Rhetorical analysis on Michael Jackson’s 2001 Oxford University Speech

Introduction

“If you enter this world knowing you are loved and you leave this world knowing the same, then everything that happens in between can he dealt with. A professor may degrade you, but you will not feel degraded, a boss may crush you, but you will not be crushed, a corporate gladiator might vanquish you, but you will still triumph.”

– Michael Jackson, March 6, 2001

Michael Joseph Jackson, dubbed “The King of Pop” in the late 1980s, was a musical genius who captivated the world with his affinity for dancing, singing and an overall excellent stage presence. Of course, this is only a sliver of what he is truly known for, as his uncanny personality, personal choices and decisions and familial upbringing are still subjects discussed to this day, despite this year being 16 years after his untimely death at the age of 50. In 2001, Jackson, littered with scrutiny from the press in multiple countries along with embracing the new journey of being a father to two, proposed to an audience at Oxford University that children’s upbringings are important and that the most important thing a child needs to know is that they are loved and protected.

In this paper, I conduct a rhetorical analysis of Michael Jackson’s “Heal the Kids—Oxford Union Speech”, delivered on March 6, 2001. I will be discussing the rhetorical situation around his speech and the rhetorical strategies used in his speech to persuade his audience to prioritize his goodwill and heart for children.

I argue that Jackson’s strategy involves using ethos, which is the rhetorical appeal to character, sentiment, moral nature, and beliefs. First, I will discuss the rhetorical situation surrounding Jackson’s failing reputation, going back to when his reputation began to dwindle in the public eye, as well as discussing the events surrounding the speech’s deliverance. I will then discuss Jackson’s use of ethos throughout the speech, highlighting specific sections, discussing his use of ethos to exalt himself as a source of great wisdom when it comes to children and referencing his tumultuous relationship with his father as examples of why he is a suitable role model to emulate. In the conclusion, I will reflect on what Jackson has shared and what he wants his audience—this is his fans beyond those sitting at Oxford University—to know about him beyond the media’s words.

Rhetorical situation analysis: the events leading up to the speech

On March 6^th, 2001, Michael Jackson gave a speech to members of Oxford University’s debate team to discuss the importance of children, forgiving their parents, and the importance of having a childhood. In this section, I want to outline the rhetorical situation Michael faced during the time of delivering the speech, including the exigence, audience and constraints.

The biggest exigence at the time of this speech’s delivery were the lingering effects of the entire 1990s that seemed to stick with Michael heavily into the new millennium. This specific exigence was the uncertainty of Michael’s reputation in the United States because of the child molestation allegations that arose in 1993. In order to address the other exigences, the molestation allegations should be addressed first, as they are the catalyst that inspired the other exigences.

In 1993, Michael was accused of child molestation by Evan Chandler, father of Jordan Chandler. This accusation was ultimately proven false due to an extensive investigation held by the Santa Barbara Police Department, but due to sensationalizing media reports, the reclusiveness of Michael’s personal life and his eccentric behaviors and friendships with younger children like child actor Macaulay Culkin and Emmanuel Lewis (Knopper, 2015), the allegations dimmed Michael’s reputationand took a toll on his personal life, which he continued to overcompensate on in his speech when mentioning the importance of having a “good” childhood. During the delivery of this speech, it was noted that Michael spoke on his own relationship with his father. A great half of the speech’s content is derived from Michael’s own relationship with his father, which he very publicly described as tumultuous and strained. In 1993, under a gag order from the civil lawsuit with Evan Chandler for child molestation, Michael did an interview with Oprah Winfrey where he detailed a lot of the alleged abuse his father did to him while a young child, along with superstardom that seemed to rob him of a proper childhood. Michael parallels this in the speech as a direct result in Michael’s erratic and eccentric behavior, as well as his lack of proper social skills to create and foster normal relationships (Boteach, 2009, pp. 207-214).

