There's absolutely nothing in this song that insinuates that. I hate how people don't hear "she" "girl" etc and come to wild conclusions. I value everyone's opinion, don't get me wrong but in MY opinion, there's nothing gay. I've already heard crazy tabloid junk about this song on the web, so sad.
[quote= so maybe we can all look at anything and see if differently according to our preconcieved notions?
i am off to look at leave me alone again [/quote]
(I realize I'm getting off topic here, but bear with me)
It's like the song Michael did with Lenny Kravitz, "Another Day". If you had no artwork to look at or video to interpret it, just based on the lyrics what would you assume the song to mean?
Here is some of the lyrics: (courtesy of directlyrics.com)
My life has taken me beyond the planets and the stars
And you’re the only one that could take me this far
I’ll be forever searching for your love
(Huhhh-Ooh)
[CHORUS]
I walked away but I was wrong
(I can't make it another day)
You’re the one that keeps me strong
(I can't make it another day)
You’re the fire that keeps me warm
(I can't make it another day)
How did I get through this storm?
(I can't make it another day without your love)
(Hoohoo)
(Come on now!)
At night, I pray before I sleep in hope of finding you
(finding you)
I've opened up my heart to let you to come through
I'll be forever searching for your love
(Huhhh-ooooh)
[CHORUS]
I walked away but I was wrong
(I can't make it another day)
You’re the one that keeps me strong
(I can't make it another day)
You’re the fire that keeps me warm
(I can't make it another day)
How did I get through this storm?
(I can't make it another day without your love)
Now imagine this song paired with the 'Hold my hand" picture....would you question the meaning behind the song?
How about if it was a picture of Christ on the cross...would the song take on a different meaning then?
How about if you saw a video, showing all of Michael's fans all around the world searching for him, but he's hidden away. He can see us but we can't see him and he's singing this song...does the meaning of the song change then too?
I hope I'm getting my point across <!-- s:? -->:?<!-- s:? --> ...the visual presentation really affects how you percieve something and can alter it's meaning. So yeah, something literal can be percieved many different ways.
Thanks for all your insight on this, guys. I had heard the original version of this song a long time ago, so when I heard the version with MJ I was kind of disappointed that it sounded exactly like the original. Nothing new. Not a bad song, but I would have to agree with it being somewhat "weak" (in MJ standards, which are high). I didn't initially get the homosexual vibe, BUT...I just remembered an interesting convo I had with a friend the other day about the new song "Do you know where your children are". I sent the link to my friend in Chicago to check it out. He said he'd have to listen to it a bit later but he asked me what it was called. When I told him the title, he's like "whoa, really? that's an interesting choice for a title..." hinting towards the child molestation charges. The song itself is simply amazing and not creepy in any way, but certainly someone had to realize that giving it that title would raise some eyebrows unfortunately. Perhaps that is the point though.
I love that song, "Do You Know Where Your Children Are", but it's not on the album tracklist. The thing is, if MJ were to always care about anything that anyone might think of his songs or art, he'd never do anything! Some people always make certain connections or take things out of context or misconstrue them... TDCAU got Michael accused of being anti-semite! Another time someone took 1 poem, just 1, from "Dancing the Dream" - and I believe this was quite recently - and wrote an article making the point that it was creepy! Now anyone who's read that book should see that it's just a beautiful collection of poems and essays and there's nothing creepy about it. But, unfortunately, some people's minds are pretty perverse (which MJ's mind wasn't).
I have personally never gotten any homosexual vibes from this song EVER. There's absolutely nothing in this song that insinuates that. I hate how people don't hear "she" "girl" etc and come to wild conclusions. I value everyone's opinion, don't get me wrong but in MY opinion, there's nothing gay. I've already heard crazy tabloid junk about this song on the web, so sad.
Yes, very sad... And it's not just "tabloid junk"... There are people whose MINDS work that way... They're always after juicy stuff to gossip about. They don't give a damn about the essence/substance of things.
[quote= so maybe we can all look at anything and see if differently according to our preconcieved notions?
i am off to look at leave me alone again
(I realize I'm getting off topic here, but bear with me)
It's like the song Michael did with Lenny Kravitz, "Another Day". If you had no artwork to look at or video to interpret it, just based on the lyrics what would you assume the song to mean?
