By the way, thanks Gav.

BartVanHemelen said:

***

Obviously your parents failed to get any manners and 'home training' through your skull.

I have managed to complete a full-time English Literature Degree and still contribute to these pages.

I'd greatly appreciate it if you didn't compare and generalise others with your own standards and abilities.

Writing your point in capitals for emphasis does not make your opinions any more valid either.

onenitealone said:

The only one making a fool of himself is you. Follow the link and you'll notice that on that page you'll find a link to excerpts from an interview with Alex Hahn from the recent Uptown magazine. And links to an earlier statement by Alex Hahn on the Org. Both of those would have already answered your question if you weren't so busy residing in your ivory tower.

And what a view my ivory tower gives me!

I can see for miles - jumped-up, friendless little pricks like you.

I don't care for your shabby site; I get all the information I want (and need) from here. Your reply just proves exactly what I wrote - you're an egotistical tw*t who even after years of Org Members telling you they don't give a flying fig what you think, still persist in trying to wind people up and being obnoxious. And, for someone who rubbishes most of Prince's recent output, you seem to have a very obsessive nature when it comes to the man and spend an inordinate amount of time on this site.

I don't wish to make enemies (that's NOT my style) I just couldn't care less what you think - I'll wait and see if Mr Hahn replies. In the meantime, I'll just chat to my (many) friends both in the real world and on the Org. I bet it's lonely round your parts, eh?



Have you had your '+' sign today?
[This message was edited Sat Mar 22 5:51:44 PST 2003 by onenitealone]

BartVanHemelen said:

---

I know I am Brilliant asshole!!! I have not read the book because it is not out yet. I am using the reviewers opinion that the book is a cross between the Wall Street Journal and the National Enquier. Maybe your stupid ass is not aware that the National Enquier is a tabloid in the U.S. that does not nothing but print second hand gossip.

In my opinion the the review is not good and confirms what I think the book is going to be about. This is my opinion and I really do not give a shit if you like it or not.

"This is truly an intelligent and lively community!"

laurarichardson said:

Are you sure you read the review? In that very sentence, the reviewer states the book is "important, and amazingly detailed." (Important, and amazingly detailed like some unholy marriage between The National Enquirer and The Wall Street Journal.) Tabloids are definitely not important, and could scarcely be characterized as "amazingly detailed". While some might appear to give intimate details, they more often leave out the information that would provide the most clarity for the situation.

So, as I said, the reference to the The National Enquirer seems to be the result of Prince's actions and chosen lifestyle, which would dictate the content of the book. While the book may provide the intimate details that could be associated with the writing style of The National Enquirer, it does not mean the book is necessarily 'tabloid-like', as you say.

The reviewer is charged with reviewing the book as a whole, the contents of which undoubtedly contain commentary on Prince's actions and lifestyle. A book review includes an examination of its content, its presentation and approach, and facets of the author; if it didn't, book reviews would be a rather bland study of paper, ink and bindings.

Counter-newsflash: When you place a quote, or the results of an interview, in your book, that's called information from a 'primary source'. It is, by definition, not secondhand. "Gossip", in this instance, is a "rumor or report of an intimate nature" (Merriam-Webster Online); and it is not a rumor, because we're discussing information garnered from a primary source, a firsthand witness. And lastly, not all of Prince's past employees are disgruntled -- while the percentage is unusually high, there are plenty who are not. Even the ones whom one might consider to be disgruntled often look back favorably on their time with the Prince camp, and have positive things to say.

You can't select the information you believe to be true until you've processed all the information available. If you don't take it all in, and then make an informed judgment, you have no hopes of ever knowing the truth. I'd personally rather know something, and risk making a poor judgment, than know nothing at all. In the end, the knowledge isn't going to hurt anybody, and neither would my poor judgment on the matter.

I just can't wait to read it. Even if I disagree-and i do not think I am in the position to do so-I want to read the detail and the opinions. I am just more pleased that someone can actually be assed to do a book about him still-coz commercially it is a gamble. Even if you criticise Prince you must at least have some interest in him to write a book-there would be easier ways to earn money. After all it is not as if he is writing about Madonna etc. Even if Prince does not like it-it is better to be in the position that you are getting some attention than complete indifference-it must be an honour of sorts that someone details your life in a book. I think with Prince because us fans know so little about him we project our own fantasies on to him-like a religion where you can mold it to your own convenience-Prince by his very distance is very ripe for this. It seems prince can only create in isolation and books like this would always appear critical because it is hard to imagine that Prince even goes to the toilet let alone could be nasty to someone. I actually find it a relief to hear information that I assume is going tobe in the book because I do not trust the level of idolatory I give the man-I worry that it could be an exscuse for actually living. However he is still the greatest-and I assume this book however critical it may be starts from this assumption-who knows.

