independent and unofficial
Prince fan community site
Tue 15th Jan 2019 4:37pm
Welcome! Sign up or enter username and password to remember me
Forum jump
Forums > Music: Non-Prince > when Hynde/The Pretenders dissed Mike
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Page 1 of 2 12>
Reply   New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
Author

Tweet     Share

Message
Thread started 12/18/18 6:42pm

rdhull

avatar

when Hynde/The Pretenders dissed Mike

Hey baby
I want to know
How much
Did you get for your soul?
You had the gospel
When you were shackled to a tree
Now you've got your freedom
You sing for the money
Soul
Soul
Soul
Soul
How much did ya
How much did ya
How much did ya get?
Hey babe
Tell me please
How much
Did you get for that sleaze?
You finally made it
Right up to the top
Millions of kids are looking at you
You say "let them drink soda pop"
Soul
Soul
Soul
Soul
How much did ya
How much did ya
How much did ya get?
Who's got soul?
Who's got soul?
From the African nation
To the Pepsi generation
Who's got soul?
Who's got soul?
It dwell from tree to sea
Every living entity
Share the super soul
We got super soul
Who's got soul?
Who could think that you're for real -
A puppet in a cabaret
To increase your wealth
Baby realize yourself
Hey baby
I want to know
From the 'a-go-go' to the disco
Where did you really go?
You finally made it
You're gonna make it rich
As long as some poor bastard in Africa
Is lying in a ditch
Soul
Soul
Soul
Soul
How much did ya
How much did ya
How much did ya get?

[Edited 12/18/18 18:47pm]

Lost your keys? check princevault..lost your relationhip? check princevault..they have all the answers
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #1 posted 12/18/18 7:47pm

mynameisnotsus
an

Fuck her - she's an asshole bored
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #2 posted 12/18/18 7:55pm

rdhull

avatar

mynameisnotsusan said:

Fuck her - she's an asshole bored

lol

Lost your keys? check princevault..lost your relationhip? check princevault..they have all the answers
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #3 posted 12/20/18 1:09am

bboy87

avatar

You had the gospel
When you were shackled to a tree
Now you've got your freedom
You sing for the money

"We may deify or demonize them but not ignore them. And we call them genius, because they are the people who change the world."
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #4 posted 12/20/18 1:15am

SoulAlive

what was her issue with Michael? hmmm

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #5 posted 12/20/18 1:17am

bboy87

avatar

SoulAlive said:

what was her issue with Michael? hmmm

The song was directed at him and Lionel for selling out by doing commercials for Pepsi

https://www.nytimes.com/1986/11/19/arts/the-pop-life-pretenders-and-rock-s-direction.html

"We may deify or demonize them but not ignore them. And we call them genius, because they are the people who change the world."
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #6 posted 12/20/18 1:37am

SoulAlive

bboy87 said:

SoulAlive said:

what was her issue with Michael? hmmm

The song was directed at him and Lionel for selling out by doing commercials for Pepsi

https://www.nytimes.com/1986/11/19/arts/the-pop-life-pretenders-and-rock-s-direction.html

I never understood why some artists had a problem with this.It should be of no concern to Chrissy shrug

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #7 posted 12/23/18 5:00pm

SoulAlive

mynameisnotsusan said:

Fuck her - she's an asshole bored

biggrin

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #8 posted 12/24/18 10:44am

luvsexy4all

good song

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #9 posted 12/27/18 8:34am

namepeace

for this song, the P in Pretenders stands for "paternalist." To put it mildly.

Good night, sweet Prince | 7 June 1958 - 21 April 2016

Props will be withheld until the showing and proving has commenced. -- Aaron McGruder
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #10 posted 12/30/18 9:33pm

gandorb

A valid critique that applies to many more than just Michael. The stars have every right to advertise, but I never get it that people who make so much money already would pick products that are so unhealthy so they can make millions more. At least Michael did a lot of other positive things.

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #11 posted 01/02/19 4:46am

Hamad

avatar

Reeks of white privilidge/superiority, no matter how much I try to ignore it. And I'm a fan of The Pretenders.

Every saint has a past, and every sinner has a future...
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #12 posted 01/02/19 5:25am

jaawwnn

avatar

Hamad said:

Reeks of white privilidge/superiority, no matter how much I try to ignore it. And I'm a fan of The Pretenders.

