From a 1990 Rolling Stones interview:

"I don't go to awards shows anymore," he says. "I'm not saying I'm better than anybody else. But you'll be sitting there at the Grammys, and U2 will beat you. And you say to yourself, 'Wait a minute. I can play that kind of music, too. I played La Crosse [Wisconsin] growing up, I know how to do that, you dig? But you will not do 'Housequake.'"

I mean I know La Crosse is a town in Wisconsin, but what the fuck does "playing La Crosse" mean???

Thanks

A sport.

Lacrosse

*

[Edited 9/21/13 3:12am]

Thanks

So WTF does playing Lacrosse have to do with U2? Is it a way of saying that they play music as badly as someone who'd try to play guitar like u play a crosse or what?

I always thought he was simply referring to the city in Wisconsin, and it had nothing to do with the sport. Meaning, "I've played gigs in places that wouldn't typically embrace "black" music, which proves that my music appeals to diverse audiences."

Coupled with Prince's next statement after that "... but YOU (U2) will never do a "Housequake." He was basically saying that he thought SOTT deserved the Grammy because he managed to cover a greater range of musical styles on one album than U2 had ever recorded in their entire career at that point.

---

[Edited 9/21/13 7:17am]

PicassoFace said:

I always thought he was simply referring to the city in Wisconsin, and it had nothing to do with the sport. Meaning, "I've played gigs in places that wouldn't typically embrace "black" music, which proves that my music appeals to diverse audiences."

Coupled with Prince's next statement after that "... but YOU (U2) will never do a "Housequake." He was basically saying that he thought SOTT deserved the Grammy because he managed to cover a greater range of musical styles on one album than U2 had ever recorded in their entire career at that point.

---

[Edited 9/21/13 7:17am]

Yeah but no, because he said "played La Crosse" not "played IN La Crosse", + he said "growing-up", and Prince didn't play anywhere save the Twin Cities when he was growing up. Your explanation was a good guess but I don't think it's that :s Other ideas?

PicassoFace said:

I always thought he was simply referring to the city in Wisconsin, and it had nothing to do with the sport. Meaning, "I've played gigs in places that wouldn't typically embrace "black" music, which proves that my music appeals to diverse audiences."

Coupled with Prince's next statement after that "... but YOU (U2) will never do a "Housequake." He was basically saying that he thought SOTT deserved the Grammy because he managed to cover a greater range of musical styles on one album than U2 had ever recorded in their entire career at that point.

Exactly. Prince was definitely referring to LaCrosse Wisconsin. It's a college town about an hour away from MPLS. Prince was referring to audiences that would be into a rock oriented sound and how he can captivate them.

PicassoFace said:

I always thought he was simply referring to the city in Wisconsin, and it had nothing to do with the sport. Meaning, "I've played gigs in places that wouldn't typically embrace "black" music, which proves that my music appeals to diverse audiences."

Coupled with Prince's next statement after that "... but YOU (U2) will never do a "Housequake." He was basically saying that he thought SOTT deserved the Grammy because he managed to cover a greater range of musical styles on one album than U2 had ever recorded in their entire career at that point.

---

[Edited 9/21/13 7:17am]

Yep, that's what it means--thus the (Wisconsin) right after it says "La Crosse."

I think he's said even more explicity somewhere that he can "play U2"--which he can't. And a big pre-emptive to whoever's getting ready to say a word about "Guitar." He can't play U2 anymore than he can play Led Zeppelin or the Beatles or Sly and the Family Stone or P-Funk. Oh, he can play one of their songs--but he can't actually do what any of them did. He can't really play their styles--he can reproduce some of the markers of their style, but it doesn't come together well--it has no real feel. Honestly, U2 could probably come as close to a respectable version of Housequake as he could of anything by U2 (which is to say, they couldn't and neither could he)--unless he decided to go in a completely different direction with it, in which case it isn't proving that he can "play U2" in any way that's really worth talking about.

Sign o the Times should have gotten the award in a perfect world--but it didn't, because it didn't have that strong an appeal to broader audiences. It had a broad palate, but it didn't really appeal to "mainstream" pop audiences, and back then, to win the Grammy, you really had to. That isn't still the case (but it certainly helps). He's right that he could have that appeal, but that doesn't mean that Sign had it. He'd played La Crosse--but he didn't play it with a Sign-based show, did he? In fact, he didn't even play a US tour with a Sign-based show... and the reasons for that are the same reasons U2 won the Grammy.

