CAL3 said:

Purplestar88 said:

So are you saying Prince could not play jazz? I think Prince could play jazz.

.

I think he could play an approximation of jazz - more along the lines of "smooth jazz." Which isn't necessarily a bad thing, by any means. His instrumental "jazz-oriented" work lacks the harmonic complexity of actual jazz.

Interesting. I would have to disagree.

Noodled24 said:

Purplestar88 said:

Alan isn't releasing albums, or going on tour. What exactly is it you want to criticize him for? Because he said something about Prince you don't agree with?

[Edited 11/1/16 7:31am]

His statements/actions can be criticized just like anyone else. If Prince made a statement people criticize it, Alan is no different than Prince or anyone else.

wonder505 said:

Noodled24 said:

You're not criticizing something he said. No. What you've done here, is take offense to something he said. then attempted to discredit him, and questioned his credibility as a voice on Prince, despite the fact he (and his brother Eric) spent a long time with Prince.

If you simply disagreed with him you'd start a thread about how great the SNL performance was, and how totally wrong Alan was. (Although, the sound on the original broadcast wasn't great and he wasn't entirely wrong about the costumes not really doing Prince favours).

YOU are taking offense to my criticism of Alan by trying to take away MY RIGHT to discredit Alan. Twenty years has passed since Alan spoke to Prince so he has NO credibility to criticize to a performance and insinuate a "mixed agenda" as if he knows Prince's intention on performing the way he did. Some of us dug the costumes and I could debate Alan Leeds head on about it.

You have no inherent right to discredit anyone. You need factual information to do that. Of which you have none.

Ultimately, if Alan had gushed about what a great performance SNL was. You wouldn't now be questioning his credibility.

Purplestar88 said:

Noodled24 said:

Alan isn't releasing albums, or going on tour. What exactly is it you want to criticize him for? Because he said something about Prince you don't agree with?

[Edited 11/1/16 7:31am]

His statements/actions can be criticized just like anyone else. If Prince made a statement people criticize it, Alan is no different than Prince or anyone else.

Then criticize his statements.

But the theme of this thread is people attempting to discredit him as a source of information, because of what he said about SNL. It's ridiculous

TL;DR I understand why Bart is so harsh.

[Edited 11/1/16 11:55am]

Noodled24 said:

Purplestar88 said:

His statements/actions can be criticized just like anyone else. If Prince made a statement people criticize it, Alan is no different than Prince or anyone else.

Then criticize his statements.

But the theme of this thread is people attempting to discredit him as a source of information, because of what he said about SNL. It's ridiculous

TL;DR I understand why Bart is so harsh.

[Edited 11/1/16 11:55am]

No. I will criticize him anyway I feel to and discredit him where discredit is due. The theme of your thread is dont criticize Alan cuz he worked for Prince 20 years ago despite not being around to witness his musical and spiritual growth for the past two decades, and dammit its hurting my feelings!

Noodled24 said:

wonder505 said:

YOU are taking offense to my criticism of Alan by trying to take away MY RIGHT to discredit Alan. Twenty years has passed since Alan spoke to Prince so he has NO credibility to criticize to a performance and insinuate a "mixed agenda" as if he knows Prince's intention on performing the way he did. Some of us dug the costumes and I could debate Alan Leeds head on about it.

You have no inherent right to discredit anyone. You need factual information to do that. Of which you have none.

Ultimately, if Alan had gushed about what a great performance SNL was. You wouldn't now be questioning his credibility.

Yes I do. FACTUALLY Alan has not been around Prince the past two decades to speak on any "mixed agenda" that is supposedly projected or to beat down on Prince's musical growth.

And I'm quite sure if Prince dissed the shit out of Alan you would be up in arms so back at you.

wonder505 said:

Noodled24 said:

Then criticize his statements.

But the theme of this thread is people attempting to discredit him as a source of information, because of what he said about SNL. It's ridiculous

TL;DR I understand why Bart is so harsh.

[Edited 11/1/16 11:55am]

No. I will criticize him anyway I feel to and discredit him where discredit is due. The theme of your thread is dont criticize Alan cuz he worked for Prince 20 years ago despite not being around to witness his musical and spiritual growth for the past two decades, and dammit its hurting my feelings!

There you go making things up again. I said was he's a credible voice to talk about Prince because he worked for him 20 years ago.