Here is some of the lyrics: (courtesy of directlyrics.com)
My life has taken me beyond the planets and the stars
And you’re the only one that could take me this far
I’ll be forever searching for your love
(Huhhh-Ooh)
[CHORUS]
I walked away but I was wrong
(I can't make it another day)
You’re the one that keeps me strong
(I can't make it another day)
You’re the fire that keeps me warm
(I can't make it another day)
How did I get through this storm?
(I can't make it another day without your love)
(Hoohoo)
(Come on now!)
At night, I pray before I sleep in hope of finding you
(finding you)
I've opened up my heart to let you to come through
I'll be forever searching for your love
(Huhhh-ooooh)
[CHORUS]
I walked away but I was wrong
(I can't make it another day)
You’re the one that keeps me strong
(I can't make it another day)
You’re the fire that keeps me warm
(I can't make it another day)
How did I get through this storm?
(I can't make it another day without your love)
Now imagine this song paired with the 'Hold my hand" picture....would you question the meaning behind the song?
How about if it was a picture of Christ on the cross...would the song take on a different meaning then?
How about if you saw a video, showing all of Michael's fans all around the world searching for him, but he's hidden away. He can see us but we can't see him and he's singing this song...does the meaning of the song change then too?
I hope I'm getting my point across <!-- s:? -->:?<!-- s:? --> ...the visual presentation really affects how you percieve something and can alter it's meaning. So yeah, something literal can be percieved many different ways.[/quote]
and this can extend to anything that is put in front of us.
politcal issues, social issues .
i also think the rest of the art work will be interesting.
let's not forget the cry video either no michael at all only other people holding hands
Thanks for all your insight on this, guys. I had heard the original version of this song a long time ago, so when I heard the version with MJ I was kind of disappointed that it sounded exactly like the original. Nothing new. Not a bad song, but I would have to agree with it being somewhat "weak" (in MJ standards, which are high). I didn't initially get the homosexual vibe, BUT...I just remembered an interesting convo I had with a friend the other day about the new song "Do you know where your children are". I sent the link to my friend in Chicago to check it out. He said he'd have to listen to it a bit later but he asked me what it was called. When I told him the title, he's like "whoa, really? that's an interesting choice for a title..." hinting towards the child molestation charges. The song itself is simply amazing and not creepy in any way, but certainly someone had to realize that giving it that title would raise some eyebrows unfortunately. Perhaps that is the point though.
Wow, Jaci...I seemed to have a light bulb moment when reading your post. Previous to it, I was thinking that HMH was just a song. Don't try to overanalyze it....but add Do You Know Where Your Children Are and it makes me think there are no such things as coincidences. I'm hot to have a listen to Monster too.
This has to be strategic to the hoax. It seems Mike is throwing these things in the world's face. Where it can't be ignored. I'd say our boy is understandably really pissed off. It reminds me of Is It Scary. where he says
I'm gonna be exactly what you wanna see
It's you whose haunting me Your warning me
To be the stranger in your life
Am I amusing you or just confusing you
Am I the beast you visualize.
And if you wanna see eccentrialities I'll be grotesque before your eyes
Let them all materialize.
But if you came to see the truth and purity
It's here inside a lonely heart
So let the performance start......
As far as HMH goes, I love it. Nice song....but the controversy is on purpose....hoax purpose. I don't understand how it all will unfold, but I intend to keep watching the performance of the greatest show on earth.
Good point. Seeing a picture or video with a song can change how we perceive it... but not necessarily completely. For instance: In my mind the song YANA (You Are Not Alone) by MJ is completely divorced from the music video - which I don't like much, and I don't think goes well with the song.
As for the song "Another Day", I interpret it as someone saying they walked away from a love (any love!) that was fulfilling and inspiring, and which they now yearn after. Love can be for Jesus, for someone like MJ, for any other person... Love isn't just "romance".
In the picture the way the hands are interlinked with each other makes it look like the shape of the heart that you usually see in a painting of Jesus with a gold aura emanating from it. What do you guys think?
Good point. Seeing a picture or video with a song can change how we perceive it... but not necessarily completely. For instance: In my mind the song YANA (You Are Not Alone) by MJ is completely divorced from the music video - which I don't like much, and I don't think goes well with the song.
