Janet Jackson as much of an icon as Michael?

No.


Justin Bieber however....

*sigh* I sigh because the answer is no, and the reasons are basically a pile of sh*t, but there's nothing I can do about it.

Janet should be viewed as an icon, and I'd argue as a legend as well (but then the definitions of 'icon' and 'legend' are another discussion altogether so I'll just stick with icon). But after that Superbowl incident happened people just would not let it go, and not only refuse to let it go but have decided to let it single-handedly wipe out their memories of everything else she had done before then. Even if you count All For You, which didn't perform as well as anything else she'd done, she still had a lot of favor on her side up to 2004. People respected her as a veteran who was still capable of making good pop music. How does one incident manage to permanently undo 20+ years of goodwill? I have seen other artists rebound from much worse. Which leads to the most mind-boggling part of it all...

I think of all the controversy Michael went through - molestation accusations are infinitely more serious than showing a nipple, and should be infinitely more damaging even after being found not guilty and/or settling out of court - and yet during and after those controversies people would still stand behind the music. In fact, part of what made Michael's legacy even stronger is precisely how staunchly so many people stood behind the music, to the point that they either could not acknowledge that such a genius could be a child molester, or they made it a point to say they separate Michael the man from Michael the musical prodigy just so they could continue to enjoy the music without a guilty conscience for indirectly 'supporting' the man.

With Janet, there was no argument on both sides. It seemed everyone just collectively washed their hands of her.

You know how artists from decades ago die and they get maybe a blurb in an online article or a 30-second mention in passing on a couple of news outlets, and no more than two comments on it? It's usually some artist that wasn't very popular and few have even heard of them, let alone remember them, but I honestly think when Janet dies she won't get much more than that kind of reception. I don't even see CD sales spiking much in the week after her death. And it's a shame that someone who accomplished so much for such a long span of time could be so easily forgotten.

I think a reason why she can be so easily 'washed away' by listeners than Michael could was simply due to the ease in finding a new female diva as opposed to the difficulty of finding a new true male pop superstar.

Elvis

I would say he's been dead long enough that there's no longer a direct influence of his work on anyone today. You don't hear people saying "Oh he's definitely got the Elvis influence going on". Michael still has plenty of relevance and you hear people saying that someone's song "sounds like Michael Jackson" or that someone "dances like Michael Jackson".

I don't think that matters when artist like Elvis, Michael, Madonna & The Beatles are involved. They're always gonna be highly regarded as "Icons" and "legends"

Basically no single solo artist (only Madonna comes close) is as much of an icon as Michael Jackson, let alone Janet.

"as mush as an icon as Michael" =/= bigger.

I do think Elvis comes close to Michaels' status. King of Pop... King of Rock.

She's not up there with Michael in the icon department, and that simply comes as a result of Michael being the biggest star to ever walk the earth, and being his younger sister.

That said, she is definitely an icon and a legend in her own right. Her name holds up against her peers.

No one is as much of an icon as Michael.

The word "legend" doesn't totally spring to mind regarding Janet but yeah, I'd say she's an icon. But no...she'll never ever come close to Michael's impact/legacy.

Michael is a better singer, writer, dancer, performer than Janet. I'm a little surprised by the overwhelming J > M opinion.

Obviously Michael was the bigger star, but Janet is iconic in her own right. Janet doesn't get NEARLY the accolades that she deserves.

Iconic? Absolutely. Legend? Absolutely.

MJ is in another league of superstardom.

Janet has had great success and influence, mostly in the US. But she will always play second fiddle to her brother. She knows this as well. That's not to diminish her accomplishments as she has many that she earned on her own through sheer perseverance, talent, and fantastic music.

A combination of things, really. But I think the two biggest factors were that she didn't apologize enough and she didn't reinvent herself afterward. Silly as the first sounds, Justin went out of his way to appear apologetic at every given opportunity after that and people bought that. But at the same time he/his team apparently didn't talk to Janet at all about this and basically left her to fend for herself instead of working to present a united statement. Janet only offered one apology in some interview I think, and I remember a lot of people saying she appeared defensive and/or insincere. If she'd openly groveled like Justin maybe people would have forgiven her more. But to most people, she wasn't even asking for forgiveness, so they didn't give it to her.

As to the latter, I think if she'd pulled a Madonna (i.e. from the Erotica era to the more mature phases of Bedtime Stories, Ray of Light, and motherhood) people would have welcomed that and felt like she had 'grown up.' Instead she stuck with the dance-pop. Again, sounds silly, but it could be taken as a sign that she isn't learning from her mistakes or aging gracefully, which is a turnoff.

Worth mentioning as well that America's society as a whole is extremely sexually repressed, and a woman 'owning' her sexuality brazenly goes against that so it makes people extremely uncomfortable. Janet's supposed lack of apology only reinforced this uncomfortable feeling, and they were already freaked out just by seeing her nipple.

Definitely true. A lot of it is simply less supply (not nearly as many men trying to be pop musicians because it isn't seen as 'cool' or 'manly'). Janet arguably influenced as many female stars after her as Michael did male stars, but that isn't saying much b/c there aren't many male stars worth mentioning. Idol is a perfect example of this (in all their male contestants, not just the winners); we take what we can get on the male side, while on the female side a pretty face with a great set of t&a voice is a dime a dozen, if not cheaper.

Also, there are so many female influences from approximately the same era(s) a young girl can look up to - Madonna, Mariah, Whitney, Celine - thus, there are many more female ingenues waiting in the wings for a diva, any diva, to be forced into retirement. The only male with a comparable amount of influence to Michael during the same time frame was Prince. And Michael greatly trumps Prince in sales and overall mainstream appeal (Michael was safe while Prince was the reason we have parental advisory labels...again, the sexual repression thing) so Michael really gets to stand alone in a lot of ways.

For the record, I consider Mike and Janet equal in terms of talent. I always find it a bummer that the idea of a tie is incomprehensible to most (hence why you have so many stan wars, b/c for some reason the idea that there are people who can be simultaneously smashing just does not stand). But yeah, Michael was always the star and there really wasn't much any of his siblings could do to get completely from under his shadow. That Janet managed to have the amazing career that she did - and for the most part without her name being constantly modified with "Michael's little sister" - says a lot in itself about her own star power. Makes you wonder how we would have viewed her if she'd had the same career, but without being Michael's sister.

I don't think it has anything to do with the Superbowl incident...but the answer is no. I just don't think Janet's iconic status is anywhere close to Michael's. I actually feel like a lot of her stuff hasn't aged too well.