Another exigence was the increasing deaths and violence against children and done by children that Michael assumed “having children read a bedtime story to” would cure. In his speech, he mentions the violent murder of James Bulger (1993) and the Columbine shooting (1999) and mentions that if he could have just been able to give the two young children who murdered Bulger a hug and expressed interest in wanting to go see and visit them, they would have better lives and possibly wouldn’t have been able to murder a young child (Boteach, 2009 p. 261). Michael seemed to propose that the simple solution to these issues was to initiate a “Children’s Universal Bill of Rights”, including seven “rights” that each child must have in order to live a successful, loving life.

The audience of this speech physically was those present at the Union’s debate on this day in London, but the actual audience was made up of several different people, most prominently the fans and media who write about him and wrote negatively on him because of his eccentric choices. During the time of this speech’s delivery, Michael had been divorced from his second wife, Debbie Rowe, which he described as a messy divorce that left him crying (Boteach, 2009, p. 207). Four years prior to this divorce, he divorced his first wife, Lisa Marie Presley, whom he was married to for two years. This was after the 1993 allegations, which took so much of a toll on him that he was sent to rehab for a heavy dependency on painkillers such as Dipravan and Demerol, which dangerously damage the cardiovascular system. During Oprah’s interview with Michael, she often asked him questions directly alluding to his sexuality, the sudden appearance change starting with the lightening of his skin, and the overindulgence on talk about children. In 1995, he had an interview with his then-wife Lisa Marie Presley where he was directly questioned by Diane Sawyer on the legitimacy of the 1993 child molestation allegations, in which Michael defended himself. His 1995 album, HIStory was released to fans, which entailed song after song about how tabloids lie, money can distort a person’s better judgement, and how he emotionally felt drained and “cold inside” during touring when the allegations broke the news (Vogel, 2019, p. 561). The fans ultimately were to hear this speech and generally accept Michael’s exaltation of children, being aware of the many good deeds and the childlike persona he always tried to portray while in public.

There are many constraints Michael faced at the time of this speech’s delivery. The 90s for him, as shared earlier, were not pleasant as he developed an obscure drug and alcohol problem, which he never recovered from, as well as continued physical changes (most self-inflicted due to surgeries and substance abuse) his skin color lightening drastically due to his increased vitiligo treatments involving skin bleaching, and rapid weight loss and gain due to adjusting to marriages, divorces, stress from touring constantly and insomnia, and the introduction to children that he cared for full time as a single father (O’Keefe, 2005, pp. 117-119). Meanwhile, Michael was dealing with issues with Sony, with whom he worked for as well as 50% shares in their Sony/ATV catalog, which he sold to them in 1995. As Sony kept asking Michael for his next album to be released two years after HIStory, Michael continuously delayed any progress on the album—named Invincible—until late 2001. Michael intentionally racked up a heavy bill for Sony, in communication that the company would be paying for everything spent—from the hotel rooms for his children and staff, to the multiple recording studios operating in Florida and New York, which resulted in Michael being in debt to Sony for more than $140 million dollars (Knopper, 2015, pp. 269-271). Michael also physically broke his foot shortly before the speech’s delivery, resulting in him using crutches in order to stand on the podium and deliver his speech (Boteach, 2009, p. 15).

Another major constraint Michael faced which can tie in with the exigence, is his reputation as a child molester which had turned many Americans and British fans off of from him during the late 90s. This still effects Michael even today posthumously. Because of the severe nature of the allegations and his reluctance to discontinue speaking so adamantly about children as he did in his 1995 interview with Diane Sawyer and continuing to host them and their families in his home at Neverland Ranch, Michael’s already aloof and eccentric public persona became more and more distant from the musical masterpieces he seemed to create in the 80s (Knopper, 2015, p. 270). In fact, his obsession toward children grew, telling a friend at the time that “if it weren’t for kids, I would throw in the towel.” (Boteach, 2009, p. 215).

Rhetorical analysis: Jackson’s use of ethos

In this section, I will be arguing how Michael Jackson used ethos to capture his audience’s attention by emphasizing how important childhoods are by providing in depth stories on his own deeds with other children at the time of the speech’s delivery, and by referencing his tumultuous relationship with his father and its connection to his (in his definition) terrible childhood and overemphasis with children.