As for the song "Another Day", I interpret it as someone saying they walked away from a love (any love!) that was fulfilling and inspiring, and which they now yearn after. Love can be for Jesus, for someone like MJ, for any other person... Love isn't just "romance".
"We see the world not as it is, but as we are."
i have not seen the lryrics for another day before your previous post but i see what you mean.
as for your are not alone. thank god someone finally said it ! i have never been able to reconcile that song and video .but i also have not been able to fit that one angry gesture into anything directed at god either. <!-- s:? -->:?<!-- s:? -->
i can remember the first time i saw sister act. when the nuns were singing my guy and replaceing guy with god. i was so blown away. it was so neat to me. i am so corny <!-- s --><!-- s -->
we just don't think of god on a personal level . he has been made to seem so distant and he is not .
Have you people lost your minds????? This song was leaked 2 yrs ago and is nothing but a lovley lovely song! I have not read all the post but are you people nuts !!
This is a song that sent chills up my spine the first time I heard it and as I have it on my ipod I have listened to it over and over again and it is just a SONG....a very nice song......a very lovely song by two people who respected one another and wanted to collaberate on a song together.
It is a great song for goodness sake just listen to the song and enjoy it. Who cares about a freaking picture ( which is very nice in my opinion)
Stop now and go to bed and get up in the morning and stop trying to see things where there are no things to see . Just my opinion
God, you are so right....I don't know what to think anymore. I just don't understand why everytime something good happens, everyone tries to disect it into something negative. Have we not learned yet what this man was all about???? Obviously NOT. I can't believe this site has become what it is. What happened????
The reason why the woman does not have a slim waist is because then there would be no M, it would look like an undecipherable alphabet.
Yeah, that was me <!-- s:D -->:D<!-- s:D --> ....I see what you mean...so we are meant to see the letter moreso than the shapes? (I know that sounds weird). If that's the case then it would tweak my perspective of it and whose behind it.
The reason why the woman does not have a slim waist is because then there would be no M, it would look like an undecipherable alphabet.
Yeah, that was me <!-- s:D -->:D<!-- s:D --> ....I see what you mean...so we are meant to see the letter moreso than the shapes? (I know that sounds weird). If that's the case then it would tweak my perspective of it and whose behind it.
couldn't they have used two children to achieve that same effect or would that become even more controversial ?
The reason why the woman does not have a slim waist is because then there would be no M, it would look like an undecipherable alphabet.
Yeah, that was me <!-- s:D -->:D<!-- s:D --> ....I see what you mean...so we are meant to see the letter moreso than the shapes? (I know that sounds weird). If that's the case then it would tweak my perspective of it and whose behind it.
couldn't they have used two children to achieve that same effect or would that become even more controversial ?
I think 2 children wouldn't fit the idea of the song, which seems to be about adults (i.e. people who have some life experience). The song says: Cause I've been there before
And you've been there before
As someone who has never heard any version of this song and hearing it for the first time ever today, I have to be honest and say my first thought was that the song had homosexual overtones <!-- s:? -->:?<!-- s:? --> This song release did seem odd to me.
Two things immediately popped into my head after hearing this....
1) the allegations Arnold Kleins assistant made about being Michael's gay lover
2) how Michael was upset over how the singles were released on the Invincible album back in 2001, which I think in part sparked that little controversy with Sony (not sure why that popped into my head, but it did).
The fact that the art cover for the song is ambiguous (It could have included a head shot of a man and woman to clear up any confusion) but the fact they chose not to, also makes me wonder if Sony isn't targeting a gay audience subliminally at the expense of Michael's reputation.
The song and the way it's being presented is leaving it to wide open for interpretation (IMO). I've never heard the song before now and don't know the history behind it's making, so I have no bias one way or the other, this was just my intial impression.
At first, I didn't understand Will.I.ams comment about this song release being "disrespectful" until now...and now I see there are multiple layers to his statement.
I do believe this album is another version of a hoax or another phase of it. Because so far nothing about this album is what it seems. So I have to agree. <!-- s:| -->:|<!-- s:| -->[/quote]
I have to agree. When something is ambiguous and unclear, it never takes certain elements of society long to get the wrong idea. There is definately a game plan here.
