SynthiaRose said:

I wish this wasn't so dissapointing/sad for you. You're above response gives me the feeling that you're just giving up the search for your answer. Don't!"...It's just around the corner.." (sorry, had to say that) It's something most of us have or will (newbies beware) go through. It's very much like falling in love hard and months later you find out something about the person is flawed. To believe anyone is perfect for you, without flaws is to engage in fantasy. Prince, has been a part of my life for over 25 years. I love his influences, his unique qualities and forgive his flaws.

What else can I say he's the bestest

vainandy said:

That is so cute , but really that's the first time I heard it. I didn't know she was sampling off nobody(wonder whatever happened to Monifa) and quite a few other songs I learned through other folks sampling them.

By the way SynthiaRose you never revealed what song the words purple rain have been used before Prince used. What's the song? Who's the artist?

QuakeXLE said:

And

There

It

Is.

SexyBeautifulOne said:

Break it Down then, Thanks for Representin The Funk, SBO!

Astasheiks said:

You know I had to! True Funk Soldier til I die!

Turn It

UP said

Several have mentioned it above. "Ventura Highway" by America.
The lyrics go "Wishin' on a falling star /Waitin' for the early train/
Sorry boy, but I've been hit by purple rain."

Rev said:

That love analogy is very appropos...

Anyway, I haven't given up. I simply conceded a good statement made by that person... by a few actually....

My assertion/realization remains true: Prince is not as original as his posture led us to believe all these years.

Or if you don't like the word "original" ... let me say He is not as self-made and self-directed as his quintessential lyrics would suggest. I've come to the conclusion over the years that he is VERY influenced by others ... as if he's a puppet or a lump of clay. Someone above referred to him as a sponge, that's true too. He's been molded by several hands and seems to look outside for direction. The result of that is his image, body of work, legacy bares distinctive marks of other people.

But I've been dealing with the heartache of that revelation for a few months now and like I said above I'll just have to readjust my image of Prince. Hey, I thought he was an independent-thinking innovator. But that's not the case.

All I'm saying is I'm OK with that now since I've discussed that truth out loud. Some prefer to remain delusional. But I'll strip away the counterfeit persona of Prince and find something truthful about him to love.

That's not giving up. It's just making peace.

SynthiaRose said:

Honey, this is simply not true. You're putting yourself through heartache for little to no reason.

And as for the words "purple" and "rain" appearing next to each other in some song from 1970-something? For real, you could do that with nearly any classic song. I'm sure I could find you hundreds of songs using the word "Imagine." Does that make John Lennon a ripoff artist?

SexyBeautifulOne said:

cant we keep the discussion on topic folks and off the personal? we all cool peeps...

this has been a very enjoyable read...(except for the personal jabs)..


as far as prince not being sued..he has been. levi and sonny sued him.....

At the end of the day, sometimes the whole is bigger than the sum of it's parts, end of story.

Look at Oasis - certainly not my cup o' Rosee Lee, but I rest my case regardless.

He'll always be 'Prince' to me.

FunkMistress said:

But it's not that simple, FunkMistress. Imagine is one word. Of course it's commonly used.

Purple Rain is not a common phrase. It's a unique idiom that frankly I'd never heard before. It smacks of creativity and the workings of a introspective mind. ...like "lovesexy", "starfish and coffee." "yellow day"

If I find that those latter phrases had been used before that would be horrifying as well. (well, maybe not yellow day but you know the other Princely phrases I can't think of right now)...

Purple Rain is an idiosyncratic phrase completely associated with Prince. As I mentioned, many have spent threads discussing his meaning... why he called the rain purple ... red blood, blue sky etc.

It's bad enough to think he patterned the phrase off of Purple Haze ... but to find that he lifted it in tact from another song and then used the phrase as the name of his biggest album and song ....
.
[Edited 7/20/05 9:45am]

sosgemini said:

I'm always cool, but that's not gonna stop me from calling it like I see it!

Anyway, what exactly did they sue him for? I tried searching here to see if it's been discussed, but I'm sure you know how that went. So please, by all means enlighten me.

SynthiaRose said:

I guess I just don't understand why you're taking all of this so personally. Would you really be "horrified" if you found out that another songwriter used the phrase "yellow day"?