It is an interesting coincidence, though--he references "La Crosse" in order to contrast himself with U2, when "The Cross" is a song Bono's referenced in discussing Prince's skill as a lyricist (I don't have a citation, this is from memory) and he's performed it with Prince (in 1995).

P.S. To "play New York" would be a perfectly acceptable way to say "play in New York." It's only the fact that there's a game by a similar name that even makes you notice (if you do) whether there's an in stated. As to the "growing up"--don't take it too literally. I'm not actually sure he ever played La Crosse at any point. But it seems far more likely to me that he's referring to it as a representative of the type of mostly-white, mostly-rock audiences he'd played to at times in his career than that it has anything to do with the game, which would have no significance at all in a discussion comparing him to U2--who almost certainly have never played the game of lacrosse, though they've certainly played similar cities.

[Edited 9/21/13 8:11am]

OK, thanks very much guys for the clarification La Crosse being close to MPLS makes sense, I had no clue.

So shall we all agree that it's about the city and not the sports?

Yeah, that way the city is probably even more sensible.


And, grammatically, of course he can say "played La Crosse" without the "in" and mean the city. It's common stage language.

SuperSoulFighter said:

Okay, now we got that sorted out, here's another thing: I always had this feeling that U2 trying to be "danceable" with Achtung Baby and Zoo TV was them trying to get back at Prince. You think we can't do Housequake? Think again! This is us being funky! But I never found U2's "funk" very convincing. Like EddieC said, Prince can't do U2. And U2 can't do Prince. Thank God for that. [Edited 9/21/13 8:48am]

I really don't have these albums and Zoo TV in mind anymore but 2 me it was more like them trying 2 emulate Bowie on the first album (the Eno connection, the "berlinesque" darkness) and early european electronica (with maybe a touch of Detroit house?) on the second, than anything funky or princey. But as I said I haven't heard these albums in 20 years, so...

I think it is a typo for the song "the cross"

Most of the responses here are dead on, but I'll add that when Prince is discussing U2 he isn't saying that he can do U2 better than U2. He's saying that his musical range or palate is wider than U2's range or palate. And, moreover, even when the African American's artist's range or palate is wider, he is not acknowledge in the same manner as say a white artist usually is. Now, we can debate whether that is true or not, but that certainly seems to be Prince's sentiment. And while I agree with Prince’s sentiment, one can also argue that in the same year Sign "O" the Times lost to Luther Vandross’s album at the Soul Train Awards, if I remember correctly, so maybe for Prince his range or diversity is simultaneously his greatness and his albatross, especially when it comes to a mass audience being able to enjoy various genres on one album. Now, I think that Sign "O" the Times crushes most of what was released that year, but I like diverse genres on albums.

1725topp said:

Most of the responses here are dead on, but I'll add that when Prince is discussing U2 he isn't saying that he can do U2 better than U2. He's saying that his musical range or palate is wider than U2's range or palate. And, moreover, even when the African American's artist's range or palate is wider, he is not acknowledge in the same manner as say a white artist usually is. Now, we can debate whether that is true or not, but that certainly seems to be Prince's sentiment. And while I agree with Prince’s sentiment, one can also argue that in the same year Sign "O" the Times lost to Luther Vandross’s album at the Soul Train Awards, if I remember correctly, so maybe for Prince his range or diversity is simultaneously his greatness and his albatross, especially when it comes to a mass audience being able to enjoy various genres on one album. Now, I think that Sign "O" the Times crushes most of what was released that year, but I like diverse genres on albums.

I think it hurts him across the board, at least when it comes to awards. He has trouble in pop and rock circles, and he has problems in R&B circles as well--because he's not true to a genre. He wouldn't be Prince if he were, and I probably wouldn't be posting on this forum that probably wouldn't exist--but he might have a few more statues on his mantle.

I also wonder how much he really was upset by that loss. What about that lyric (it was in some live thing he played for awhile--I don't remember which song) "I love u 2--but not the band." And then he'd repeat it, to make sure people got it (cuz it's just so clever).

