Bigger Impact: Michael Jackson or J.K Rowling??

1,256
11
Joined Feb 19, 2004
Randomly doing a bit of late night reading on both.  Who does NT think has had a bigger impact globally?
 
2,844
14
Joined Mar 8, 2009
I'm going to say JK. The sheer fact that she had kids lining up for a book is crazy. Its easy to get people to dance and sing because we as humans enjoy dancing and singing.
 

balloonoboy

Banned
9,788
481
Joined Nov 13, 2009
Aside from lining up for Harry Potter releases in odd garb, what else did Rowling impact?

Mike united the world and released Thriller. He released *@%%*#! Thriller.

I love JK. But she's no MJ.
 
3,131
400
Joined May 22, 2005
Show me millions upon millions of people crying and passing out from sheer satisfaction of being in any kind of presence of J.K Rowling or anything Harry Potter related and we'll talk. Unless I've been blind since the first Harry Potter book release...this isn't close at all.
 
5,445
444
Joined May 24, 2006
Third world countries know about MJ, but can't say the same thing about HP/JK Rowling.
 
2,018
14
Joined Jun 5, 2009
JK Rowling's single handed boost to literacy worldwide or MJ's universal appeal bringing people of different backgrounds together....damn that's tough.
 
1,801
361
Joined Dec 27, 2006
MJ
Thriller still the best album of all time. His music was so versatile it would be played on pop, r&b, and rock stations.
Everyone wanted to Moonwalk. Even though he wasn't the original maker of the move but the Moonwalk is always attributed to him.

JK
I read all the books and it's impressive that she created a whole new world of magic.

I was born in 92. MJ's prime was before I was born but I remember my family always listening to his music, and me watching his music videos and seeing greatness.
He changed music. He's in a league of his own.

But we'll check again in 10 years, probably kids of this generation will tell there kids more about harry potter than MJ, but people are still sampling MJ's songs as the youth are gradually shunning away books.
 
394
10
Joined Jan 22, 2008
I am surprised that this is a discussion and even more surprised that an old head like DoublesJ, or any old head for that matter, would consider this a good question.

40 years of music that reached and affected the whole world compared to 10 years of film/literature that only affected the western world.

Bascially, my grandma in a remote African village knows Micheal Jackson but even if the J.K. Rowling continued to write books and movies were made for the next 10 years, it still wouldn't reach the same audience. Thats like me asking my grandma if she knows facebook.
 
21,161
32
Joined Mar 13, 2004
Again...I think it depends on who you ask because the answers given will probably be from a generational perspective.

Due to when I grew up (in the 80's) I can understand the impact MJ had. I'd have to say from my POV, he had the bigger impact between the two. That being said, I'm a bit naive to JK Rowling. I know about her success and the popularity of her books, but that's about it. I don't care about Harry Potter...never seen a movie, or read anything that she's written. On the flip, I DO understand that there is probably a generation of kids/teens/young adults who don't understand how big Michael Jackson was in his prime. Those people I mentioned can probably tell you just about everything about Harry Potter. Their view of Michael Jackson may be that of what the man became (weird recluse) and not of what he once was. I get that. To me, it's Michael Jackson...but I'm not going to sit here and dig my feet in the sand w. my opinion because I don't know too much about Rowling.

I don't know how you can definitively pick one over the other...it's a good question and I don't think there is a clear-cut answer.
 
394
10
Joined Jan 22, 2008
Plus, you guys should understand the subjects that are being portrayed through those mediums.

Anyone can like a song wether they understand it or not, but the the western ideal of magic won't make sense to all cultures around the world.

You can hear something considered music and just like the way it sounds, but a film/book you have to actually understand what is going on.
 
1,256
11
Joined Feb 19, 2004
J.K Rowling
Her book series is the #1 of all time, in number of books sold (450 million). Her movie franchise is the #1 movie franchise of all time ($7.6 billion). Her books have been translated into 70 different distinct languages.
Prime: 1997-2011 (books + movies)


Michael Jackson
Best selling album of all time (Thriller, 110 million copies).
Prime(%#@): 1972-2001

Synopsis: Her books impacted me personally more than any music ever has. I started reading them as a freshman in high school, and read the last one as a senior in college. Waiting every year for the release of those books was great. She basically released 7 #1 albums. As I grew older, so did the depth of the books. I think she literally created an alternate world that people of all ages could really get into. The only other thing even remotely similar is the Star Wars saga. In terms of creativity and giving the world something it hasn't seen, she takes the cake. I've never been to a country where people haven't heard, read, or at least seen a Harry Potter movie. Same goes for Michael Jackson though.

Music is a generational thing though. You really have to be a part of the current culture to truly appreciate it. I've heard of the Beatles. I've spent my fair share of time listening to their music. However, they are not even in my top 30 favorite bands. They are good to listen to, but they simply don't effect me because I have no attachment to their music. Generations in the future will feel the same way about Mike. I was born at the end of his era and I at least 'felt' somewhat attached to him because even my parents, who have no interest in music, would watch the Jackson 5 movie, and talk about him. He may have the higher impact with one generation, but generally books stand the test of time. In 50 years people will still continue to be reading Harry Potter. Significantly less people will have that same attachment to Michael Jackson.
 
6,376
432
Joined Nov 9, 2007
Bigger impact?  MJ.  Bigger fanbase?  Rowlings.

This is an apples vs. oranges comparison though.  One was an artist/icon, the other is a writer.  One is famous for creating other characters, one is famous for being himself.  The only similarity between the two is that they are able to reach a wide-spread audience.
 
394
10
Joined Jan 22, 2008
Although I understand this might be a bit off topic but both Durden and DoublesJ are saying that this matter is subjective.

I never understood apples vs oranges because the question is who is better at what they do/did.

Is Rex Grossman a better QB than Ronaldo was a forward? Hell no. Although your comparing different sports, you can still gauge how good they were within their respective realms.
 

Pathos

formerly retrosan
4,762
52
Joined Dec 15, 2010
Originally Posted by RedMan

For the NTers who are saying Mike, may you provide reasons.
cause when Michael died, tears was shed (moms damn near went into withdrawal for like a week) and he has a bigger legacy
if JK died it won't hit you as much as it did with mike

EDIT: Plus EVERYBODY knows who Mike is, don't think JK is as wordly renown 
 
1,994
14
Joined Aug 11, 2000
Originally Posted by Durden7

Bigger impact?  MJ.  Bigger fanbase?  Rowlings.

This is an apples vs. oranges comparison though.  One was an artist/icon, the other is a writer.  One is famous for creating other characters, one is famous for being himself.  The only similarity between the two is that they are able to reach a wide-spread audience.
Since Mike made music for 40 years, I really think his fanbase is bigger.
 
6,376
432
Joined Nov 9, 2007
enlightendespot wrote:[hr][/hr]Although I understand this might be a bit off topic but both Durden and DoublesJ are saying that this matter is subjective.

I never understood apples vs oranges because the question is who is better at what they do/did.

Is Rex Grossman a better QB than Ronaldo was a forward? Hell no. Although your comparing different sports, you can still gauge how good they were within their respective realms.
The question is who had a bigger impact, not who is better at their craft.

Maybe I misinterpreted what the question truly was, but from I understand it's who had the bigger impact on society.  Just based off of what MJ did for a living, he has the advantage in the platform for having an impact.

I dont want to sound like im discrediting Rowlings either.  She has a massive fanbase, but what she does just doesnt create a lasting impact on society.

  
 
Top Bottom