Noodled24 said:

wonder505 said:

No. I will criticize him anyway I feel to and discredit him where discredit is due. The theme of your thread is dont criticize Alan cuz he worked for Prince 20 years ago despite not being around to witness his musical and spiritual growth for the past two decades, and dammit its hurting my feelings!

There you go making things up again. I said was he's a credible voice to talk about Prince because he worked for him 20 years ago.

And I'm saying he's not credible of Prince's current abilities just because he worked with Prince 20 years ago.

[Edited 11/1/16 12:18pm]

wonder505 said:

Noodled24 said:

You have no inherent right to discredit anyone. You need factual information to do that. Of which you have none.

Ultimately, if Alan had gushed about what a great performance SNL was. You wouldn't now be questioning his credibility.

Yes I do. FACTUALLY Alan has not been around Prince the past two decades to speak on any "mixed agenda" that is supposedly projected or to beat down on Prince's musical growth.

Was he promoting AOA? or 3EG?.. or Lianne La Havas? Usually the host would introduce the Performer(s) and the song. But Prince ran through a medly, no song titles were mentioned and neither were 3EG or Lianne. I think that's what he ment by mixed agendas.

And I'm quite sure if Prince dissed the shit out of Alan you would be up in arms so back at you.

I'm a Prince fan.

wonder505 said:

Noodled24 said:

There you go making things up again. I said was he's a credible voice to talk about Prince because he worked for him 20 years ago.

And I'm saying he's not credible of Prince's current abilities just because he worked with Prince 20 years ago.

[Edited 11/1/16 12:18pm]

And who are you to make that call? What on earth would make you more credible than Alan Leeds?

Noodled24 said:

wonder505 said:

And I'm saying he's not credible of Prince's current abilities just because he worked with Prince 20 years ago.

[Edited 11/1/16 12:18pm]

And who are you to make that call? What on earth would make you more credible than Alan Leeds?

And who are you to tell me I can't? I never said I was more credible than anybody. I just know that in 20 years people grow and should not be judged on what they knew of someone when they were in their 20's.

Noodled24 said:

wonder505 said:

Was he promoting AOA? or 3EG?.. or Lianne La Havas? Usually the host would introduce the Performer(s) and the song. But Prince ran through a medly, no song titles were mentioned and neither were 3EG or Lianne. I think that's what he ment by mixed agendas.

And I'm quite sure if Prince dissed the shit out of Alan you would be up in arms so back at you.

I'm a Prince fan.

Nah, you're an "Alan Leeds Manager of the Prince glory days" type of fan. I have no issues with that specific assessment if that is what Alan intended to mean, if he had articulated himself more clearly, but his statement came off as more than that, negatively, grudgefully, as "Prince look at the shameful musician/performer you have become, you needed to do what I told you to do 20 years ago". I as a fan face to face with Alan would debate him on that because despite the "costumes" or "bells and whistle" of that ONE performance, it was just a small part of the success going on at the time with AOA and his shows around that time, which Alan has chosen not to speak on (if he has someone can correct me on it).

[Edited 11/1/16 13:34pm]

purplerabbithole said:

a grudge against the man is different than a grudge against his talent. Leeds knows Prince is talented. No one said otherwise. I actually liked Leeds when he did a Q and A on Prince in 2013. He seemed objective and relatively fair. But then I thought about it---how good of a source is someone who knew him 30 years ago. I can't remember much about my friends from high school and I am only in my early 40's. Obviously, he has mixed feelings about Prince--which I get. But he seemed to be in a pretty pissed off mood after that 2014 SNL performance and calling him on it seems fair to me.

jaawwnn said:

Not really.

Alan doesn't speak for things he wasn't there for, he doesn't "pass judgement" like you won't be allowed buy a Prince album if Alan doesn't like it. Please provide some evidence that Alan is lying and taking credit for things he didn't do as is strongly implied by that post.

I have never seen any evidence of a grudge; people ask his opinion, he gives it. As well as being critical he has also consistently praised Prince's work. For example, even at his most critical of Prince in that Q&A thread he said the following of prince's new music:

I have no doubt that he can still stumble on a brilliant new song in his sleep. His effortless command of the stage and awesomely rich catalogue will always lure ticket buyers into any venue he chooses to visit. We music fans will always be richer for his presence.

God, I know right, such bitterness, what a grudge. SHAKING MY HEAD.

Again, good points Purplerabbithole.

LOL @ jaawwnn trying to use one left-handed compliment for cover.

purplerabbithole said:

Leeds comments about the 2014 performance were the worst kind of non-constructive criticism. I was an English major in college and a huge film geek. Pardon the grammatical errors and slight tangents--its late, my thoughts are whirring, and I am tired)..but I hate this kind of weak criticism.