Thanks for all your insight on this, guys. I had heard the original version of this song a long time ago, so when I heard the version with MJ I was kind of disappointed that it sounded exactly like the original. Nothing new. Not a bad song, but I would have to agree with it being somewhat "weak" (in MJ standards, which are high). I didn't initially get the homosexual vibe, BUT...I just remembered an interesting convo I had with a friend the other day about the new song "Do you know where your children are". I sent the link to my friend in Chicago to check it out. He said he'd have to listen to it a bit later but he asked me what it was called. When I told him the title, he's like "whoa, really? that's an interesting choice for a title..." hinting towards the child molestation charges. The song itself is simply amazing and not creepy in any way, but certainly someone had to realize that giving it that title would raise some eyebrows unfortunately. Perhaps that is the point though.
Wow, Jaci...I seemed to have a light bulb moment when reading your post. Previous to it, I was thinking that HMH was just a song. Don't try to overanalyze it....but add Do You Know Where Your Children Are and it makes me think there are no such things as coincidences. I'm hot to have a listen to Monster too.
This has to be strategic to the hoax. It seems Mike is throwing these things in the world's face. Where it can't be ignored. I'd say our boy is understandably really pissed off. It reminds me of Is It Scary. where he says
I'm gonna be exactly what you wanna see
It's you whose haunting me Your warning me
To be the stranger in your life
Am I amusing you or just confusing you
Am I the beast you visualize.
And if you wanna see eccentrialities I'll be grotesque before your eyes
Let them all materialize.
But if you came to see the truth and purity
It's here inside a lonely heart
So let the performance start......
As far as HMH goes, I love it. Nice song....but the controversy is on purpose....hoax purpose. I don't understand how it all will unfold, but I intend to keep watching the performance of the greatest show on earth.
That's what I'm thinking too! It all has to be strategic. I didn't think of any of those negative things about these songs, but I simply know that some OTHER people will. And those lyrics you pointed out show exactly what I mean.
The reason why the woman does not have a slim waist is because then there would be no M, it would look like an undecipherable alphabet.
Yeah, that was me <!-- s:D -->:D<!-- s:D --> ....I see what you mean...so we are meant to see the letter moreso than the shapes? (I know that sounds weird). If that's the case then it would tweak my perspective of it and whose behind it.
couldn't they have used two children to achieve that same effect or would that become even more controversial ?
Well, see that's the thing!...Thank you for that.... if they did do that, then it seems weird to have a "grown-up" song with kids holding hands on the cover. I know people are getting all upset about suggesting a "gay" undertone to it, but how it's presented that can make you percieve it a certain way. If they did use two little kids, then what? What would people be saying then? would they be confused about the context of the song?
But if you hear the song and see the single cover, the outward observer is going to take it for the "literal"...they aren't seeing an "M" for Michael or thinking of it in hoax terms. They hear two men singing an ambiguous love song and see an ambiguous art cover...what conclusion are they going to naturally come to?
(by ambiguous I mean there is no gender reference)
check out the attached picture...you tell me if this is a man and woman holding hands or two men? <!-- s:geek: -->:geek:<!-- s:geek: -->
When I hear the song I don't hear negativity but I do when I look at the cover. Only because it can be taken two ways - I think the ambiguity speaks for itself.
I have to agree. When something is ambiguous and unclear, it never takes certain elements of society long to get the wrong idea. There is definately a game plan here.
Thank you!...that's all I was trying to say... it's sad that society thinks that way, but it's real.
That was my "knee jerk" reaction to first hearing the song and seeing this cover. It's no different than say seeing two women kissing and hugging each other on the street. My first "knee jerk" reaction would be to think they were gay...when in fact they could have been a mother - daughter. Things aren't always so obvious until they are explained or researched and sadly not alot of people are going to research such things...they are just going to go on their initial assumption.
I feel like I'm preaching to the choir here because if people are here reading these forum threads, they obviously "get it"....they "see" things differently already...you know the meaning behind things Michael does....that's not true for everyone else.
maybe this is part of the plan to re educate people's minds...but I've honestly never had that reaction to any of Michael's other songs he's collaborated on. Go figure <!-- s:| -->:|<!-- s:| -->
I have to agree. When something is ambiguous and unclear, it never takes certain elements of society long to get the wrong idea. There is definately a game plan here.
Thank you!...that's all I was trying to say... it's sad that society thinks that way, but it's real.
