In 1971 W.E. Cross offered a psychological model for what he called "negressence"--the process by which someone "comes into the consciousness" of being black.

Even though the study specifically discusses how someone comes into their "blackness," the four phases of the process seem retain their coherence when discussing other forms of conversion as well.

Here are the four phases:

1. Pre-encounter: This is when the person is pretty much oblivious to any issues having to do with race. They haven't had any reason to think about it at all. (For many black folk, their childhood is mostly preencounter--no drama everything is all good.)

2. Encounter: This is the trigger event or incident that shocks the person into reconsider what they had taken for granted during the pre-encounter phase. (This is that incident: somebody calls you the "N" word or something worse that triggers in your the realization that you're gonna have to deal with shit because of "race.")

3. Immersion-Emersion: As a result of the encounter, the person retreats into their racial identity and immerses themselves in everything Black--history, culture, etc.--to insulate themselves from the attacks coming from the outside world. After immersion, the person them emerges from that process better equipped to handle encounter type situations.

4. Internal Commitment/Integration: The person is now committed to their self-health and their community's self-worth... and has integrated "blackness" into their everyday life for a more balanced approach.

If we look at these phases we could look at religious conversion in a similar way:

1. Pre-encounter (self explanatory) P just doing whatever

2. Encounter - the trauma of 1996 re: his family which caused him to search for spiritual answers

3. Immersion/Emersion - in his excitement for what he found in an answer to his spiritual quest, he immersed himself in everything about that tradition; every chance he had he told us about it. Stauros, the interviews, etc. The zealot mode.

4. Internal Commitment/Intergration: I think P has emerged from that zealot phase and while he has a strong personal commitment, it's internalized and more integrated for a better balance in expression. At the celebration last year, Larry's presence was appropriate; the preaching was minimal, and even in the videocam comments that were broadcast nightly, P allowed for diverse comments to be expressed when folk talked about their (dis)belief in God. This plus, P hosting luminaries like Cornel West and Michael Eric Dyson--who are both are committed Christians but are as pluralistic as can be railing against dogmatism and xenophobia-- I took as a positive sign that Prince had arrived at this phase.

One thing W.E. Cross points out is that this not a linear process but is cyclical, with people going through it over and over again on different levels and to different degrees.

The same analysis could apply to P's awakening racial/political consciousness as well (with the "slave" era reflecting immersion/emersion after the encounter being the dispute with WB) or other spiritual rebirths (with the "Black Album"/Ingrid Chavez/E trip being an encounter that sends him into a spiritual immersion/emersion with Lovesexy) etc.

Excellent ideas as usual. But you forgot an important factor. Prince wants a cult

rdhull said:

He has a following no doubt. But I haven't seen sure fire signs that he wants a cult in the purest sense.

Generally speaking, he's had a cult ever since back in the day. But like religious type cult? Naaah.

NuPwrSoul said:

The cult of purple

speaking of Cult, I wish he would cover Love Removal Machine..that shit would be bad-AZZ!

If you also look at many of his songs, a lot of them have an essence of being in the "End Times" even before his conversion to JW. And with his Christianity background, it really is not much of a surprise that he converted to JW.

buist said:

"cant run from revelation no"-1999

NuPwr, I think you've just contributed more insight into Prince than any 100 threads on the topic.

Prince appears to have changed a good deal since the height of his most recent immersion phase, that passionate study phase that nearly always turns evangelistic and extremist to some degree (see Prince’s countless interviews of the late 90s and the so-called “listening” sessions for “TRC” nearly 2 years ago). But as time passes more rational heads usually start separating the personal truth from the fundamentalism.

Prince and Larry Graham are very different people, even though at the height of Prince’s proselytizing they may have appeared one in the same. Larry Graham is an extremist personality type. When he was “bad” he was really out there and when he “converted” he was just as extreme and overzealous in his new “good” realm.

Prince is a much more balanced individual, with many more shades of gray to his intellect. His very artistic brain might be quite open to bouts of charismatic soul searching and dramatic change, but I doubt he’ll ever take up residence permanently in any one doctrine. He has the type of personality that appears to move from one life-changing event to the next, moving on when he’s strengthened and has squeezed out all the knowledge that he can.