My grandmother used to say "If you have nothing nice to say then say nothing at all". I usually agree with that. But unsolicted opinions deserve responses. Unless his opinion was asked for or he was a professional music critic, then why does he even have to post an unsolicited opinion. If he is going to do something like that, than why can't we call him on it for being a spiteful critic, for giving what is essentially a bitchy Rex Reed like version of criticism. I hate when criticism is not constructive.

His BS criticism and his temper tantrum/grudge about a comment Prince stated 20 years ago that may have only meant that Prince didn't want to look normal reflects worse on him than it did on Prince (in fact, he mentioned that Prince comment in another source as well). Move on. Prince at least only made fun of his clothes between the two of them. Leeds went to social media (twice) and ripped him a new asshole 20 years later for a trash talking comment not uncommon amongst men.

For one, Ms.. Smith enjoyed Prince's cover of her song. For two, people Prince respects have covered HIS music and Leeds damn well knows that to be a fact. Third, fake concerns over Prince's clothes are trivial after the fact here. If the rest of the public didn't care (hell, they are used to it) why should he? No one walked away from that acclaimed performance, saying "gee, I would have listened to that performance but I couldn't get past those gawdy clothes". Fourth, he actually criticized Prince for underutilizing a talented singer. Damn, I thought it was a Prince performance. He had 8 fucking minutes of time to do his gig. What is he going to do--give a whole song to this woman? It would be a bit like when Marlon Brando sent in that native American women to collect his Oscar. They lashed out at her because Brando didn't show.Did he criticize Prince for not giving Wendy and Lisa constant solos when he was in command? Of course not. Fifth, yes he is not Alice Smith (whatever that is supposed to mean--be specific Leeds, if you think her original version is better than explain why). Respect Prince enough to actually give his music a chance and examine the actual original songs featured in this performance and on his album (instead of clocking how much time was given to the women featured in the album or on stage). And do these women need Leeds defense--give me a break? Mixed agenda?--is he trying to determine Prince's motives by watching an 8 minute performance (talk about hyperbolic overreacting). Its funny how he spends all his time bitching about what he thinks Prince left out of the overall performance, his clothes, and the amount of time he gave to the female guest appearances, but never explains what is actually wrong with Prince's performance..(was his singing uninspired, were his guitar skills lacking, were his lyrics ridiculous or was it just that Prince wasn't with the Revolution and his brother anymore?) Leeds comes off reactionary and not as cool as he thinks he is.

Back to my disdain of non-constructive criticism. I remember a review for the Jolie film "A mighty heart" in which a critic spent the whole time bitching about Jolie's high profile adoptions. I remember Rex Reeds many spiteful reviews of films in which he obviously had no objectivity or suspension of disbelief (stating before reviewing a Christopher Nolan that he had a general hatred for Nolan, making fun of Kidman's forehead before reviewing a film of hers) this BS pisses me off and directed at Prince for a solid performance (because of personal reasons) it pisses me off even more.

I don't think Leeds is totally wrong about Prince's clothing. Don't get me wrong. IN general, he may have a point about flashiness overshadowing the music, but when the music is right there right in front of you, how can one say that it is overshadowed. He does think Prince is talented and may even care for him in his own way, but he is being spiteful here and he sucks at musical criticism--like he is more interested in satorical choices and petty swipes than actual constructive musical criticism.

wonder505 said:

Nah, you're an "Alan Leeds Manager of the Prince glory days" type of fan.

Am I.

I have no issues with that specific assessment if that is what Alan intended to mean, if he had articulated himself more clearly, but his statement came off as more than that, negatively, grudgefully, as "Prince look at the shameful musician/performer you have become, you needed to do what I told you to do 20 years ago". I as a fan face to face with Alan would debate him on that because despite the "costumes" or "bells and whistle" of that ONE performance, it was just a small part of the success going on at the time with AOA and his shows around that time, which Alan has chosen not to speak on (if he has someone can correct me on it).

The bit in bold. You appear to be quoting Alan, but actually you've just made up your own statement. Alan doesn't use the word shameful does he? You've just made it up?

Noodled24 said:

wonder505 said:

Nah, you're an "Alan Leeds Manager of the Prince glory days" type of fan.

Am I.

The bit in bold. You appear to be quoting Alan, but actually you've just made up your own statement. Alan doesn't use the word shameful does he? You've just made it up?