The first part of this analysis will highlight how Jackson constantly uses ethos to capture his fanbase’s attention to help revive his failing public reputation, especially with the mention of his strained relationship with his father. Jackson has shared many times throughout his long career that he did not have a secure and close relationship with his father, Joseph Jackson. Since the beginning of his adulthood in the late 70s, Jackson has always valued the relationship between a parent and child. In several interviews, Jackson shared how he often desired to be touched, hugged or called “son” by his father, but never felt or experienced any of those things. Acknowledging his decades long alienation of his father, in his speech Jackson shared “So tonight, rather than focusing on what my father didn’t do, I want to focus on all the things he did do and on his own personal challenges. I want to stop judging him.” There is no doubt that Jackson himself is a master at appealing to emotions and captivating his audience through his impeccable public speaking and writing skills. Through this statement, Jackson shared his first component of appealing to the emotion of his audience through “closing the book” per se on the unforgiveness held toward his father by reflecting on his own journey as a father and rebuilding his relationship with his father, as well as attempting to repair the damaged stems from his public reputation stemming from the 1993 allegations by sharing emotional and personal anecdotes of his encounters with sick children and his own personal life.

Jackson begins his speech with addressing those at the Oxford Union and updating those listening on his many endeavors to support and help children all around the world. He then shares many stories and personal anecdotes on the many children who travelled to see him during tours or that he stopped by the visit that were bed-ridden, and how his appearance brightened up their lives even for a second. As stated in the introduction paragraph, Jackson is very skilled at drawing attention to himself via personal anecdotes and recollections. This is evident in his music, short films, books and short stories, poems and his speech, especially in the section where Jackson reveals a story about a young boy who came to visit him while he was at his home in the beginning of 1987:

“His parents told me that he wasn’t going to live, that any day he could just go, and I said to him: ‘Look, I am going to be coming to your town in Kansas to open my tour in three months. I want you to come to the show. I am going to give you this jacket that I wore in one of my videos.’ His eyes lit up and he said: ‘You are gonna give it to me?’ I said: ‘Yeah, but you have to promise that you will wear it to the show.’ I was trying to make him hold on. I said: ‘When you come to the show I want to see you in this jacket and in this glove…’and I gave him one of my rhinestone gloves — and I never usually give the rhinestone gloves away.”

Here, Jackson uses a strong and sensitive anecdote to not only appeal to himself but to the goodwill and selfless character he has toward those less fortunate than him. I was not born in the late 80s, so I cannot recall any details personally during this time, but one thing associated with Jackson is his elaborate home in California—Neverland Valley Ranch—which many children around the world would attend up until 2005. Jackson stating that the child visited “me in my home” was not Jackson just organizing a house visit with just himself and the family present, but dozens of other children and families, staff workers, and employees who cooked nutritious meals for the guests, showed them around the amusement parks and petting zoos, and provided many children with candy and goods to bring home. Jackson regularly invited children or anyone whom he was friendly with to his ranch.

This part of the speech—the giving away of the glove and the jacket, the invitation to the show, the realization that this story still hang close to Jackson’s heart after a decade—speaks to Jackson’s thoughtless goodwill and generosity that he wants the audience—his long-time loyal fanbase that support him in America and the UK, who seemed tot turn their backs on him during the mid-90s—to remember as the speech continues. Here, Jackson attempts to regain the approval and respect he once had in the media’s eye as they are reminded of his selfless actions and motivational quests. In the next section, I will discuss Jackson’s address on the several decade-long tumultuous relationships with his own father, and his decision to decide to seek forgiveness during the delivery of this speech.

