SONG GROOVE (AKA ABORTION PAPERS) - What can you say about this song?

I think it's great. I like it, I don't think it's among the best of his unreleased demos as some people have been saying, though.

This is not just one of the best demos, I PUT THIS SONG IN THE SAME RANK AS THE BEST SONGS OF MJ (Billie Jean, Smooth Criminal etc.)

This is the EXTENDED VERSION I am addicted to which made the original version way better: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=79KVI0_GD4Q
 
Attitudes toward abortion differ quite a bit throughout the world, I doubt that most of Europe (English yellow press excluded) and Asia would raise any 'controversy' issues around a song that explore abortion the way he did. It would have been noted, discussed, a couple of TV blab magazine 'reports', end of story, since Europeans tend to be stunned more by the violence that surrounds particularly the US on that topic.
Sure, abortion will never be a topic of casual conversation, but a good song about the topic would rarely elicit confused reactions like those toward domestic terrorism in the US- such as the gunning down of a Doctor in a church!

The sentiments around the globe can be very similar, but they are currently not the same.

I am not debating abortion, merely that Michael has always had a huge international audience that isn't necessarily shying away from the same things US audiences MIGHT shy away from.

Michael is more than an eccentric Peter Pan and not the naive and clueless man child (and worse) that so many prefer to cling to in their projection.
And that's why I say, bring it on, brining it all, he's all and everything, and I hope that one day as collective humanity we can stop castigating and typecasting him and stop projecting our own stuff onto him.
Michael thought and read about so many things and I will forever mourn the books he could have written later on, lending a very unique perspective, given his unique viewpoint.

He is just as much allowed to have an opinion, as all of us. One of the things that I also found interesting in the US, is the apparent surprise (or even dismay and outrage) whenever an actor or singer engages in whatever form of political activism, for example. Charity and social activism is okay- anything deemed 'political', it even 'controversial' is surprising.

Whereas in Europe actors are pretty much expected to smoke like a chimney, down several bottles of wine per interview and be raging proponents of Brecht and so on.
A proper interview with some long haired genius is considered memorable when someone got offended- and plenty an interview went quite unexpected. Klaus Kinski, Nureyev, think punk.
When did we ever become so boring???
Sure, it's a bit cliche, my depiction- but so is the cliche of the robotic smile of the lead actors at some press conference. People do think, have emotions, perhaps we'd all get along better if we would start talking to each first.

I welcome it all, even if I don't have to agree.

Just as Michael is more than his glove and fedora, so of course differs his worldwide audience.
I very much appreciate all insights from all his stations in life, and sometimes it's also good to remember that not everything an author writes about, or a singer sings about is of autobiographical nature and/or personal opinion.
Some is, lots has to be, but not all of it is.
 
Attitudes toward abortion differ quite a bit throughout the world, I doubt that most of Europe (English yellow press excluded) and Asia would raise any 'controversy' issues around a song that explore abortion the way he did. It would have been noted, discussed, a couple of TV blab magazine 'reports', end of story, since Europeans tend to be stunned more by the violence that surrounds particularly the US on that topic.
Sure, abortion will never be a topic of casual conversation, but a good song about the topic would rarely elicit confused reactions like those toward domestic terrorism in the US- such as the gunning down of a Doctor in a church!

The sentiments around the globe can be very similar, but they are currently not the same.

I am not debating abortion, merely that Michael has always had a huge international audience that isn't necessarily shying away from the same things US audiences MIGHT shy away from.

Ahh I see what you mean in regards to fanbases in different parts of the globe. I don't think Michael was ever afraid of controversy to be honest (minus the child molestation allegations), he seemed to be mainly worried if he offended people. Remember when HIStory came out and all those bullshit allegations came out about Anti-Semitism? The last thing MJ wanted to do was be cast as one and offend more people who misinterpret TDCAU, so he immediately went back into the studio and censored the track.

That was my guess as to why he didn't release this song. Abortion is, and always has been, a topic that can bring up depressing and horrific memories for many people - such as victims of rape or those who have experienced a stillborn child, for example. Michael has always gone on about how he wants his music to bring joy and happiness to those who listen to it and singing about such an extremely risky and personal topic could have the adverse affect for many people.

For the record, I'm not against the release of the song on Bad 25, I'm just stating my belief as to why Michael didn't release the song on Bad 26 years ago.
 
It was one of my top three when all the demos came out, it's pretty honest and real... I still love it and the 80's sound of it is what gets me most of the times, just love it.
 
LOL, I was going to rant about the term "outdated" as well. It's so overused and people use it indeed as if today's music is somehow superior. Well, the Beatles sound outdated. They totally sound 1960s. So what? Does that mean it's somehow inferior to today's music? And today's music will sound outdated in 10 years. So it's such a shallow term IMO. Just a way to look down on older music.