That was my "knee jerk" reaction to first hearing the song and seeing this cover. It's no different than say seeing two women kiss and hug each other on the street. My first "knee jerk" reaction would be to think they were gay...when in fact they could have been a mother - daughter. Things aren't always so obvious until they are explained or researched and sadly not alot of people are going to research such things...they are just going to go on their initial assumption.
I feel like I'm preaching to the choir here because if people are here reading these forum threads, they obviously "get it"....they "see" things differently already...you know the meaning behind things Michael does....that's not true for everyone else.
Yes - you only stop to wonder when something is ambiguous - someone obviously meant it that way to make people wonder. Its a bit like the Say Say Say cover where you could plainly see MJ and Paul McCartney holding hands - I often used to wonder why they did the cover that way.
I think it is just unfortunate. This is how much they destroyed Michael's image and why Michael would have found it a hurdle to release music all these years. I think a lot of songs can now be misinterpreted and all the parody songs come to mind.
If there were no allegations, would people think this about his song. If people are questioning this track, they are the ones who refuse his legacy to be stain free. They are constantly trying to insinuate all sorts of negative things about him. I am just glad that on youtube where the views are going up so fast, there are just 2% listeners who think this track is bad. And we the 98*% can surely drown them out. We owe it to Michael.
I would say just ignore the negativity and try to spread positivity. A thread like this on this forum means that we are doubting Michael, why should we be concerned about it having a gay vibe, do we believe he was gay? And even if he was, would we love him less??
Even Michael can make mistakes, maybe he meant this song and the picture to just be one of brotherly love, he must now be upset that even part of the Michael's army of love doubt his actions.
Comments
To me this could have been clarified if they had shown a full body silhouette (head to toe) - then you would know conclusively it is a man and woman. But they did not do this, so it seems it was very intentional that the wanted anyone looking at it to get a "different meaning" out of the song, something more than just the simple act of holding hands. People have commented that this song could represent humanitarian or brotherly love---so then if you take that meaning from it, why would they show just a picture of a man and woman's silhouette holding hands which would indicate it is a "romantic song" instead? You can't have it both ways.... <!-- s:? -->:?<!-- s:? -->
It's like his song "Leave Me Alone"- the video was about Michael being harrassed by the media and all the things they critcized him for, yet the lyrics of the song are about a woman. So you can't conclude "Hold my hand" is one dimensional...
I think the artwork related to this album is going to be just as interesting as the songs themselves. and there is more to this song than it seems.
so maybe we can all look at anything and see if differently according to our preconcieved notions?
i am off to look at leave me alone again <!-- s:D -->:D<!-- s:D -->
i am off to look at leave me alone again [/quote]
(I realize I'm getting off topic here, but bear with me)
It's like the song Michael did with Lenny Kravitz, "Another Day". If you had no artwork to look at or video to interpret it, just based on the lyrics what would you assume the song to mean?
Here is some of the lyrics: (courtesy of directlyrics.com)
My life has taken me beyond the planets and the stars
And you’re the only one that could take me this far
I’ll be forever searching for your love
(Huhhh-Ooh)
[CHORUS]
I walked away but I was wrong
(I can't make it another day)
You’re the one that keeps me strong
(I can't make it another day)
You’re the fire that keeps me warm
(I can't make it another day)
How did I get through this storm?
(I can't make it another day without your love)
(Hoohoo)
(Come on now!)
At night, I pray before I sleep in hope of finding you
(finding you)
I've opened up my heart to let you to come through
I'll be forever searching for your love
(Huhhh-ooooh)
[CHORUS]
I walked away but I was wrong
(I can't make it another day)
You’re the one that keeps me strong
(I can't make it another day)
You’re the fire that keeps me warm
(I can't make it another day)
How did I get through this storm?
(I can't make it another day without your love)
Now imagine this song paired with the 'Hold my hand" picture....would you question the meaning behind the song?
How about if it was a picture of Christ on the cross...would the song take on a different meaning then?
How about if you saw a video, showing all of Michael's fans all around the world searching for him, but he's hidden away. He can see us but we can't see him and he's singing this song...does the meaning of the song change then too?
I hope I'm getting my point across <!-- s:? -->:?<!-- s:? --> ...the visual presentation really affects how you percieve something and can alter it's meaning. So yeah, something literal can be percieved many different ways.
