When Alessandro Moreschi died on 21 April, 1922, the world thought it had felt the last stubbleless kiss of the voice of an angel on Earth — the boy castrato. The castrato tradition dictated that the talented boy singer was castrated before he reached puberty so that his larynx was not transformed by age and his angelic voice was preserved into adulthood. Castrati sang with a range equivalent to that of a female soprano, and the absence of testosterone as they grew resulted in unusually long ribs which gave them an almost superhuman lung power.
By the time Michael Jackson was 11 years old, he was the keystone to the earning power of a Motown juggernaut with an unprecedented string of consecutive number-ones. And his voice was about to break.
This week at his memorial, his brothers and sisters gathered to support and to mourn the passing of their talented sibling. In the photos of those difficult times, it is immediately apparent that whatever it was that was different about Michael, it probably wasn’t genetic. His eldest brother Jackie is a thick-set man with broad shoulders, Tito has a solid, masculine figure, Jermaine shares the manly physiques of his older brothers and combines it with a chiselled jaw, Marlon and Randy have similar builds and Marlon usually wears a thick moustache.
The surviving images of the great castrati of history suggest that castrati do not physically develop in the same way as other boys. The absence of testosterone as they grow not only affects their ribs, it also prevents them developing the other typical physical characteristics of grown men — body hair, broad shoulders and most significantly, a manly voice. A study in mice also found that castrating mice leads to depigmentation of their skin. Although this finding is hardly conclusive, it provides an intriguing explanation for the significant depigmentation of his skin.
The lack of women (or men) who claim to have slept with Michael Jackson seems surprising given his level of celebrity, and it appears that none of his children were naturally conceived. Michael Jackson kept his private life intensely private, which was his prerogative. But is it possible that his unusual love and s-x life was as much a result of a physical inability to engage in sexual intimacy as it was about sexual preference? He clearly enjoyed the company of children.
Could this have been the result of a preference for the simpler, more honest level at which children communicate, free of the temptations and complications of sexual desire? Perhaps children were more his physical and emotional equals than the adults in his life. They at least spoke with similar voices.
Carlo Broschi, who died in 1782, had legendary three-octave vocal range and could reputedly hold a note for a full minute. Another great castrato, Farinelli, had a voice that was likened by critics to that of a god. It seems the world appreciates the purity and agility of the castrato voice, even though they may wince at the methods behind its creation. Whatever it was that altered the trajectory of Michael Jackson’s adult life, it almost certainly happened before he reached puberty.
Money and superstardom are powerful motivators to do extreme things. We will never know what conversations took place in the rooms backstage in the months leading up to Michael’s puberty, and whether the possibility of him losing the voice that had made him and a lot of other people fabulously wealthy was discussed at all. But it might have been. And if so, was there a solution proposed?
Could it be that the explanation for Michael Jackson’s unquestioned uniqueness lay in a hidden childhood shame? Whether or not it was the case, he undoubtedly sacrificed a lot for our entertainment, and, as he always said, the world was not willing to accept him for who he was. The question remains, was he the great castrato of our time?
Jack Ellis is a graduate in Composition of the Sydney Conservatorium of Music and studied Phase Composition at the Royal Conservatorium, The Hague.
107 thoughts on “Michael Jackson: was he a castrato?”
David Sanderson
July 23, 2009 at 2:53 pmOK, the castrationists don’t have a leg to stand on, so to speak.
END OF STORY.
Peter Nicholson
July 23, 2009 at 3:04 pmI read the article yesterday and it seemed plausible speculation. I’ve googled and I can’t find anything about the LAPD photographing his genitals and in any event, I don’t know enough about castrati to know what the genital area would look like after such an operation (but surely a good surgeon could make everything look similiar to before the operation). I can’t imagine that even the greediest parent would allow this to be done to a son but stranger things have happened.
I see that a few readers think crikey is too highbrow for this type of speculation, but I think it’s just the sort of thought provoking article that fits here.
mbyrnes
July 23, 2009 at 3:17 pmNo, it is complete garbage. Patently false.
Whether you can find it or now, the LAPD examination is well known and can be ascertained with a competent basic Google search. The author clearly was so ignorant he wasn’t aware of it.
I’m not opposed to articles on popular culture (if I was I wouldn’t have read the article to begin with), but there is a tendency to apply a lower standard to articles on such subjects, as if a lack of basic research and totally fanciful speculation is permissible in this context.
This is possibly the most poorly researched and ludicrous article ever to be published on a credible news website. The only thoughts it provokes is how it ever got that far.
gregstyles
July 23, 2009 at 3:24 pmTo those who are inflamed by speculative nature of piece, I don’t see a single assertion of fact in the piece. It’s a speculation piece.
To speculate further, his characteristics do lend themselves to a castrato. Depigmentation is not normally associated with castration. But since the castration tradition was primarily based in Europe, it may never have been observed in pale skinned subjects. There has been some tentative links of melanin production (brown pigment of skin) with testosterone [1], but again hardly conclusive.
The presence of his complete set of genitals as proven by the LAPD, doesn’t actually rule out castration. Traditional chemical castration is unlikely since they usually have to keep up medication to sustain the effect . One possibility that springs to mind is a kind of modified vas sclerosing directly into to the testes [2], not known of course. Another possible explaination, other than purposful castration, could be a simple genetic disease like Kallmann syndrome.
I’m no doctor and I have no other information other than that is avalable publically.
[1] Slominski, A., D. J. Tobin, et al. (2004). “Melanin Pigmentation in Mammalian Skin and Its Hormonal Regulation.” Physiol. Rev. 84(4): 1155-1228.
[2] Freeman, C. (1975). “Preliminary human trial of a new male sterilization procedure: vas sclerosing.” Fertility and sterility 26(2): 162.
Michael Tatas
July 23, 2009 at 3:29 pmDeary me, talking about getting peoples knickers in a twist.
I don’t hear the same howls of protest when crikey publishes some ridiculous, ultra-left wing, earth hugging, gaia loving article from Clive Hamilton 🙂
Alison Turner
July 23, 2009 at 3:47 pmI can’t believe how much of a response this article has received! As if you would waste your time getting all het up about a small, amusing, SPECULATIVE piece on some freaky dead singer. I say good on ya, Crikey. And Jack.
P.S Tell First Dog I said hello….
Rob McLennan
July 23, 2009 at 3:56 pmAlright, move on people, there’s nothing more here to see…
mbyrnes
July 23, 2009 at 3:58 pmA “speculative” piece should still have regard to known facts, particularly those readily ascertainable through a modicum of research. The best speculative pieces are those that construct a theory arounf fact. The entire premise of this piece has arisen through the ignorance of,and lack of research by, the author.
There are a lot of apologists for this piece on the basis of who it was written about as if that somehow makes a difference. That is beside the point; the article is sloppy, lazy, offensive and misconceived. Don’t patronise though who think it’s important that some standards be maintained.
mbyrnes
July 23, 2009 at 3:59 pmAnd Jack.
P.S Tell First Dog I said hello….
Thought so. Say hello to Max Gogarty as well.
Rob McLennan
July 23, 2009 at 4:04 pmWell said MByrnes. Although I do worry that by continuing the argument we are giving the false impression that this article is worth debating. Let’s be clear here: this is not speculative writing, it is ignorant and ill-informed fantasy. You know, the kind you find in New Idea and Woman’s Day. People only ever write this kind of guff after the subject is dead because they know they will be hauled before a defamation court and they will never be held to account for publishing, at best, ill-researched gossip, and at worst, blatant lies. I’ll say it again, I subscribed to Crikey.com, not some ACP trash mag.