Now I don't know how many peeps in this thread were joking, but this thread cracks me up! He is talking about The Cross which starts with strumming very similar to U2's ...

ufoclub said:

Now I don't know how many peeps in this thread were joking, but this thread cracks me up! He is talking about The Cross which starts with strumming very similar to U2's ...

The similarity is obvious. This song is from AFTER The Cross, though, so U2 would have imitated P, not the opposite. Now the Rolling Stone interview clearly says "La Crosse (Wisconsin)", not "The Cross", so do u think P was doing some metaphor and RS missed it or what?

Ufo just spanked us all. Of course he's right. The Rolling Stone transcript is simply incorrect...

databank said:

ufoclub said:

Now I don't know how many peeps in this thread were joking, but this thread cracks me up! He is talking about The Cross which starts with strumming very similar to U2's ...

The similarity is obvious. This song is from AFTER The Cross, though, so U2 would have imitated P, not the opposite. Now the Rolling Stone interview clearly says "La Crosse (Wisconsin)", not "The Cross", so do u think P was doing some metaphor and RS missed it or what?

I take the point of what Prince is saying as this:"I played what they play now back when I was a kid. In other words, I am more advanced than U2." revealing that he probably composed the song The Cross (or even recorded a demo) many many years before it's eventual recording/production and release on SOTT.

ufoclub said:

databank said:

The similarity is obvious. This song is from AFTER The Cross, though, so U2 would have imitated P, not the opposite. Now the Rolling Stone interview clearly says "La Crosse (Wisconsin)", not "The Cross", so do u think P was doing some metaphor and RS missed it or what?

I take the point of what Prince is saying as this:"I played what they play now back when I was a kid. In other words, I am more advanced than U2." revealing that he probably composed the song The Cross (or even recorded a demo) many many years before it's eventual recording/production and release on SOTT.

I think u may b extrapolating about The Cross having been composed b4 July 1986, because Per Nielsen's research is really comprehensive when it comes 2 anything recorded in the early years, but who knows? I'm not sure about that theory altogether because P saying "I played The Cross when I was young" would imply he played it live or something, not only composed it, + this song is really mature compared to Prince's early lyrics. + the Rolling Stone reporter HAD 2 b familiar with SOTT, therefore it's odd that he's miss that and think "The Cross" means "La Crosse". But nonetheless u may b correct, who knows??? It's really odd this interview, with no less that THREE possible interpretations :s

databank said:

ufoclub said:

I take the point of what Prince is saying as this:"I played what they play now back when I was a kid. In other words, I am more advanced than U2." revealing that he probably composed the song The Cross (or even recorded a demo) many many years before it's eventual recording/production and release on SOTT.

I think u may b extrapolating about The Cross having been composed b4 July 1986, because Per Nielsen's research is really comprehensive when it comes 2 anything recorded in the early years, but who knows? I'm not sure about that theory altogether because P saying "I played The Cross when I was young" would imply he played it live or something, not only composed it, + this song is really mature compared to Prince's early lyrics. + the Rolling Stone reporter HAD 2 b familiar with SOTT, therefore it's odd that he's miss that and think "The Cross" means "La Crosse". But nonetheless u may b correct, who knows??? It's really odd this interview, with no less that THREE possible interpretations :s

I think Prince really means that he came up with the idea of The Cross very early on, and from the structure of the song, which is very simple and not unlike a "The Doors" vibe (and I think the lyrics are quite charmingly surface level, naively poetic and religious with no spin or underlying meaning), I'd believe a bright eyed, posturing youngster would come up with these lyrics and this simple two chord rock song that builds in a very predictable way.

Per Nielsen still is only relying on accounts outside of Prince himself, and I know that all that type of production and conceptual history can be very inaccurate and incomplete (even recording session notes)... even if it was straight from the source: Prince.

I know that for example Per Nielsen's brief entry of the aftershow Ocean Club activities of Prince for the Houston Lovesexy show are not really accurate. I think this kind of blurring and factual error potentially happens for ALL the entries in his book.

I think you need at least three sources for an event to paint a somewhat accurate picture.

I wish we had a third source for Prince's meeting with Sinead!

Occam's razor.

poisonmouth said:

Occam's razor.