Larry, on the other hand, without help is probably either stuck where he’s at or he's back to the other end of the spectrum where he started. For millions of people like Larry Graham, it truly is either the bible or the vile, endlessly trying to get to the bottom of one or the other.



---
[This message was edited Sat Apr 12 0:26:54 PDT 2003 by Brendan]

Brendan said:

Would this account for his temporamental nature - sometimes a disappointment to fans that expect him to finish one idea, when he just wants to work on the next?

Brendan said:

Phew! Thanks man. I thought this post was gonna die a quick death... Yall rescued it so it wasn't just RD & me

And I agree totally with you. Someone as creative and artist as P, by nature of being so creative has to be open in order to receive the gift of creation. When you close your mind, it begins to shut down and I have always suspected that P has entirely too much artistic energy to suffer that fate.

Even if he goes deeper into his spiritual beliefs they will interact with him in a different way than it has with others. TRC is a hopeful sign of that. It represents his attempt to regain balance after having his world rocked by spiritual epiphanies... and after some awkward attempts to try to be the "old Prince" in a new wineskin (Rave and High).

Anji said:

Yeah!

interesting! much love Nu...it's too early in the morning for me to respond but I'll return with a response.

Interesting thread, and topic is deep - cool

rdhull said:

Very good thread this so sorry for lowering the tone!

i never new what he said in that 1999 line, now i do.Interesting.

NPS

that applies to Jimi Hendrix in even Less time what is your point exactly? Hendrix went through so much in even less time.Hippies/Black Panther Follower,Europe/America.and a Even Better Comtempary Person for that Piece IMHO is:2Pac.but you know I'm gonna get Flammed because I don't follow the party so Fire Away!! Hendrix&2Pac.

mistermaxxx said:

My point? That R, Kelly is a pisser.



Nah seriously, I already said it's a psychological MODEL. Guess what models are used for? They have applicability to more than one instance! No one ever said this was exclusively for Prince.

The model, if you even read the post, was developed in 1971 so OF COURSE this was not developed to explain Prince. And OF COURSE this can apply to others who have gone through life changes.

*MY* point was to offer people a conceptual framework that could explain Prince's zealous embrace and proselytizing of a set of beliefs, since many are trying to figure out what's going on.

Now, what's YOUR point exactly?

NuPwrSoul said:

Another Cheap Shot on R.Kelly but Hey Haters Need Work for cheap Laughs Huh? anyway I Applaud your Brain but Come On Brother Man Prince don't think like that Man? Musically He took what He saw,had a Tv Set&watched that&then His Surroundings reflected a Diverse Population so the Cat has a Memmory like a Elephant&Manipulates all of those Elements from the past to the Present&then you get some of that.I think it's interesting you wanna have a Soul to Soul Mental Conversation on Prince.Prince used the SLy Stone,Jimi Hendrix,Little Richard,James Brown,Motown Model&that was embracing both Cultures&visions of the World.

mistermaxxx said:

Oh man get over the R Kelly thing. It was a joke.

Now as far as Prince embracing both cultures... I think you really missed what I was saying. The main point I was using the psych model was to explain his RELIGIOUS conversion to suggest that he has worked through the zealous mode that makes people so uncomfortable. Very few people linger in the immersion/emersion phase, and he has already shown signs of a more balanced approach to spirituality.

All your references to Hendrix, Stone, Brown, and "embracing both cultures" suggests that you are stuck on the race-basis for the model, which in my post I indicated I was borrowing to explain his religious conversion. Not musical style or racial identity (although I think as far as racial politics I think this model has a bit of universal applicabiity).

NuPwrSoul said:

didn't find the R.Kelly thing Funny.but that's another time.Little Richard Converted as well&where does He stand with it?Prince was More Balanced back in the Day with His take on Sexual&spritual Elements.but He ain't the Only JW.Michael Jackson 20 years ago wasn't throwing His Beliefs of being a JW at People&Neither has George Benson among others.I think now He is still fishing for Religion&as long as He is tied to the Music Industry it's another Phase IMHO.Sam Cooke,Marvin Gaye,R.Kelly all have that struggle with Religion&Sexual Prince as well but nobody cares what they say on it because you gotta find yourself when it's all said&done.so I Ask you has Prince truly found Himself or is this another Episode??

mistermaxxx said:

I would agree with W.E. Cross that the model is not linear. There is no beginning and end point, cuz it goes in cycles.

