Taking Sides: Nick Cave vs. Michael Jackson

Of course Nick Cave stomps all over Jacko, but anyone who doesn't think so really cannot be my friend. That is all.

I wonder if anyone was tempted to change their vote after this. I was voting for MJ anyway, though.

I am such a huge Nick Cave stan that you will see me as a talking head in the upcoming documentary about him. His live show never fails to amaze and inspire. His music changed my life. Unfortunately for my one-time idol Mr. Cave, he had no involvement in "I Want You Back," which is one of the 20th century's peak musical moments - shockingly, it's only one of several such moments to which MJ can lay claim. A vote for Michael Jackson is a vote for your own sanity. Hold on to your mind!

In keeping with the idea of "What if these two musicians were in their own mid 90s NBC Thursdays sitcom together?" from the previous thread.

Sitcom working title: Your Shenanigans, Our Trials

Plot: After filing for bankruptcy Michael Jackson starts a new life in Australia, where he lives in the guest house of singer Nick Samson (Nick Cave), who is trying to juggle family life with life on the road as a rock singer.

Episode: The Birthday Party

When Nick (Nick Cave) throws a Halloween themed birthday party for his young nephew he assumed that his houseguest Michael (Michael Jackson) wouldn't be around to try to lure some of the children into the Cave family guest house to watch Nick at Night's Brady Bunch marathon. Can Nick pull off the birthday festivities or will be too occupied keeping one eye on Michael the whole night? And what of this news that Nick's wife (Patricia Heaton) wants Nick to cut touring in half so they can take a vacation to Alaska together?

Guest Star: Christopher Knight. 30 Min TVPG

"A vote for Michael Jackson is a vote for your own sanity. "

Oh, please, spare us your concern. I don't like the records, that's it.

Wait, so who did you end up voting for, J0hn.

xp Cunga: I think this is the most redeeming post on this thread ... would they be playing themselves or non-celebrities with elements of their personalities/personas?

Episode: I Had a Bad Dream Joe (the parents advisory episode)

Nick's wife goes away for a girls' week-long vacation at the beach, leaving Nick home with the kids. Before leaving, Nick's wife makes him promise that he will spend quality time with the kids, instead of holing up in his home studio and writing music. But old habits die hard. After working into the wee hours on a concept album about Old Testament tyrants, he wakes up to find the kids missing. He walks into the backyard to find that Michael has built this towering treehouse and is dangling Nick's youngest over the balcony. Nick clambers up the tree, and instead of pulling the child down, he throws the child off the balcony, where it falls to its death, skull split open. In a fit of panic, to hide his guilt, he throws his other child off the balcony of the treehouse. Then, as he is stuggling with Michael to toss him off, too, he wakes up. Michael is shaking him awake because they have tickets to the amusement park and they are running late.

Episode: Home Truths

Michael Jackson fiddles kids and Nick Cave isn't all that. Guest stars: Prince (pwns) Morrissey (sucks)

Damn, it just occured to me that I should have voted for Michael Jackson, because Michael Jakson glued up a person a plaster

would they be playing themselves or non-celebrities with elements of their personalities/personas?

Heightened versions of themselves, and I lol'd at the dream sequence you did.

Wait, so who did you end up voting for, J0hn

I don't remember :(

Good god, John. You certainly seem to be sitting on the fence now, despite your first post here.

Of course Michael will win this one, more folks know him. I knew Prince would win the other poll against Morrissey, as well. No big surprises here. As far as Nick goes, though, I agree his stuff is quite boring lately. But The Birthday Party were challenging the status quo and being more weird & arty than MJ could possibly ever be even if he wanted to, and as a child of punk/post-punk in my listening habits, I'm bound to give the goods to the one who "ripped things up and started again" (i.e. attempting something new and different) so to speak. But I'm lying if I say I enjoy BP more than some of Nick's solo stuff. Oh, no way. Sure, you hate Boatman's Call, John, fine (prob my all time fave album of his) but look at Tender Prey for instance. I mean isn't that pretty much the all-time best diverse statement of what he was capable of in his prime? "Let Love In" is another fantastic and diverse album. I'm thankful to Matt for saying "Henry's Dream" cause I need to re-experience that one again.

So yeah, Michael in his prime was mostly a pleaser of the masses (hey I'm totally down with most of Off The Wall and even a track or two off Thriller) but I like artists who plumb the depths, do something different, follow a different muse than the crowd. Nick has been out of ideas for years, I think, but that doesn't discount the value of the unique contribution he made to music.

Of course Michael will win this one, more folks know him.

uh, that's crap, to be fair. maybe yeah out of 6 billion worldwide. in terms of ILX i'm pretty sure everyone would have heard of nick cave.

man i guess i'm not getting this prevailing opinion that nick is boring now...i fucking LOVE abbatoir blues/lyre of orpheus and grinderman was pretty awesome too

Agreed, Grinderman was more fun than he's been for ages.

Of course Michael will win this one, more folks know him.

Knee-jerk but heartfelt response: Of course Michael will win this one, more folks are stupid.

So yeah, Michael in his prime was mostly a pleaser of the masses (hey I'm totally down with most of Off The Wall and even a track or two off Thriller) but I like artists who plumb the depths, do something different, follow a different muse than the crowd.