Occam's razor is no fun.

EddieC said:

1725topp said:

Most of the responses here are dead on, but I'll add that when Prince is discussing U2 he isn't saying that he can do U2 better than U2. He's saying that his musical range or palate is wider than U2's range or palate. And, moreover, even when the African American's artist's range or palate is wider, he is not acknowledge in the same manner as say a white artist usually is. Now, we can debate whether that is true or not, but that certainly seems to be Prince's sentiment. And while I agree with Prince’s sentiment, one can also argue that in the same year Sign "O" the Times lost to Luther Vandross’s album at the Soul Train Awards, if I remember correctly, so maybe for Prince his range or diversity is simultaneously his greatness and his albatross, especially when it comes to a mass audience being able to enjoy various genres on one album. Now, I think that Sign "O" the Times crushes most of what was released that year, but I like diverse genres on albums.

I think it hurts him across the board, at least when it comes to awards. He has trouble in pop and rock circles, and he has problems in R&B circles as well--because he's not true to a genre. He wouldn't be Prince if he were, and I probably wouldn't be posting on this forum that probably wouldn't exist--but he might have a few more statues on his mantle.

I also wonder how much he really was upset by that loss. What about that lyric (it was in some live thing he played for awhile--I don't remember which song) "I love u 2--but not the band." And then he'd repeat it, to make sure people got it (cuz it's just so clever).

*

Yes, Prince's eclectic nature is definitely why I'm a fan. And, how much he was upset by the loss is, as you know, anybody's guess. We have all learned that at any particular moment Prince definitely believes what he believes until he believes something else. I have never taken that as hypocrisy but as Prince being his natural experimental self, for lack of a better term. I don't think that Prince has ever held any real animosity against U2, and that they were just, at the moment, the best example for Prince of how he felt--probably still feels to a degree--that artists not as diverse as he is get rewarded more. And, of course, factor into this whole equation that Prince comes from the tradition of musical competition or battle of the bands, which can be very “lighthearted” to very “cut throat,” and people who don't realize that this is just one of those elements or aspects of Prince's background will be displeased or “rubbed the wrong” way because they may not dig or come from the whole musical competition background. So, I agree with Prince's general assertion, but I don't think that it is something about which he or U2 spend nights fuming, especially since Bono was quoted as saying: “These rock stars, they think they're authentic, and that Prince is not the real deal. But he has more soul in his little finger than a whole harbor full of them” or something to that effect. I hope I have that quote correct, but I'm sure someone will correct me if I don't.

1725topp said:

EddieC said:

I think it hurts him across the board, at least when it comes to awards. He has trouble in pop and rock circles, and he has problems in R&B circles as well--because he's not true to a genre. He wouldn't be Prince if he were, and I probably wouldn't be posting on this forum that probably wouldn't exist--but he might have a few more statues on his mantle.

I also wonder how much he really was upset by that loss. What about that lyric (it was in some live thing he played for awhile--I don't remember which song) "I love u 2--but not the band." And then he'd repeat it, to make sure people got it (cuz it's just so clever).

*

Yes, Prince's eclectic nature is definitely why I'm a fan. And, how much he was upset by the loss is, as you know, anybody's guess. We have all learned that at any particular moment Prince definitely believes what he believes until he believes something else. I have never taken that as hypocrisy but as Prince being his natural experimental self, for lack of a better term. I don't think that Prince has ever held any real animosity against U2, and that they were just, at the moment, the best example for Prince of how he felt--probably still feels to a degree--that artists not as diverse as he is get rewarded more. And, of course, factor into this whole equation that Prince comes from the tradition of musical competition or battle of the bands, which can be very “lighthearted” to very “cut throat,” and people who don't realize that this is just one of those elements or aspects of Prince's background will be displeased or “rubbed the wrong” way because they may not dig or come from the whole musical competition background. So, I agree with Prince's general assertion, but I don't think that it is something about which he or U2 spend nights fuming, especially since Bono was quoted as saying: “These rock stars, they think they're authentic, and that Prince is not the real deal. But he has more soul in his little finger than a whole harbor full of them” or something to that effect. I hope I have that quote correct, but I'm sure someone will correct me if I don't.

Yeah, I doubt he loses any sleep over it--probably should have put a smiley on it.