You're right. Grammatically I should have put italics or spell it out as my own interpretation. And he did used the word "shame." Doesnt change my assessment of his comments though and how it was perceived, in the grand scheme of what he said and what was happening at the time of the SNL performance.

[Edited 11/1/16 14:29pm]

wonder505 said:

No. I will criticize him anyway I feel to and discredit him where discredit is due. The theme of your thread is dont criticize Alan cuz he worked for Prince 20 years ago despite not being around to witness his musical and spiritual growth for the past two decades, and dammit its hurting my feelings!

Exactly.

Everybody has their pet associate that they think is above reproach, which is a load of bull.

babynoz said:

wonder505 said:

No. I will criticize him anyway I feel to and discredit him where discredit is due. The theme of your thread is dont criticize Alan cuz he worked for Prince 20 years ago despite not being around to witness his musical and spiritual growth for the past two decades, and dammit its hurting my feelings!

Exactly.

Everybody has their pet associate that they think is above reproach, which is a load of bull.

Yes, I dont get it. Actually I do get why, but not gonna go there here.

wonder505 said:

babynoz said:

Exactly.

Everybody has their pet associate that they think is above reproach, which is a load of bull.

Yes, I dont get it. Actually I do get why, but not gonna go there here.

I don't blame ya. It would only result in more tap dancing.

You can't draw parallels, can you? Its one sentence on Jolie. And my point (in referencing her film) is that constructive crititism should be more about the intrinsic value of the work itself and less about personal issues with the artist or peripheral issues not contained in the work (unless its the actual topic of the work--as in political music or films) . Leeds said nothing specific about Prince's actual musical performance. He spends his entire time dissing his clothes, his earlier behavior and a seemingly imagined mixed agenda in relation to women (all personal and peripheral issues). this is the definition of non-constructive criticism. I didn't see him state that other older musicians should all dress like himself or his brother. Keith Richards still dresses like a pirate. Look at George Clinton. He wouldn't dare to put those two down I imagine.

So, Prince didn't say the women's names (later in the thread, this is mentioned). He didn't talk at all or even stick around long enough to be a part of SNL's closing moments. Does he have to introduce his players everytime. Its a nice gesture but its not an obligation. If we bought his album, we would discover in the liner notes who his collaborators were.

Noodled24 said:

purplerabbithole said:

Leeds comments about the 2014 performance were the worst kind of non-constructive criticism. I was an English major in college and a huge film geek. Pardon the grammatical errors and slight tangents--its late, my thoughts are whirring, and I am tired)..but I hate this kind of weak criticism.

My grandmother used to say "If you have nothing nice to say then say nothing at all". I usually agree with that. But unsolicted opinions deserve responses. Unless his opinion was asked for or he was a professional music critic, then why does he even have to post an unsolicited opinion. If he is going to do something like that, than why can't we call him on it for being a spiteful critic, for giving what is essentially a bitchy Rex Reed like version of criticism. I hate when criticism is not constructive.

His BS criticism and his temper tantrum/grudge about a comment Prince stated 20 years ago that may have only meant that Prince didn't want to look normal reflects worse on him than it did on Prince (in fact, he mentioned that Prince comment in another source as well). Move on. Prince at least only made fun of his clothes between the two of them. Leeds went to social media (twice) and ripped him a new asshole 20 years later for a trash talking comment not uncommon amongst men.

For one, Ms.. Smith enjoyed Prince's cover of her song. For two, people Prince respects have covered HIS music and Leeds damn well knows that to be a fact. Third, fake concerns over Prince's clothes are trivial after the fact here. If the rest of the public didn't care (hell, they are used to it) why should he? No one walked away from that acclaimed performance, saying "gee, I would have listened to that performance but I couldn't get past those gawdy clothes". Fourth, he actually criticized Prince for underutilizing a talented singer. Damn, I thought it was a Prince performance. He had 8 fucking minutes of time to do his gig. What is he going to do--give a whole song to this woman? It would be a bit like when Marlon Brando sent in that native American women to collect his Oscar. They lashed out at her because Brando didn't show.Did he criticize Prince for not giving Wendy and Lisa constant solos when he was in command? Of course not. Fifth, yes he is not Alice Smith (whatever that is supposed to mean--be specific Leeds, if you think her original version is better than explain why). Respect Prince enough to actually give his music a chance and examine the actual original songs featured in this performance and on his album (instead of clocking how much time was given to the women featured in the album or on stage). And do these women need Leeds defense--give me a break? Mixed agenda?--is he trying to determine Prince's motives by watching an 8 minute performance (talk about hyperbolic overreacting). Its funny how he spends all his time bitching about what he thinks Prince left out of the overall performance, his clothes, and the amount of time he gave to the female guest appearances, but never explains what is actually wrong with Prince's performance..(was his singing uninspired, were his guitar skills lacking, were his lyrics ridiculous or was it just that Prince wasn't with the Revolution and his brother anymore?) Leeds comes off reactionary and not as cool as he thinks he is.