LOL yeah sure, because MJ was really downtrodden in 1986.

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #13 posted 01/02/19 5:35am

Hamad

avatar

jaawwnn said:

Hamad said:

Reeks of white privilidge/superiority, no matter how much I try to ignore it. And I'm a fan of The Pretenders.

LOL yeah sure, because MJ was really downtrodden in 1986.

Missed the point my friend, but ok smile

Every saint has a past, and every sinner has a future...
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #14 posted 01/02/19 6:17am

jaawwnn

avatar

Hamad said:

jaawwnn said:

LOL yeah sure, because MJ was really downtrodden in 1986.

Missed the point my friend, but ok smile

welllll.... maybe I did, but if your point is that white privilege exists and a white person has it by virtue of being white then it's not much of a point. I'm sure Michael could take anything Chrissie Hynde was going to sling at him in 1986 but her song raises a point that's worth pondering. It doesn't make his music any less good, at least not for me.

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #15 posted 01/02/19 7:52am

Hamad

avatar

jaawwnn said:



Hamad said:




jaawwnn said:



LOL yeah sure, because MJ was really downtrodden in 1986.



Missed the point my friend, but ok smile



welllll.... maybe I did, but if your point is that white privilege exists and a white person has it by virtue of being white then it's not much of a point. I'm sure Michael could take anything Chrissie Hynde was going to sling at him in 1986 but her song raises a point that's worth pondering. It doesn't make his music any less good, at least not for me.



It’s not about Michael.
Every saint has a past, and every sinner has a future...
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #16 posted 01/02/19 11:13am

jaawwnn

avatar

Hamad said:

jaawwnn said:

welllll.... maybe I did, but if your point is that white privilege exists and a white person has it by virtue of being white then it's not much of a point. I'm sure Michael could take anything Chrissie Hynde was going to sling at him in 1986 but her song raises a point that's worth pondering. It doesn't make his music any less good, at least not for me.

It’s not about Michael.

Not specifically, no.

But it's not about giving out to someone who is just trying to pair their rent either.

[Edited 1/2/19 11:13am]

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #17 posted 01/02/19 11:23am

Nvncible1

avatar

bboy87 said:

You had the gospel
When you were shackled to a tree
Now you've got your freedom
You sing for the money

You Caught That Too?

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #18 posted 01/02/19 2:20pm

Hamad

avatar

jaawwnn said:



Hamad said:


jaawwnn said:


welllll.... maybe I did, but if your point is that white privilege exists and a white person has it by virtue of being white then it's not much of a point. I'm sure Michael could take anything Chrissie Hynde was going to sling at him in 1986 but her song raises a point that's worth pondering. It doesn't make his music any less good, at least not for me.



It’s not about Michael.

Not specifically, no.

But it's not about giving out to someone who is just trying to pair their rent either.

[Edited 1/2/19 11:13am]



Ok I don’t know what that means. But my initial point still stands, which is: the song & the message that the singer tried to convey reeks of white privilege.
Every saint has a past, and every sinner has a future...
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #19 posted 01/02/19 4:45pm

BobbyDrake

avatar

She tried to come for the King?

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #20 posted 01/02/19 6:45pm

purple05

Hamad said:

Reeks of white privilidge/superiority, no matter how much I try to ignore it. And I'm a fan of The Pretenders.


Looking back MJ ruffeled lots of feathers. I’m not sure why he got so much hate. Anyone else would’ve been praised but he receives backlash
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #21 posted 01/02/19 6:47pm

purple05

Nvncible1 said:



bboy87 said:



You had the gospel
When you were shackled to a tree
Now you've got your freedom
You sing for the money








You Caught That Too?


*speechless
[Edited 1/2/19 18:52pm]
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #22 posted 01/03/19 3:03am

jaawwnn

avatar

Hamad said:

jaawwnn said:

Not specifically, no.

But it's not about giving out to someone who is just trying to pair their rent either.

[Edited 1/2/19 11:13am]

Ok I don’t know what that means. But my initial point still stands, which is: the song & the message that the singer tried to convey reeks of white privilege.

How so? I don't see it and i'm sick of trying to guess what you mean by that incredibly general statement.

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #23 posted 01/03/19 5:09am

Hamad

avatar

jaawwnn said:



Hamad said:


jaawwnn said:


Not specifically, no.

But it's not about giving out to someone who is just trying to pair their rent either.