I agree that he should have won in stead of U2. SOTT was way out of U2's league.

ufoclub said:

databank said:

I think u may b extrapolating about The Cross having been composed b4 July 1986, because Per Nielsen's research is really comprehensive when it comes 2 anything recorded in the early years, but who knows? I'm not sure about that theory altogether because P saying "I played The Cross when I was young" would imply he played it live or something, not only composed it, + this song is really mature compared to Prince's early lyrics. + the Rolling Stone reporter HAD 2 b familiar with SOTT, therefore it's odd that he's miss that and think "The Cross" means "La Crosse". But nonetheless u may b correct, who knows??? It's really odd this interview, with no less that THREE possible interpretations :s

I think Prince really means that he came up with the idea of The Cross very early on, and from the structure of the song, which is very simple and not unlike a "The Doors" vibe (and I think the lyrics are quite charmingly surface level, naively poetic and religious with no spin or underlying meaning), I'd believe a bright eyed, posturing youngster would come up with these lyrics and this simple two chord rock song that builds in a very predictable way.

Per Nielsen still is only relying on accounts outside of Prince himself, and I know that all that type of production and conceptual history can be very inaccurate and incomplete (even recording session notes)... even if it was straight from the source: Prince.

I know that for example Per Nielsen's brief entry of the aftershow Ocean Club activities of Prince for the Houston Lovesexy show are not really accurate. I think this kind of blurring and factual error potentially happens for ALL the entries in his book.

I think you need at least three sources for an event to paint a somewhat accurate picture.

I wish we had a third source for Prince's meeting with Sinead!

Hmm. Now that I think about it, if the writer mistook Prince's saying "I played The Cross..." as "I played La Crosse" it could be that the "growing up" part that got printed was also a misinterpretation. Let's not forget that Prince doesn't allow journalists to record interviews or even take notes, so they have to rely on memory. It could be that most of what got quoted and made it to print in that sentence is inaccurate.

PicassoFace said:

ufoclub said:

I think Prince really means that he came up with the idea of The Cross very early on, and from the structure of the song, which is very simple and not unlike a "The Doors" vibe (and I think the lyrics are quite charmingly surface level, naively poetic and religious with no spin or underlying meaning), I'd believe a bright eyed, posturing youngster would come up with these lyrics and this simple two chord rock song that builds in a very predictable way.

Per Nielsen still is only relying on accounts outside of Prince himself, and I know that all that type of production and conceptual history can be very inaccurate and incomplete (even recording session notes)... even if it was straight from the source: Prince.

I know that for example Per Nielsen's brief entry of the aftershow Ocean Club activities of Prince for the Houston Lovesexy show are not really accurate. I think this kind of blurring and factual error potentially happens for ALL the entries in his book.

I think you need at least three sources for an event to paint a somewhat accurate picture.

I wish we had a third source for Prince's meeting with Sinead!

Hmm. Now that I think about it, if the writer mistook Prince's saying "I played The Cross..." as "I played La Crosse" it could be that the "growing up" part that got printed was also a misinterpretation. Let's not forget that Prince doesn't allow journalists to record interviews or even take notes, so they have to rely on memory. It could be that most of what got quoted and made it to print in that sentence is inaccurate.

I too think that Prince said, "I played "The Cross"..." Even for a Twin Cities guy, Lacrosse Wisconsin is a pretty obscure reference. It doesn't directly coorelate to mean "rock music."

skywalker said:

PicassoFace said:

Hmm. Now that I think about it, if the writer mistook Prince's saying "I played The Cross..." as "I played La Crosse" it could be that the "growing up" part that got printed was also a misinterpretation. Let's not forget that Prince doesn't allow journalists to record interviews or even take notes, so they have to rely on memory. It could be that most of what got quoted and made it to print in that sentence is inaccurate.

I too think that Prince said, "I played "The Cross"..." Even for a Twin Cities guy, Lacrosse Wisconsin is a pretty obscure reference. It doesn't directly coorelate to mean "rock music."

This has got to be the dumbest thread on this board. If you listen to the whole interview he is talking about La Crosse Wisconsin and being able to perform in front of white audiences during pop and rock music. I honestly wonder about some of you.

[Edited 10/7/13 6:36am]