Back to my disdain of non-constructive criticism. I remember a review for the Jolie film "A mighty heart" in which a critic spent the whole time bitching about Jolie's high profile adoptions. I remember Rex Reeds many spiteful reviews of films in which he obviously had no objectivity or suspension of disbelief (stating before reviewing a Christopher Nolan that he had a general hatred for Nolan, making fun of Kidman's forehead before reviewing a film of hers) this BS pisses me off and directed at Prince for a solid performance (because of personal reasons) it pisses me off even more.

I don't think Leeds is totally wrong about Prince's clothing. Don't get me wrong. IN general, he may have a point about flashiness overshadowing the music, but when the music is right there right in front of you, how can one say that it is overshadowed. He does think Prince is talented and may even care for him in his own way, but he is being spiteful here and he sucks at musical criticism--like he is more interested in satorical choices and petty swipes than actual constructive musical criticism.

We're talking about Alan Leeds. That's an entire fucking paragraph on Jolie?

If you're goinng to post a wall of text keep it on topic.

wonder505 said:

You're right. Grammatically I should have put italics or spell it out as my own interpretation. And he did used the word "shame."

Did he say "Look at the shameful performer"? Which is what you put in quotations.

I don't know about wonder505. And I don't discredit the facts Leeds shares about P's past. I discredit his objectivity in terms of Prince's music and I discredit his assumptions about Prince's motives---because I believe he only knows a part of who prince was (due to his limited time with him.) I know 10 years is a long time, but it was a long time ago and people evolve. Do they totally change?--Probably not. But do they change a great deal?--Possibly. He is entitled to an opinion but when an opinion seems to be petty and more the product of a grudge, I am going to call him on it.

As for P's performance, the sound was only bad when P's guitar wasn't plugged in. And as for the costumes, Prince has worn worse and he wore some of his worst outfits when Leeds was his manager. Wasn't he still working for him in 1991 when prince had a insane pompadour and looked like he was sewn into a iceskater's outfit? I prefer afro/fringe/pajama look anyday of the week. I hate the three eye sunglasses though. I don't mind criticism of P's clothes. I hate some of them too. And I do think Leeds was right in his initial statement that Prince's clothes sometimes overshadow the music. (in some cases, the outfits are an extension of the music. In other cases, they overshadow the music) And I do think Prince should have listened to him a bit more in 1991 or whenever. That being said, getting older doesn't mean you have to lose your individuality. Sometimes older people can be even more 'agist' than younger people. (Slightly off topic, but my 61 year old mom will sometimes make fun of women her age for looking old. I always give her shit for that.)

Noodled24 said:

wonder505 said:

And why can't we criticize something Alan said that we disagree with?

You're not criticizing something he said. No. What you've done here, is take offense to something he said. then attempted to discredit him, and questioned his credibility as a voice on Prince, despite the fact he (and his brother Eric) spent a long time with Prince.

If you simply disagreed with him you'd start a thread about how great the SNL performance was, and how totally wrong Alan was. (Although, the sound on the original broadcast wasn't great and he wasn't entirely wrong about the costumes not really doing Prince favours).

purplerabbithole said:

You can't draw parallels, can you?

I've just been on here long enough to know that when discussing a specific topic and someone wants to draw an irrelivant analogy it's because they can't actually back up what they're saying.

Its one sentence on Jolie. And my point (in referencing her film) is that constructive crititism should be more about the intrinsic value of the work itself and less about personal issues with the artist or peripheral issues not contained in the work (unless its the actual topic of the work--as in political music or films) . Leeds said nothing specific about Prince's actual musical performance. He spends his entire time dissing his clothes, his earlier behavior and a seemingly imagined mixed agenda in relation to women (all personal and peripheral issues). this is the definition of non-constructive criticism. I didn't see him state that other older musicians should all dress like himself or his brother. Keith Richards still dresses like a pirate. Look at George Clinton. He wouldn't dare to put those two down I imagine.