[Edited 1/2/19 11:13am]



Ok I don’t know what that means. But my initial point still stands, which is: the song & the message that the singer tried to convey reeks of white privilege.

How so? I don't see it and i'm sick of trying to guess what you mean by that incredibly general statement.



Negative. You were not trying to understand or see my point, you walked into the conversation with an already set view hence the sarcastic remark (The fact that MJ wasn’t downtrodden is neither here nor there because if you are a PERSON OF COLOR in the US, you will get faced with racism in some form or another, status notwithstanding). Now, let’s examine the lyrics for a minute, while the initial message was critical of consumerism & catering to capitalism. The artist decided to specifically chastise black artists in every verse using different distinct themes of that culture (whether it’s directed at MJ or Lionel is beside the point here). Singling out an artist from a specific racial group as opposed to a general statement addressing ALL artists, despite the fact that they were not the only artists who relied on advertisments for personal gain raises a few questions. There were many white artists of high stature & influence that endorsed products as well, how come they were not addressed? How come they didn’t have their roots questioned in such disrespectful fashion? How come they weren’t asked or even - as the lyric showed - falsely accused & shamed of exploiting “poor African bastards in a ditch”? How come their chase after the American Dream doesn’t get labeled as “money hungry”?

The condescending & self righteous overtones from the lyrics convey a subtle expectation that only black artists “who once were once shackled to a tree & had the gospel” are expected to only “sing” and therefore somehow shouldn’t attempt to venture out & make a living for themselves “now you’ve got freedom, you sing for the money”. As far as I’m concerned, the song should’ve been titled “Stay in your lane, Negros!” because thats exactly what I got from the lyrics. I hope that clarifies my point smile
Every saint has a past, and every sinner has a future...
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #24 posted 01/03/19 8:54am

purple05

Hamad said:

jaawwnn said:



Hamad said:


jaawwnn said:


Not specifically, no.

But it's not about giving out to someone who is just trying to pair their rent either.


[Edited 1/2/19 11:13am]



Ok I don’t know what that means. But my initial point still stands, which is: the song & the message that the singer tried to convey reeks of white privilege.

How so? I don't see it and i'm sick of trying to guess what you mean by that incredibly general statement.



Negative. You were not trying to understand or see my point, you walked into the conversation with an already set view hence the sarcastic remark (The fact that MJ wasn’t downtrodden is neither here nor there because if you are a PERSON OF COLOR in the US, you will get faced with racism in some form or another, status notwithstanding). Now, let’s examine the lyrics for a minute, while the initial message was critical of consumerism & catering to capitalism. The artist decided to specifically chastise black artists in every verse using different distinct themes of that culture (whether it’s directed at MJ or Lionel is beside the point here). Singling out an artist from a specific racial group as opposed to a general statement addressing ALL artists, despite the fact that they were not the only artists who relied on advertisments for personal gain raises a few questions. There were many white artists of high stature & influence that endorsed products as well, how come they were not addressed? How come they didn’t have their roots questioned in such disrespectful fashion? How come they weren’t asked or even - as the lyric showed - falsely accused & shamed of exploiting “poor African bastards in a ditch”? How come their chase after the American Dream doesn’t get labeled as “money hungry”?

The condescending & self righteous overtones from the lyrics convey a subtle expectation that only black artists “who once were once shackled to a tree & had the gospel” are expected to only “sing” and therefore somehow shouldn’t attempt to venture out & make a living for themselves “now you’ve got freedom, you sing for the money”. As far as I’m concerned, the song should’ve been titled “Stay in your lane, Negros!” because thats exactly what I got from the lyrics. I hope that clarifies my point smile

Thank you! That’s exactly what was being said. Many of those white artist couldn’t take how popular, successful and how much money black artist like Michael, Whitney and Lionel were making.
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #25 posted 01/03/19 2:03pm

jaawwnn

avatar

Hamad said:

jaawwnn said:



Hamad said:


jaawwnn said:


Not specifically, no.

But it's not about giving out to someone who is just trying to pair their rent either.


[Edited 1/2/19 11:13am]



Ok I don’t know what that means. But my initial point still stands, which is: the song & the message that the singer tried to convey reeks of white privilege.

How so? I don't see it and i'm sick of trying to guess what you mean by that incredibly general statement.