ShabasLove said:

---
""important, and amazingly detailed." (Important, and amazingly detailed like some unholy marriage between The National Enquirer and The Wall Street Journal.) "

I read this quote the right way. The book is a unholy marriage between the National Enquirer and the Wall Street Journal. The National Enquirer is a tabloid that rarely prints the truth and never contacts the person they are attacking to get their side of the story. The Wall Street Journal states facts that are going on in the news. From the quote I get the impression that the book is tabloid like with no input from subject of the book and no truthful comments. I also get from the reviewers quote that their may be some facts. The facts probaly come from legal documents and public records. One thing is for sure the facts do not come from Prince.


"Counter-newsflash: When you place a quote, or the results of an interview, in your book, that's called information from a 'primary source'. It is, by definition, not secondhand. "Gossip", in this instance, is a "rumor or report of an intimate nature" (Merriam-Webster Online); and it is not a rumor, because we're discussing information garnered from a primary source, a firsthand witness. And lastly, not all of Prince's past employees are disgruntled -- while the percentage is unusually high, there are plenty who are not. Even the ones whom one might consider to be disgruntled often look back favorably on their time with the Prince camp, and have positive things to say."

The quote means that the information is from a primary source. However, it does not mean the primary source is telling the truth. The so-called first hand witness could be telling the biggest lies just to get a quote in the book.

I have a newsflash for you. Just because you go to a dictionary and obtain a definition to try a make me look stupid does not mean that the writer investigated the quoutes and comments from his interview subjects.

People lie they always have and they always will.

I found another review at GuitarNoise.com. Here's the link: http://www.musiccareers.n...php?id=242.

AlexHahn said:

- I hope so...we Prince fans know that Prince could be brilliant and a sucker at the same time. I hope the book makes justice to him. I am very curious about it, specially for the behind-the-scenes stories. It reminds me that I still must buy ´The real Frank Zappa book´too...I love biographies. I recommend Miles Davis´ too.

BartVanHemelen said:

- I got to agree with Bart. It seems lots of ´fams´ hate to see anything that couldnt be a praise to Prince.
I hope Mr Hahn really sees the two sides of the story.

Accuracy is what I question. Since, I find the title inaccurate, I would be heavily weary as to the content. And planting seeds that will grow based on untruthful or glorified (grapevine) information is unfair to Prince and those who read it.

The book for all intents and purposes may be good reading. However, I think it is distasteful to write about someone elses private life and claim to have respect for this person.

laurarichardson said:

You've given yourself away as a person that isn't willing to give the book a chance. I agree with your basic characterization of the two papers; however, there has been no evidence that this book is attacking Prince in any way. And thus far, it seems quite the opposite, that Hahn has written the book from a place of respect. But, as you say, The Wall Street Journal "states facts"; this is not all they do, and it is impossible to be a simple observer who puts forth only the facts for our examination. News stories are written by reporters, reporters have persepctives. As much as they might try to eliminate it, there is bias in any writing, and so there will be in Hahn's book.

From the quote you get the "impression that the book is tabloid like", while "their [sic] may be some facts." You've already defeated the book without knowing word-one of its contents. You're already convinced the book is tabloid-like but only may have some facts. There isn't that much information in the quote to make that judgment. All I've argued is that you don't know what is held in the book, you don't know how the author's motivations show through in the writing, and you don't know that the book aims to tear down Prince in any fashion. Yet you've already decided what the book is, what it is going to say, and you've passed judgment on it -- literally by what you would read on the cover.

As far as Hahn not contacting the subject to get their input, do you think Prince would've said one word to Hahn about any of this? Do you really think that was feasible? Let's say "no". So then what alternatives are there? How about speaking with the other people that were there? That's the best one can do; at least Hahn didn't decide to simply construct an introspective review of Prince's career. No, he went out and interviewed the people that experienced the times, and he heard what they had to say. He shared information with Per Nilsen, who wrote an excellent examination of the Prince's musical history, DMSR, which included many quotes of people being quite honest about their discontent with some things, as well as their positive feelings and experiences.

What you need to accept is that Prince has done a lot of shitty things to a lot of people. And so telling the stories of those events does not make Hahn's book tabloid trash; it makes the book an account of the events that transpired. It is up to you to interpret the information and distinguish truth from fabrication. What I know is that many of the stories circulating about Prince, some of which I imagine will be contained in this book, as well as having been in DMSR, have been corroborated by other news sources, other contacts, other people I know that witnessed some of these things (that I can trust to tell the truth), or that I have seen myself. And from what I do already know, I can tell what jives with what I didn't already know.