ETA: I don't mean anyone in this thread. I know you did not mean to look down on MJ's music, but I know a lot of people throw around that term to suggest inferiority in a way and I do think that term is overused for all the wrong reasons.
Bad Era sounds dated to me, particularly this song, but I don't care as long as the music sounds good overall, which Abortion Papers is missing something for me. The Beatles don't sound dated to me, but MJ's Quincy stuff does, but that's not a bad thing because good music can never be truly dated. Yeah the whole Bad album sounds really dated to me, but MJ made it sound damm good.
 
What can I say? Well, I have this bulletin on my wall with the title Top 10 favorite songs of mine, and Abortion Papers is #1. My family members (mother, father, siblings) love the song too :p so it's safe to say I love it more than anything. It's so true, and honest.
 
Bad Era sounds dated to me, particularly this song, but I don't care as long as the music sounds good overall, which Abortion Papers is missing something for me. The Beatles don't sound dated to me, but MJ's Quincy stuff does, but that's not a bad thing because good music can never be truly dated. Yeah the whole Bad album sounds really dated to me, but MJ made it sound damm good.


The Beatles sound 60s just as much as Bad sounds 80s.
 
Last edited:
Abortion papers actually did stir some controversy when it was released on Bad 25. I remember a vile and angry article about it by some feminist. How Michael Jackson should just shut up about this subject because what would he know? Obviously MJ sang from a male's perspective and he was criticized for that. I think the author took it as an anti-abortion song and she was upset about that. Had Michael lived the controversy would have been a lot more wide spread. I'm not against abortion but I can understand the POV Michael sang from and I don't think he meant to be judgemental of women who do abortion. But it's difficult to put it through in a way that no one feels offended. And I think that's why he never released it. I agree with HIStoric that more than being afraid of controversy he was afraid of hurting other people's feelings. But I'm glad we got to hear it on Bad 25.
 
The Beatles sound 60s just as much as Bad sounds 80s.

To add more to the whole ''music being dated'' topic that's going on here I always wonder why is the 80's the only decade that seems to get picked on the most for this? A lot of music from the 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s, 90s and early 00s sound ''dated'' today and the late 00's and 2010's will also sound ''dated'' in a few years from now.

The 80's just seems to get picked on the most, which is funny because I consider the 80's to be the best decade ever when it comes to mainstream pop music
 
Last edited:
To add more to the whole ''music being dated'' topic that's going on here I always wonder why is the 80's the only decade that seems to get picked on the most for this? A lot of music from the 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s, 90s and early 00s sound ''dated'' today and the late 00's and 2010's will also sound ''dated'' in a few years from now.

The 80's just seems to get picked on the most, which is funny because I consider the 80's to be the best decade ever when it comes to mainstream pop music

Idk, maybe there were production styles which were unique to that decade. And certain instruments like the synth, sax etc. I agree that the 80s seem to be picked on the most for this, but at the same time it's also true that no decade seems to fascinate people as much as the 80s - in terms of music and pop culture as well. I just watched a video today which was about a new series by National Geographic called "The 80s: The Decade That Made Us". There is even a website for it: http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/channel/the-80s-the-decade-that-made-us/

For the promotion of the show there was an interview with one half of Run-DMC and he talked about the difference between the hip-hop of the 80s and today and basically what he said was that back then everything was a lot more positive. They were "kids" just like today's rappers but they had a sense of responsibility in terms of what message they gave to people, while today a lot of it is about just sex, drugs, guns, booze, every second word is a cuss word etc. So everything became more negative, more cynical. I think looking back from this cynical POV of today the 80s might look "cheesy" (another thing they like to accuse the 80s of) but to me (and to many people) it was a better and more exciting and more inspiring decade. No wonder it continues to fascinate more than any other decade.

In terms of music I guess it just had certain very unique features in terms of production - maybe the synth etc.
 
I think that the cynical attitude of today is a lot more cheesy than the happy and uplifting attitude that the 80's had.

and yeah the 80's did use a lot of synths but the 60's used a lot of acoustic guitar
 
the 80's was the birth of what I'd consider true Pop culture.. The birth of the MTV age!! While pop existed far before the 80's, in the 80's it went from a musical style to a cultural movement.. Everything that came from that is why everyone looks at the 80's as the start of the Pop culture era.
 
and yeah the 80's did use a lot of synths but the 60's used a lot of acoustic guitar

Yeah, but I think because the acoustic guitar is a more traditional instrument its sound is considered more "timeless".
 
Back
Top