I love that song, "Do You Know Where Your Children Are", but it's not on the album tracklist. The thing is, if MJ were to always care about anything that anyone might think of his songs or art, he'd never do anything! Some people always make certain connections or take things out of context or misconstrue them... TDCAU got Michael accused of being anti-semite! Another time someone took 1 poem, just 1, from "Dancing the Dream" - and I believe this was quite recently - and wrote an article making the point that it was creepy! Now anyone who's read that book should see that it's just a beautiful collection of poems and essays and there's nothing creepy about it. But, unfortunately, some people's minds are pretty perverse (which MJ's mind wasn't).
Yes, very sad... And it's not just "tabloid junk"... There are people whose MINDS work that way... They're always after juicy stuff to gossip about. They don't give a damn about the essence/substance of things.
(I realize I'm getting off topic here, but bear with me)
It's like the song Michael did with Lenny Kravitz, "Another Day". If you had no artwork to look at or video to interpret it, just based on the lyrics what would you assume the song to mean?
Here is some of the lyrics: (courtesy of directlyrics.com)
My life has taken me beyond the planets and the stars
And you’re the only one that could take me this far
I’ll be forever searching for your love
(Huhhh-Ooh)
[CHORUS]
I walked away but I was wrong
(I can't make it another day)
You’re the one that keeps me strong
(I can't make it another day)
You’re the fire that keeps me warm
(I can't make it another day)
How did I get through this storm?
(I can't make it another day without your love)
(Hoohoo)
(Come on now!)
At night, I pray before I sleep in hope of finding you
(finding you)
I've opened up my heart to let you to come through
I'll be forever searching for your love
(Huhhh-ooooh)
[CHORUS]
I walked away but I was wrong
(I can't make it another day)
You’re the one that keeps me strong
(I can't make it another day)
You’re the fire that keeps me warm
(I can't make it another day)
How did I get through this storm?
(I can't make it another day without your love)
Now imagine this song paired with the 'Hold my hand" picture....would you question the meaning behind the song?
How about if it was a picture of Christ on the cross...would the song take on a different meaning then?
How about if you saw a video, showing all of Michael's fans all around the world searching for him, but he's hidden away. He can see us but we can't see him and he's singing this song...does the meaning of the song change then too?
I hope I'm getting my point across <!-- s:? -->:?<!-- s:? --> ...the visual presentation really affects how you percieve something and can alter it's meaning. So yeah, something literal can be percieved many different ways.[/quote]
and this can extend to anything that is put in front of us.
politcal issues, social issues .
i also think the rest of the art work will be interesting.
let's not forget the cry video either no michael at all only other people holding hands
This has to be strategic to the hoax. It seems Mike is throwing these things in the world's face. Where it can't be ignored. I'd say our boy is understandably really pissed off. It reminds me of Is It Scary. where he says
I'm gonna be exactly what you wanna see
It's you whose haunting me Your warning me
To be the stranger in your life
Am I amusing you or just confusing you
Am I the beast you visualize.
And if you wanna see eccentrialities I'll be grotesque before your eyes
Let them all materialize.
But if you came to see the truth and purity
It's here inside a lonely heart
So let the performance start......
As far as HMH goes, I love it. Nice song....but the controversy is on purpose....hoax purpose. I don't understand how it all will unfold, but I intend to keep watching the performance of the greatest show on earth.
Good point. Seeing a picture or video with a song can change how we perceive it... but not necessarily completely. For instance: In my mind the song YANA (You Are Not Alone) by MJ is completely divorced from the music video - which I don't like much, and I don't think goes well with the song.
As for the song "Another Day", I interpret it as someone saying they walked away from a love (any love!) that was fulfilling and inspiring, and which they now yearn after. Love can be for Jesus, for someone like MJ, for any other person... Love isn't just "romance".
"We see the world not as it is, but as we are."
The reason why the woman does not have a slim waist is because then there would be no M, it would look like an undecipherable alphabet.
i have not seen the lryrics for another day before your previous post but i see what you mean.
as for your are not alone. thank god someone finally said it ! i have never been able to reconcile that song and video .but i also have not been able to fit that one angry gesture into anything directed at god either. <!-- s:? -->:?<!-- s:? -->
i can remember the first time i saw sister act. when the nuns were singing my guy and replaceing guy with god. i was so blown away. it was so neat to me. i am so corny <!-- s
we just don't think of god on a personal level . he has been made to seem so distant and he is not .