Yes, it is true that the veracity of the witness's claims can come into question, but you cannot assume them to be false any more than you can assume them to be true. You have to look at the surrounding evidence and draw a conclusion. However, you don't want to do that. You'd rather pass an immediate judgment, based on an excerpt of a review, and continue on with your preconceived notions of what Prince is and is not, and what he would and would not do. You have no indication that any of the interviewees were motivated to lie. For the most part with Prince, you don't have to lie to get your quote in the book. You've chosen not to make the equal consideration that they are NOT lying.



You're absolutely right. But there has been an indication that he has done the proper research and cross-checking, and you have no reason, at this point, to suspect otherwise.

This is hopeless in that we're discussing a book that neither of us have sampled. The difference here is that you've been trying to justify passing judgment on the book without reading it, while I've simply advocated keeping an open mind. The appearance is that you are, like Javed said in the beginning, "in denial".

I can't wait to read it!

I like reading everything about different artist.. one thing I learned EVERY book has some truths to it!

You are not going to hear the whole story from the artist themself in their book(s)

example: If you read the 10 year old book.. Michael jackson: Unauthorized.. 10 years later we know i'd say about 95% of it is true.. but I bet at the time everyone said it was all lies.. MJ himself has admitted most of whats in that book in the recent documentaries.

sooo.. This Prince should be interesting to read! Combined with Kevin Smith's Opinon!

I like knowing warts at all about a genius like Prince!
[This message was edited Sun Mar 23 18:15:04 PST 2003 by locoarts]

Berry said:

- I agree...but remember, Prince didnt write his own version of the story yet, as Miles Davis and Zappa did. Since he is a celebrity, it´s natural that somebody would want to write his bio. As I said before, I only hope his research was accurate and fair. If it is honest, it has good chances of being a good book.

I'll buy it.

AlexHahn said:

interesting

Berry said:

Don't. Judge. A. Book. By. Its. Cover. The book is nearly 300 pages, and you're dismissing it because oft he TITLE?

Berry said:

FACT: Over the years there have been many interviews with many people that have encountred Prince at some point in their lives, some for a short while, others for a long one. And remarkably, even though some of these people never met and knew Prince in completely different decades, their stories are remarkably similar. Now, you be the judge: either they're all in one huge conspiracy, or the picture they paint of Prince is pretty accurate and thus the stories align.

I'm sure Alex Hahn has checked the stories they told with other witnesses from that era, just like Per Nilsen did in DMSR. It's called good reporting. And I'm also sure that if a story couldn't be verified through another source, he's only included it with the necessary disclaimers.

BTW If you're looking for accuracy, then Prince is the last person to talk to. Just read Uptown's review of Crystal Ball, in which they correct the many errors and fabrications in the liner notes of that album. Or read some of the late-1996/early-1997 interviews. Or if you don't trust those because they are a writer's impression, watch the Oprah interview he did, and where he lied numerous times.

Berry said:

Baloney. Take a look at the artwork for Emancipation. Or remember what TheDawn.com was like in early 1996 (for the record: it was reduced to showing Prince's "wedding album"). And I guarantee you: if his child hadn't died, Prince and Mayte would have posed with it mere weeks after the birth for the highest bidding magazine, without any regard for the privacy of the child. Or remember when Prince posted a completely made-up tabloid-like post of his website about his so-called arrest at a Minneapolis movie theatre? Or the picture of Mayte's dog on the website?

Prince's private life is deeply intertwined with his art, just look at songs like "Forever In My Life" or "If I Was Your Girlfriend" and numerous others.

onenitealone said:

So that's why you didn't notice that Alex Hahn had already posted at length about his book here.

And you didn't go to that page on my site because you were afraid that you'd have to admit that I was right.

onenitealone said:

And yet you keep reading my posts, keep replying, and never dare to admit that I was right from the beginning.

onenitealone said:

Yeah, my one visit a week really is too much, isn't it? And I wasn't aware that I had to be a completely uncritical fan to visit the Org. If you don't like criticism, go post of Prince's site. Oh wait, you can't, they don't liek it when people post their opinions there.

onenitealone said:

Sure, that's why you keep replying.

God, you know you've hit The Big Time when you get your first insult from Bart Van Hemelen!

Since this is the first time I've been here since Saturday, I'll reiterate what I posted previously - I COULDN'T care less. I think you like trying to goad people sometimes.