It's pretty much, find something new to you, get all excited and in depth about it while telling everyone that you have found THE TRUTH, and then incorporating it into your life. It becomes less of a novelty and loses that initial excitement but it has also become part of your life so you haven't walked away from it. Then something else comes along...

P has cycled through this several times (as have all those you listed I'm sure)... whether it be stumbling upon a new set of beliefs (the Egyptian thing, the Reincarnation thing, etc. all of which he has retained elements of in future cyclings), new musical styles, etc.

The initial encounter and immersion is awkward and contrived for anyone cuz it's new to them. But once they got it balanced out it comes more naturally.

I would say that "Dirty Mind" represents his encounter/immersion in sex/new wave/punk... looking back--and this is probably what awed his critics--some of that was a bit contrived. I mean songs like "Sister" and "Head" are clear attempts at shock and awe. By the time "Purple Rain" comes out, these elements are more naturally part of his work and personality.

"The Black Album" represents to me his encounter/immersion with the hip hop aesthetic that neither he nor many others expected to become what it would. He was always more skilled at encountering musical styles and that album remains one of his funk masterpieces for me. But the hip hop thing would be really awkward sounding all the way through the Game Boyz thing.

The "" album was his encounter/immersion in Arabesque culture and music via Mayte. That was a love song to her.

And so on.

I'm sure that we could look at other persons, musicians and otherwise, and see them cycling through this process as well... but I think it's useful to look at Prince through this as well in light of Alex Hahn's "Possessed" which offers his own psych theory to explain Prince (in the form of a linear rise and fall) which I don't think really illuminate the dynamics at play.

W. E. Cross's model may not be wholly applicable but I think it offers a good place to start. Prince for certain has drawn bits and pieces of his work and inspiration from others who have come before him, and he doesn't even deny this. But I think that his evolution as an artist has been less random than that of a postmodern patchwork sampler.

NuPwrSoul said:

Bingo you attached His Changings with His work&I Applaud How you did that.I Know that is what drew Me to the part of when I Questioned your reasoning&you just nailed it tying all things within Him as a Artist&things you felt.also Most Importantly the way you took on the "Black Album dealing with it as the unknown to Prince's Music Vocabualry&also how it affected Him not only as a Artist but also as a Person.but anyway to make a long story short I applaud you for taking it within the context of His words&How you used W.E. Cross in connection.Peace

NuPwrSoul said:

NPS...

your posts...

Intelligent, well thought out, relevant, meaningful,
inspiring, insightful, thought provoking posts..

here... right here on the Org???
thanx NPS


...thought ya knew!!...

NuPwr doing the heavy lifting as usual...

This is a little off-topic but as far the cult thing--Prince appears to be one of those people who are used to being right all the time, and they have the power to enforce that system. Bring the fams and you have a recipe for more of the same...

I wonder about Cross's notion of the "encounter" in the above description. He sees the "shock" that forms the awareness of blackness coming solely from outside the category of blackness, no? (use of the "N" word etc. Or is that your addition Nu?). So Cross sees "blackness" as preexisting and as something into which the individual emerges as the result of this shock and not as something culturally constructed? (I guess so since he uses the word "negressence" which suggests an essentialist view of race.)

But, couldn't the awareness of "blackness" (or whatever) come from the particular group (or culture) that has already formed, without the occasion of this external "shock"? In other words, couldn’t race also be culturally constructed? Does "blackness" need "whiteness" to come into being?

Also, despite what he says, it's hard to see this process as "cyclical." How would that work for something like "blackness"? (I see how it would work with religious conversion.)

I'm not sure I'm being clear here, but it strikes me that the encounter stage plays such an important role in Cross's theory and I wonder how psychological theories of behavior and cultural theories of behavior might be reconciled here.

Actually, your application of these steps to religious conversion sounds more convincing to me.

Anji said:

Bear in mind what I'm about to say is about ideas and principles.

I have made some music. One track to be precise. And I have run it past several people. Those people all said something different about how they would change it after listening to it. My point is this. When I listened to what other people were saying, I thought to myself, God, I'd better change that so so-and-so likes it...I'd better change this so so-and-so likes it. I learnt a valuable lesson which I think is simple, yet is easy to forget. That Prince just listens to himself and expresses himself. What ever he puts out, or whatever he doesn't finish is part of his expression and as he said in interview once, he doesn't see himself through other peoples eyes.

