Hopefully not any of the Nirvana related stuff. ;)

I don't know. He sounds like he never liked Michael Jackson, so why would he talk about him being "dethroned" in any kind of personal sense?

The thing is I'm not coming at this article with any kind of Michael Jackson fanboy goggles on—I think he did what he did well, but a lot of what he did just isn't my bag—but still I see the attempt at contrasting him Nirvana as pretty silly. He talks about how Michael Jackson's tabloid presence and whatnot overshadowed the music, and I agree. But I'd also say the exact same thing about Kurt Cobain.

Well the actual words in the article were

Grunge pretty much took over everything, you couldn't get away from it. You know that, you were there the same as I was. So I think in that respect he's right.

I don't get the impression he's saying 'Artist A' was responsible for the downfall of 'Artist B'. I think he's speaking figuratively that grunge took over the mainstream & everything else was shoved aside, which in my experience was what happened. And that this had more of an effect on him than Jackson ever did.

It had more of an effect on him sure. But that's just like how The Fall had more of an impact on you than more well known bands, that doesn't make them a more important band overall.

ELP has had more of an impact on me than The Stones ever did, and you may find that laughable and I don't think we have to argue which band means more to people worldwide.

And I think that's the overall thing, Jackson has crossover and worldwide appeal that is only matched by Elvis and The Beatles. I think Jackson's popularity will stay just as strong as Elvis's has over the years.

Cobain however, will just remain popular with certain subcultures because he was part of much more niche genre of music,.

I'm talking of a specific time
You're talking about in general.

If you put what he says in the context of being in 1992 then it makes much more sense.

Oh, well in that case, what was even the point of printing that article?

Other than to say "that dead guy was better than this dead guy."

Yeah lets all dismiss the entire article because one sentence was blown out of proportion :rolleyes:

I'm just thankful that MJ didn't attempt to do a grunge song.

He was simply the best

What I'm trying to say though is that grunge didn't take over the mainstream and shove everything else aside, not a by a long shot. It took over mainstream rock, that's it. But back then, just like now, most top 40 music wasn't rock.

Just for shits and giggles, below are the top five albums from the prime years of the grunge era (I realize these are just American sales, but I wouldn't be surprised at all if the UK reflected something similar). Grunge makes a minor appearance for sure but most definitely does not push everything else aside:

1992:
1. Garth Brooks—Ropin' the Wind
2. Michael Jackson—Dangerous
3. Nirvana—Nevermind
4. Billy Ray Cyrus—Some Give All
5. U2—Achtung Baby

1993:
1. The Bodyguard Motion Picture Soundtrack
2. Kenny G—Breathless
3. Eric Clapton—Unplugged
4. Janet Jackson—Janet
5. Billy Ray Cyrus—Some Give All

1994:
1. Ace of Base—The Sign
2. Mariah Carey—Music Box
3. Snoop Doggy Dogg—Doggy Style
4. The Lion King Motion Picture Soundtrack
5. Counting Crows—August & Everything After

1995:
1. Hootie & the Blowfish—Cracked Rear View
2. Garth Brooks—The Hits
3. Boyz II Men—II
4. Eagles—Hell Freezes Over
5. TLC—Crazysexycool

(I got these from here)

Yeah, Michael Jackson was frantically trying to get a good grip on his own coattails long before Kurt Cobain ever hit the scene. I have a tough time believing that true believers sold their MJ records for flannel shirts when Nevermind rolled around.