As shared in the intro paragraph, Jackson’s relationship with his parents and specifically his father has been almost common knowledge to Jackson’s fanbase. In his speech, Jackson comments, “You probably weren’t surprised to hear that I did not have an idyllic childhood. The strain and tension that exists in my relationship with my own father is well documented.” In this part of the speech, Jackson attempts to connect the sorrowful and tumultuous childhood to the sorrowful and tumultuous adulthood. He eludes that if a child has a tough and unforgiving childhood; absent of parental guidance, affection and care, then that child will grow to become a stagnant and miserable adult. This is a common motif in Jackson’s persona—his consistent griping about the lingering effects of being a celebrity since he was a young child along with the grueling work his father trained his brothers and he in performing, singing and dancing—made way for a perfect empathy train and a perfect way of using ethos to gain the audience’s trust and credibility in him.

Jackson speaks of his Heal the World charity founded in the early 1990s. In this section of the speech, he shares “Do I really believe that we can heal this world, that is riddled with war and genocide, even today? And do I really think that we can heal our children, the same children who can enter their schools with guns and hatred and shoot down their classmates, like they did at Columbine? Or children who can beat a defenseless toddler to death, like the tragic story of Jamie Bulger? Of course I do, or I wouldn’t be here tonight.” This section is interesting because through the exploitation of Jackson’s personal misalignment with his own father, he displays that he has begun the first step in the process to “heal the world”: this being “forgiving our parents.” He demonstrates to his audience that in order to be enlightened in the area of harmony and peace with oneself and of value to society, you must first travel where I have gone: forgiveness of parents for their personal transgressions. It is noted that Jackson also excuses the alleged intense abuse at the hands of his father, because he never notes the process for how to deal with the unforgiveness. Jackson’s grandiose way of thinking almost seems kiddish and are greatly enveloped in optimism. During the delivery of this speech, Jackson was heavily enveloped in a drug addiction to Demerol, used to sedate patients for intense surgeries, This was Jackson’s way of aiding his chronic insomnia and pain inflicted on him during his 1999 charity concert. Whether Jackson’s words were drug-conceived or not are up for debate, but Jackson nevertheless challenges the audience to forgive the wrongdoing of their parents and have empathy toward their shortcomings and giving our parents “the benefit of the doubt.”

In conclusion, Jackson attempts to paint a monotone world that forgiveness is the answer to the world’s problems and that healing can truly begin when we forgive and allow ourselves to be those children we once were; starting new relationships with our parents…here, Jackson overemphasizes a person’s childhood and spreads a message that with forgiveness, the world can be whole. Jackson acknowledges and spreads to his audience that underneath his superstardom and wealth, he has always longed for a mother and father who truly loved him and approved of him.

Conclusion

In conclusion, I have discussed in this paper that Jackson uses ethos to pander to specific audiences, this being is loyal and dedicated fandom and the mainstream media and press in order to repair the heavily damaged public reputation he had at the time of the speech’s delivery. Jackson’s plethora of circumstances leading up to this event (the rhetorical situation), resulted in him attempting to appeal to his audience by appearing like the role model all should follow, and telling his audience many persuasive stories on how Jackson values children, why the rest of the world should value children, and why having a childhood is how children grow up to be confident and effective adults. I would argue that Jackson’s writing of this speech and its subsequent delivery mixed with the drug abuse that was present in his life at this time quite exaggerates Jackson’s longstanding fascination with children. Maybe fascination is the wrong word…but it is well-known that Michael Jackson has always had an infectious affinity toward children and childlike things. While his natural affinity is not an issue (there are many people who love children and wish to protect them), his unhappiness with fame, lack of healthy relationships with adults and the heavy drug usage during the latter years of his life may have skewered his intentions and blurred his message to the public. This is an important thing to note, as Jackson’s life story is now a part of history—more so a cautionary tale that fame and celebrity and a lack of a childhood come with a heavy price—that Jackson’s heart seemed to always be on the children of the world, the young child in himself, and the approval of a brutal public opinion whom he desperately tried to measure up to with no avail. However, despite this, his clear action and dedication to children is unmatched to the amount of personal struggles he seemed to exhibit.

Sources

MJ: The Genius of Michael Jackson (pages 197-274) by Steve Knopper

Spin: The Story of Michael Jackson by Sherry O’Keefe

The Michael Jackson Tapes by Shmuley Boteach

Man in the Music: The Creative Life and Work of Michael Jackson by Joseph Vogel