I really value his integrity and I'm glad that I've disliked some of his work. I'd feel weird enjoying everything about him, as I don't even feel that way about people I know personally!

Okay. Phew.

First of all, dag, my thread was all on the second page and what not. Lost in the sauce.

2the9s said:

The shock thing (use of the "N" word) was my example thrown in... It's been a while since I read Cross's work but Cross's work comes in the context of the black power movement and its impact on black scholars in the 70s so indeed it is very likely that the study embraced an essentialist notion of race.

That being said, I would say that Cross's model applies more specifically to "converting" to a specific ideology of blackness. Commonly regarded as blackness itself (in essentialist notions) or black consciousness, once examined more critically, it's really an ideology of being black, rather than being black in and of itself.



I think I understand what you're saying. But I would contend that an ideology of blackness or even "blackness" itself, as it is conceived in America is historically a response to the encounter of Africans living in America--taking into account how Africans arrived on these shores, the socio political economic system that they were inducted to, and the experience they had, positive and negative. In a kind of historical survey glance, it was in part one big "N" word experience.

Now much of this encounter experience is already embodied in black culture so that one does not have to experience the encounter outside of the group or culture. I used the "N" word example as a quick illustration. But the encounter was also slavery, rape, lynching, Jim Crow, KKK terrorists, cross burnings, as well as new language, new land, new technology, education and religion (no matter how whitewashed), and so forth and so on.

As such, one can grow up in the culture, and acquire the same values as though s/he had gone through the phases individually. But still, each individual is encountering within in this process leading to immersion/emersion.



Maybe cyclical is not the best word. Perhaps "spiral"?



It would seem that the encounter is crux of the model, as it is seen as the catalyst for the immersion/emersion. I don't know that it has to be so dramatic as a shocking thing. It can be as subtle as learning new information.

I have never spoken to a black person that has NOT had an encounter though. I have never read any biography of a black person that did not have an encounter. And that encounter shaped every last one of them. It may have been something small, like not being able to get a cab, or being followed in a store. But an encounter experience seems to be part and parcel of being black in America.

Everyone in the culture is not a zealot though, so everyone in the culture is not going through these phases spirally to reach higher and higher forms of ideological blackness. Some people go through it once and keep on stepping, albeit with a less intense expression of "blackness"/"black consciousness"/"black ideology." But, others may keep spiralling (after further and further encounters within and without their culture) for more intense senses of being.



I agree. But, like I said the model was developed at the height of the black power movement when folks were struggling to explain what was going on, and were using the language of racial essentialism to do so... so I forgive them, and refine Cross's model to refer to ideologies of blackness, rather than simply "blackness."

I just realized that what I wrote in response to Therapy's post should actually be another thread... so I started one for it here:

Is Prince being a "contro...an artist?
.
[This message was edited Sun Apr 13 5:29:22 PDT 2003 by NuPwrSoul]

NuPwrSoul said:

Yeah that's what it sounds like, and interesting for that reason.



If you are using "ideology" in the Marxist sense of the word to describe how a particular social group generalizes their own interests so that they appear to be universal (definition paraphrased from Richard Ohmann) then what does this do to the category of blackness? Or the ideology of blackness? I'm still having trouble bringing together the essentialist view and the cultural/ideological view.



Which would make it less applicable to the psychological model, if I am hearing you right. Although what you say next tries to bring them together.



Okay, so we've had psychology, cultural studies, ideology, now we have historical analysis thrown into the hopper too! And I've been out of my depth for a while... But actually I like this view that history does have a real impact on the culture existing today, even if we acknowledge "history" itself to be a site of contending discourses and not a monolithic "truth." Although it sounds like this impact is analogous and not identical to the original experience, no?



I wasn't denying these encounters, although even before I hit "post response" I was aware that my response could be seen as trying to diminish lived experience. But that was not my intent. It was just interesting to me to see how such a psychological model could be mapped onto what I was seeing as a cultural construct, and if there was any way to bring them together.

2the9's in the prince forum

rdhull said:

Shaddup!