Besides being batshit, this is totally RONG. Artists trying to please the masses (whatever that means) are responsible for some of the great work of the last 40 years; and how the hell do you gauge an artist "plumbing the depths" -- do you have some sensor that allows you to know whether they're excavating into Nick Cave levels of artistic integrity?

http://content.answers.com/main/content/img/McGrawHill/boating/f0146-01.png

Knee-jerk but heartfelt response: Of course Michael will win this one, more folks are stupid.

― Alex in NYC, Sunday, April 19, 2009 6:00 PM (2 hours ago) Bookmark

Haha! I love you, man! Thanks for saying what I dared not say, and refuse to lay claim to.

Besides being batshit, this is totally RONG. and how the hell do you gauge an artist "plumbing the depths" -- do you have some sensor that allows you to know whether they're excavating into Nick Cave levels of artistic integrity?

Artists trying to please the masses (whatever that means) are responsible for some of the great work of the last 40 years;

Ha! Dude it may shock you but there are some geniuses in this world (and I'm not even referring to Nick Cave as such) who have been blessed with such unique artistic gifts, that like maybe only 200 people "get it" and buy their CD's right now or accept their theories right now. In 50 years, these folks may be recognized for their contributions, but unfortunately right now, they have to deal with people like you who don't get it. These artists, scientists, scholars, whatever they are, are absolutely on FIRE with their creative gifts, their art, their contribution to humanity. They're reaching out for NEW THINGS, BEYOND what has come before. AGAINST THE PREVAILING STYLE. Get it? SOMETHING DIFFERENT. UNTRIED. NEW. EVOLUTION. CREATIVITY. TRY TO GET ON BOARD. Have you ever met any of these people? Would you know them if you saw them? I doubt you would even recognize them in your midst.

Michael Jackson is a talented individual, no single doubt about it, but he has never, ever, musically challenged the status quo, and he is not as unique as Nick Cave.

I'd say Michael Jackson is more unique than Nick Cave, but not in a good way.

Serious answer: Nick Cave. More varied music. Less concerned with pandering to the lowest common denominator. More things to say and more interesting ways to say them. Give me "The Curse of Millhaven" or "City of Refuge" or "Tupelo" over anything off the slavishly overrated Off the Wall any dayEVERY DAY of the week.

Ha! Dude it may shock you but there are some geniuses in this world (and I'm not even referring to Nick Cave as such) who have been blessed with such unique artistic gifts, that like maybe only 200 people "get it" and buy their CD's right now or accept their theories right now.

Really?

They're reaching out for NEW THINGS, BEYOND what has come before. AGAINST THE PREVAILING STYLE. Get it? SOMETHING DIFFERENT. UNTRIED. NEW. EVOLUTION. CREATIVITY. TRY TO GET ON BOARD. Have you ever met any of these people? Would you know them if you saw them? I doubt you would even recognize them in your midst.

"Billie Jean" sounded like nothing I'd ever heard: lyrically, musically, vocally.

If you really want something different, use less capital letters next time.

As for Nick Cave, I prefer Gothic corn in literature, not in music, but he's written a couple of good tunes.

I prefer Gothic corn in literature, not in music

^^^^^

this.

Not that I know firsthand if that's accurate about Nick Cave. I can't really be enticed into listening to his stuff.

this is a stupid poll but nick cave defenders are really scraping the bottom of the barrell with their arguments here. were like ten posts away from 'nick cave is better cuz he uses real instruments man'

Well, he does.

Again, this thread was merely meant to lampoon another thread (specifically the Morrissey vs. Prince thread). Much like that comparison, there really aren't any common threads between MJ and...er... NC. It's not meant to be taken so dead seriously. Nick Cave and Michael Jackson are very different artists who make very different music from each other, generally tailored to very different demographics. It's a pointless comparison.

... but Nick is still better.

... and never molested anyone.

... that we know of, at least.

lol i spelled barrel wrong

That's the least of this thread's problems.

Of the Michael Jackson proponents, how many like the majority of his musical output, and how many like a few songs or albums including the band he was in as a kid and dislike Nick Cave? It seems like there are folks saying MJ is great, and others saying MJ had some good songs, which is more than Nick Cave had.

xp Max: Would it be scraping further down to say "I vote for Nick Cave because he is better looking"?

at this point i think anything goes

I do wonder what a Michael Jackson-Mick Harvey collab would sound like.

It'd certainly sound different.

"including the band he was in as a kid"

nick cave >>> michael jackson

BUT

jackson 5 >> boys next door

LOL one thing I do like about this thread is the concept of "Gothic corn" which I don't think I will stop chuckling about for awhile, here.

http://www.moplants.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2006/08/indian%20corn.JPG

spot the goth!

Thriller & The Birthday Party cancel each other out with true greatness.

Jackson 5 definitely deserve some major props... far more than Boys Next Door (who I like plenty).

Latter ear Jackson and Cave do little for me, but there's no doubt that Cave has maintained sanity and relevancy over time.

But when you really get down to it, only one of these two can sing.

I can't even vote on this.

And by "latter ear" I of course meant "latter era". As far as I know, MJ's ears are the only original part of him remaining.

You were probably thinking about an ear of corn. In fact, according to this website, the term "comes from the Gothic word for 'husk of corn' which was ahs".

xp ian: the goth corn is the one on the far right, right next to the reggae corn.

Automatic thread bump. This poll is closing tomorrow.

This poll is closing tomorrow.

Oy. Thank God!

Automatic thread bump. This poll's results are now in.

Yawn.