Negative. You were not trying to understand or see my point, you walked into the conversation with an already set view hence the sarcastic remark (The fact that MJ wasn’t downtrodden is neither here nor there because if you are a PERSON OF COLOR in the US, you will get faced with racism in some form or another, status notwithstanding). Now, let’s examine the lyrics for a minute, while the initial message was critical of consumerism & catering to capitalism. The artist decided to specifically chastise black artists in every verse using different distinct themes of that culture (whether it’s directed at MJ or Lionel is beside the point here). Singling out an artist from a specific racial group as opposed to a general statement addressing ALL artists, despite the fact that they were not the only artists who relied on advertisments for personal gain raises a few questions. There were many white artists of high stature & influence that endorsed products as well, how come they were not addressed? How come they didn’t have their roots questioned in such disrespectful fashion? How come they weren’t asked or even - as the lyric showed - falsely accused & shamed of exploiting “poor African bastards in a ditch”? How come their chase after the American Dream doesn’t get labeled as “money hungry”?

The condescending & self righteous overtones from the lyrics convey a subtle expectation that only black artists “who once were once shackled to a tree & had the gospel” are expected to only “sing” and therefore somehow shouldn’t attempt to venture out & make a living for themselves “now you’ve got freedom, you sing for the money”. As far as I’m concerned, the song should’ve been titled “Stay in your lane, Negros!” because thats exactly what I got from the lyrics. I hope that clarifies my point smile


Aha, interesting and well said! I dont think she's more exploring her own disappointment but its not exactly (White man) in Hammersmith Palais when it comes down to it lyrically, its clumsy stuff. And no, I wasn't wilfully misunderstanding you, i was just wondering what you were getting at.
[Edited 1/3/19 14:07pm]
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #26 posted 01/03/19 2:30pm

Hamad

avatar

jaawwnn said:

Hamad said:



Negative. You were not trying to understand or see my point, you walked into the conversation with an already set view hence the sarcastic remark (The fact that MJ wasn’t downtrodden is neither here nor there because if you are a PERSON OF COLOR in the US, you will get faced with racism in some form or another, status notwithstanding). Now, let’s examine the lyrics for a minute, while the initial message was critical of consumerism & catering to capitalism. The artist decided to specifically chastise black artists in every verse using different distinct themes of that culture (whether it’s directed at MJ or Lionel is beside the point here). Singling out an artist from a specific racial group as opposed to a general statement addressing ALL artists, despite the fact that they were not the only artists who relied on advertisments for personal gain raises a few questions. There were many white artists of high stature & influence that endorsed products as well, how come they were not addressed? How come they didn’t have their roots questioned in such disrespectful fashion? How come they weren’t asked or even - as the lyric showed - falsely accused & shamed of exploiting “poor African bastards in a ditch”? How come their chase after the American Dream doesn’t get labeled as “money hungry”?

The condescending & self righteous overtones from the lyrics convey a subtle expectation that only black artists “who once were once shackled to a tree & had the gospel” are expected to only “sing” and therefore somehow shouldn’t attempt to venture out & make a living for themselves “now you’ve got freedom, you sing for the money”. As far as I’m concerned, the song should’ve been titled “Stay in your lane, Negros!” because thats exactly what I got from the lyrics. I hope that clarifies my point smile


Aha, interesting and well said! I dont think she's more exploring her own disappointment but its not exactly (White man) in Hammersmith Palais when it comes down to it lyrically, its clumsy stuff. And no, I wasn't wilfully misunderstanding you, i was just wondering what you were getting at.
[Edited 1/3/19 14:07pm]


No worries, it’s the virtual world & communications can potentially suffer breakdown. Like I said, I’m a fan of The Pretenders but the fact that it is clumsy (like you pointed out), callous & most importantly false, kinda prove my gut feeling that it is stemmed from white privilege, because they simply can get away with it and sometimes even benefit from it. Had they ever been addressed about the song? If so, then not strong enough. For argument sake, let’s say the target subject in the song was Barbara Streisand & she somehow did a Pepsi commercial? Would it fly easily had she been reminded of the holocaust or the history behind Jews’ tribulations in the same strong judgemental language of the initial song? Could they afford being clumsy? Hell, would they even have a career after that? Lol something to think about.