You've written more than he did in this post alone.

So, Prince didn't say the women's names (later in the thread, this is mentioned). He didn't talk at all or even stick around long enough to be a part of SNL's closing moments. Does he have to introduce his players everytime. Its a nice gesture but its not an obligation. If we bought his album, we would discover in the liner notes who his collaborators were.

ep it on topic.

Did people buy the album? Maybe if someone had mentioned the name of it huh?

Noodled24 said:

Oh i get it. You can't counteract my points so now you gonna pretend you didn't read my post where I corrected that he did use the word "shame" which you can see for yourself in the tumblr link I posted. And if you go back to read his statement it did come off as Alan regarding the performance as shameful. My point is that in the grand scheme of what was happening at the time his comment was over the top...IMO

Thanks purplerabbithole. Great points.

wonder505 said:

Noodled24 said:

Did he say "Look at the shameful performer"? Which is what you put in quotations.

Oh i get it. You can't counteract my points so now you gonna pretend you didn't read my post where I corrected that he did use the word "shame" which you can see for yourself in the tumblr link I posted. And if you go back to read his statement it did come off as Alan regarding the performance as shameful. My point is that in the grand scheme of what was happening at the time his comment was over the top...IMO

If you want to twist things and believe Alan was actually saying it was a "shameful performance". That's fine. You can think that... Not actually what he said though is it? You put those words in his mouth.

babynoz said:

purplerabbithole said:

a grudge against the man is different than a grudge against his talent. Leeds knows Prince is talented. No one said otherwise. I actually liked Leeds when he did a Q and A on Prince in 2013. He seemed objective and relatively fair. But then I thought about it---how good of a source is someone who knew him 30 years ago. I can't remember much about my friends from high school and I am only in my early 40's. Obviously, he has mixed feelings about Prince--which I get. But he seemed to be in a pretty pissed off mood after that 2014 SNL performance and calling him on it seems fair to me.

Again, good points Purplerabbithole.

LOL @ jaawwnn trying to use one left-handed compliment for cover.

Fair enough, if you're finding insults within compliments then there's no conversation to be had here, you just see what you want to see.

As for people talking about "objectivity", don't make me laugh. All we have and all we'll ever have is subjectivity. Alan didn't like Prince's SNL performance, ok that's allowed. I liked it myself but I also thought he raised some good points in his criticism of it. I don't feel the need to assasinate his entire character because I disagree with him over something.

Noodled24 said:

Purplestar88 said:

His statements/actions can be criticized just like anyone else. If Prince made a statement people criticize it, Alan is no different than Prince or anyone else.

Then criticize his statements.

But the theme of this thread is people attempting to discredit him as a source of information, because of what he said about SNL. It's ridiculous

TL;DR I understand why Bart is so harsh.

[Edited 11/1/16 11:55am]

I believe I did criticize his statements. I see nothing wrong with people can discrediting Alan as a source of information because of what he said about SNL. Fair is Fair. People discredit Prince all the time and I don't people running to defend him. I could care less about Bart. He has nothing to do with the discussion.

jaawwnn said:

babynoz said:

Again, good points Purplerabbithole.

LOL @ jaawwnn trying to use one left-handed compliment for cover.

Fair enough, if you're finding insults within compliments then there's no conversation to be had here, you just see what you want to see.

As for people talking about "objectivity", don't make me laugh. All we have and all we'll ever have is subjectivity. Alan didn't like Prince's SNL performance, ok that's allowed. I liked it myself but I also thought he raised some good points in his criticism of it. I don't feel the need to assasinate his entire character because I disagree with him over something.

First of all if you did not think purplerabbit had good points then that is who you should have quoted and left me out of it to begin with.

Next time address the person you intended to debate and you wont have that problem.

SNL was one example put forward, but purple rabbit brought up several issues besides that which you apologists continue to willfully ignore, preferring to nitpick over minutiae as a deflection tactic. The reason I said "good points" is because didn't feel the need to be redundant by tap dancing and grandstanding when the point was already well made.

Purplestar88 said:

I believe I did criticize his statements. I see nothing wrong with people can discrediting Alan as a source of information because of what he said about SNL. Fair is Fair. People discredit Prince all the time and I don't people running to defend him. I could care less about Bart. He has nothing to do with the discussion.

He worked with James Brown, Prince & D'angelo... unless your resume is as impressive I suspect biographers and film makers will continue to reach out to the Leeds brothers before "PurpleStar88".