Yeah, that was me <!-- s:D -->:D<!-- s:D --> ....I see what you mean...so we are meant to see the letter moreso than the shapes? (I know that sounds weird). If that's the case then it would tweak my perspective of it and whose behind it.
couldn't they have used two children to achieve that same effect or would that become even more controversial ?
I think 2 children wouldn't fit the idea of the song, which seems to be about adults (i.e. people who have some life experience). The song says:
Cause I've been there before
And you've been there before
Two things immediately popped into my head after hearing this....
1) the allegations Arnold Kleins assistant made about being Michael's gay lover
2) how Michael was upset over how the singles were released on the Invincible album back in 2001, which I think in part sparked that little controversy with Sony (not sure why that popped into my head, but it did).
The fact that the art cover for the song is ambiguous (It could have included a head shot of a man and woman to clear up any confusion) but the fact they chose not to, also makes me wonder if Sony isn't targeting a gay audience subliminally at the expense of Michael's reputation.
The song and the way it's being presented is leaving it to wide open for interpretation (IMO). I've never heard the song before now and don't know the history behind it's making, so I have no bias one way or the other, this was just my intial impression.
At first, I didn't understand Will.I.ams comment about this song release being "disrespectful" until now...and now I see there are multiple layers to his statement.
I do believe this album is another version of a hoax or another phase of it. Because so far nothing about this album is what it seems. So I have to agree. <!-- s:| -->:|<!-- s:| -->[/quote]
I have to agree. When something is ambiguous and unclear, it never takes certain elements of society long to get the wrong idea. There is definately a game plan here.
That's what I'm thinking too! It all has to be strategic. I didn't think of any of those negative things about these songs, but I simply know that some OTHER people will. And those lyrics you pointed out show exactly what I mean.
Well, see that's the thing!...Thank you for that.... if they did do that, then it seems weird to have a "grown-up" song with kids holding hands on the cover. I know people are getting all upset about suggesting a "gay" undertone to it, but how it's presented that can make you percieve it a certain way. If they did use two little kids, then what? What would people be saying then? would they be confused about the context of the song?
But if you hear the song and see the single cover, the outward observer is going to take it for the "literal"...they aren't seeing an "M" for Michael or thinking of it in hoax terms. They hear two men singing an ambiguous love song and see an ambiguous art cover...what conclusion are they going to naturally come to?
(by ambiguous I mean there is no gender reference)
check out the attached picture...you tell me if this is a man and woman holding hands or two men? <!-- s:geek: -->:geek:<!-- s:geek: -->
Thank you!...that's all I was trying to say... it's sad that society thinks that way, but it's real.
That was my "knee jerk" reaction to first hearing the song and seeing this cover. It's no different than say seeing two women kissing and hugging each other on the street. My first "knee jerk" reaction would be to think they were gay...when in fact they could have been a mother - daughter. Things aren't always so obvious until they are explained or researched and sadly not alot of people are going to research such things...they are just going to go on their initial assumption.
I feel like I'm preaching to the choir here because if people are here reading these forum threads, they obviously "get it"....they "see" things differently already...you know the meaning behind things Michael does....that's not true for everyone else.
maybe this is part of the plan to re educate people's minds...but I've honestly never had that reaction to any of Michael's other songs he's collaborated on. Go figure <!-- s:| -->:|<!-- s:| -->
Yes - you only stop to wonder when something is ambiguous - someone obviously meant it that way to make people wonder. Its a bit like the Say Say Say cover where you could plainly see MJ and Paul McCartney holding hands - I often used to wonder why they did the cover that way.
If there were no allegations, would people think this about his song. If people are questioning this track, they are the ones who refuse his legacy to be stain free. They are constantly trying to insinuate all sorts of negative things about him. I am just glad that on youtube where the views are going up so fast, there are just 2% listeners who think this track is bad. And we the 98*% can surely drown them out. We owe it to Michael.
I would say just ignore the negativity and try to spread positivity. A thread like this on this forum means that we are doubting Michael, why should we be concerned about it having a gay vibe, do we believe he was gay? And even if he was, would we love him less??
Even Michael can make mistakes, maybe he meant this song and the picture to just be one of brotherly love, he must now be upset that even part of the Michael's army of love doubt his actions.