I don’t know, the so-called self righteous “selling out” argument leaves such a bad taste on my mouth because it has always been historically selective and 9 times out of 10, it’s usually artists of color who happen to be at the receiving end of it, having to prove their integrity when they don’t have to. On top of co-existing in an already unforgiving & racist industry.
[Edited 1/3/19 14:39pm]
Every saint has a past, and every sinner has a future...
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #27 posted 01/03/19 3:06pm

jaawwnn

avatar

Hamad said:

jNo worries, it’s the virtual world & communications can potentially suffer breakdown. Like I said, I’m a fan of The Pretenders but the fact that it is clumsy (like you pointed out), callous & most importantly false, kinda prove my gut feeling that it is stemmed from white privilege, because they simply can get away with it and sometimes even benefit from it. Had they ever been addressed about the song? If so, then not strong enough. For argument sake, let’s say the target subject in the song was Barbara Streisand & she somehow did a Pepsi commercial? Would it fly easily had she been reminded of the holocaust or the history behind Jews’ tribulations in the same strong judgemental language of the initial song? Could they afford being clumsy? Hell, would they even have a career after that? Lol something to think about.

I suppose i'm sympathetic to Chrissie Hynes because read any interview with her and she's mostly pissed off at anyone who makes rock and roll music who doesn't live like a rebel; she's not a theorist and I wouldn't want her to be. She was in trouble a few years back as well for saying something about women who dress in a certain way are asking for it. More clumsiness, but at least that one wasn't in song. Honestly, I wouldn't put it past her to write that Barbara Streisand song but I take your point, her career can and has survived these things.


I don’t know, the so-called self righteous “selling out” argument leaves such a bad taste on my mouth because it has always been historically selective and 9 times out of 10, it’s usually artists of color who happen to be at the receiving end of it, having to prove their integrity when they don’t have to. On top of co-existing in an already unforgiving & racist industry. [Edited 1/3/19 14:39pm]


Well i'll say i'm instinctively on her side because it does bug me when an artist sells out, and yeah taking the cash when you don't need it is selling out in my eyes. I didn't like when the Clash were used to sell jeans and I don't like when Prince is used to sell Capital One Credit. That's just me though. Besides, I still listen to all of them.

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #28 posted 01/03/19 9:12pm

gandorb

jaawwnn said:

Hamad said:

jNo worries, it’s the virtual world & communications can potentially suffer breakdown. Like I said, I’m a fan of The Pretenders but the fact that it is clumsy (like you pointed out), callous & most importantly false, kinda prove my gut feeling that it is stemmed from white privilege, because they simply can get away with it and sometimes even benefit from it. Had they ever been addressed about the song? If so, then not strong enough. For argument sake, let’s say the target subject in the song was Barbara Streisand & she somehow did a Pepsi commercial? Would it fly easily had she been reminded of the holocaust or the history behind Jews’ tribulations in the same strong judgemental language of the initial song? Could they afford being clumsy? Hell, would they even have a career after that? Lol something to think about.

I suppose i'm sympathetic to Chrissie Hynes because read any interview with her and she's mostly pissed off at anyone who makes rock and roll music who doesn't live like a rebel; she's not a theorist and I wouldn't want her to be. She was in trouble a few years back as well for saying something about women who dress in a certain way are asking for it. More clumsiness, but at least that one wasn't in song. Honestly, I wouldn't put it past her to write that Barbara Streisand song but I take your point, her career can and has survived these things.


I don’t know, the so-called self righteous “selling out” argument leaves such a bad taste on my mouth because it has always been historically selective and 9 times out of 10, it’s usually artists of color who happen to be at the receiving end of it, having to prove their integrity when they don’t have to. On top of co-existing in an already unforgiving & racist industry. [Edited 1/3/19 14:39pm]


Well i'll say i'm instinctively on her side because it does bug me when an artist sells out, and yeah taking the cash when you don't need it is selling out in my eyes. I didn't like when the Clash were used to sell jeans and I don't like when Prince is used to sell Capital One Credit. That's just me though. Besides, I still listen to all of them.

Chrissie has a long history of taking a rather self-righteous stance when dishing about popular music, other artists, and trends regardless of the race. Part of me rolls an eye when she does it but then another part of me respects that she is one of the few artists who seems to at least cares about selling out.

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #29 posted 01/08/19 9:12pm

Tontoman22

BobbyDrake said:

She tried to come for the King?

He was no KING in 1986 !

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Page 1 of 2 12>
Reply   New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Forums > Music: Non-Prince > when Hynde/The Pretenders dissed Mike