But I AM interested in everyone's opinions, good or bad - including your's. I certainly don't have any naive attitude when it comes to Prince (even if, so far, I've never had my fingers burned). I just think a little politeness goes a long way, Bart. So, sincerely, apologies for my earlier remarks; throwing insults isn't exactly my style.

As Aerogram pointed out, it's hardly the hallmarks of an 'intelligent' community.

Peace.

Thanks to neokyle for posting a link to the guitarnoise.com review. I think it's worth highlighting a quote from that review: "Hahn manages to do a great job of presenting the facts and letting the reader make his or her own conclusions." And both of the other two reviews indicate that the book is balanced and fair; for example, the two sentences that conclude the allmusic.com review state: "Possessed does an admirable job of covering both sides. Important, and amazingly detailed like some unholy marriage between The National Enquirer and The Wall Street Journal." To me, those sentences indicate that while some of the facts of Prince's life might appear National Enquirer-like, the reporting of the book is sound, balanced, and detailed -- not unlike the Wall Street Journal.

I'm happy to take whatever criticisms people and reviewers might offer, and believe me I'm not perfect, any more than Prince or anyone else. But I think all three of these initial reviews present the book as fair, and that's really the most important thing to me.

ARE YOU PEOPLE ALL AWARE OF THE FACT THAT PRINCE IS RECORDING NEW MUSIC RIGHT NOW? IT'S AWEFULLY QUIET FROM THE PAISLEY FRONT... THAT4S MY OPINION...

i do hope he releases a new album for the summer... ti's been such a long time since prince released an album in the spring-or summertime.

I can still rember the hot spring dayz when LOVESEXY was released! radio playin' Alphabet St. on and on and on...

AlexHahn said:

The power and influence of the org is very apparent here. The author is selling his book to us, trying to convince us to buy it and encouraging discussions or heated debates. Who else feels this way? or am I just being silly? Back in the day when I was so deperate for information on the man I would buy anything, but I have never seen a author directly appeal to the fan base. This is unbelievably savvy.

butterfli25 said:

perhaps its got something to do with the author being a fan himself and therefore being on the org anyway (read the above comments by "gav" and you'd see that).

anyway, if you were marketing a book on "the lesser spotted spiny toad" the first place to start your media campaing would be www.lesserspottedspinytoads.org !

Bart: U make some undeniably good points and without insult. Thank u.


I have to be honest and say that I have been caught up in the title. And a bit in the motives of the author. It just doesn't sit well with me...

I have to work through it. I honestly don't know if I want/need to know Princes' past. I am content with who he is now. His music is as beautiful as ever!

Alex: I can appreciate that you seek being viewed as fair. That sparks my interest in reading it. Because I'd like to see if that is what you present throughout your book. Because I certainly don't think the title is fair.




Alex, please understand that I wish you no personal insults or anything of that nature. I respect that you made a goal a reality. Congratulations on your accomplishment.

err about that point about me being in denial, my only response to that is 'bull s!"@'. I am totally in agreemnet that Prince has dumped on people over the years just like many other 'celebs' and regular folk, his business judgement or advice taken on business / marketing has been poor. But so what, if he wanted to he could've made much more than he has done, if he'd played ball with Warners in a more diplomatic way he'd still be in the charts etc. However where he is now and how he got there seems tobe driven by his absolute belief in his art and to hell with the consequences. Musically he seems tobe in a good/free place, his relationship with us has never been better [although some would call it cynical marketing!]. I could waffle on but please don't ever accuse me of being in denial.
As for the book i am very keen to read for myself where the balance comes from, I truly hope tobe surprised and hear tales from associates who say good things about him, the only thing is that those who are closest to him during these'positive' years probably didn't talk to Alex i.e. Kirky , Larry, Morris Hayes etc. The major problem i have is with the title - 'fall of Prince'?, according to who?, in terms of charts success, record sales then a definite yes , in terms of art then that has tobe a 'no'.
It is fair to say that when you put yourself in the public eye then you are left open tobe shot at but at the end of the day Prince has given me the soundtrack to my life and unbelieveable musical joy and i'll always be thankful for at least that. Hopefully you will to.

DOROTHYPARK said:

Ummm, thanks.

Alex, I read the book I got an advance copy, it made me rethinking my opinion of Prince and it gave really good scoop on his relationship with the artists. They where a couple of bombs dropped in the book, I was like WHOA! This is a must read for the org members. Im reading it again, thats how intense this book is and its not written from a fan's point of very. Its very factual info. If you do a book signing in NY ill be there.
[This message was edited Tue Mar 25 10:30:39 PST 2003 by deviouz2]