No artist exists in a vacuum. As has been repeated on this board before, every artist, every genius, takes bits and pieces of what he or she sees and hears to create their art. But what separates a true artist or genius from a mere ripoff artist is what they do with that raw material. Anybody can buy some paints and a canvas. Only a true artist can create a stunning masterpiece with them.

These things are true of every artist, not just Prince. You created an unrealistic pedestal for him, and you're taking it to heart when you find out that he couldn't possibly live up to it.

SexyBeautifulOne said:

sure, call it when you see it as it pertains to the subject....


and im not really sure about the specifics of the case..all i know is that they claimed they were not given proper writing credit or pay for a couple songs...

sosgemini said:

I guess you missed a sentence or two, I know you're busy moderating your own board and all, oh well.

This is truly the first I've heard of this, if anyone else has some details on what really went down, I'm interested in learning what happened.

(Alledgedly) His thing is to drag cases out as long as possible before they hit the courts proper, therefore draining any financial worth from those who've brought the case. Kinda harsh, but he's done it a number of times with ex-bandmembers apparently.

coldbloodedque said:[quote]What da ...

You played him like he was Ja Rule trying to be like Tupac.


U sho nuff got that ColdBlood!!

SynRose, I understand you wanting objective input & you make some good points & present them in (mostly) a thoughtful, insightful way.

BUT.... if you are truly a P fam....HOW?!.....TELL ME HOW?!?!..... could you compare JayZ to Prince or vice versa.

THAT is why you've gotten the feedback you got & not mature, objective debate.

sosgemini said:

What was the outcome???

If he did do it, Since he became a JW, maybe he return their props and apologized.

FunkMistress said:

VERY good point, FunkMistress. This may seem unrelated but... I'm NO expert on art but one of my mates hates anything slightly modern; in other words, unless it's a sculpture or a landscape, forget it. He views most modern artists as attention seekers. As I explain to him, sometimes it's what we see, how we interpret it that can be artistic, not necessarily the object itself. It's also how we interpret it that is part of the artistic process in itself. And even if it does look like a piece of 'junk' - it's a piece of 'junk' that nobody thought to present previously.

And did you ever hear the John Lennon/reviewer story? Back in the day, music reviewers were sent one-sided vinyl acetates containing selected tracks from the artist's album on one side, and nothing on the flip side. Anyway, some reviewer - somehow - managed to play the flip side by accident and wrote a full-page review extolling the virtues of this 'masterpiece', silence, pops and all. (Bearing in mind this was during John & Yoko's experimental period when virtually anything could end up on record). Immediately, every other reviewer tried to call him out claiming it was the most pretentious crap they'd ever read; he'd listened to the wrong side after all. But John Lennon himself claimed that if the reviewer got an artistic experience out of it, who are we to judge? We all experience 'art' in our own unique ways. Maybe that reviewer did too.

I'm not sure what I'm even trying to say now - ! - but the raw materials, as you put it, are available to everyone. What we do with it - either as artists or reviewers - is up to us.
[Edited 7/21/05 4:37am]

I do not think that some 1 as prolific as Prince can be called or deemed un-original. The vast amount of work he has put out speaks for itself.

Yet, Prince will use the the ideas of others if he has 2. For example, KISS, Prince wrote the lyrics, but the groove was created by Mazarati. When Prince heard their groove, he wanted the song back.

I think it's more a case of Prince perhaps not acknowledging ALL of his influences and inspiration compared to him NOT being original.

SynthiaRose said:

Thank U


Correct that line to, "...has led me to believe...".

And I only say this because I truly beleive you have a misconception of the term 'original'. You focus on aspects of 'originality' .. but has ignored its full scope.

I looked up 'original' in the Encarta dictionary for 'all' of it meanings and this is what I found:

As an adjective
1. first: existing first, from the beginning, or before other people or things
An impossible state for any man... any music... any thing we know to currently exist.

2. new: completely new and not copied or derived from something else
This is were I beleive your deifinition of 'originality' begins and ends. Being 'new' is where your arguement has teeth. However, at the moment you are creating music... any music.. are you creating something... NEW?
You are creating in a medium which in it self is not new, has been copied and by nature is derivived from what came before it.

But lets continue with the definitions...
3. creative: possessing or demonstrating the ability to think creatively
4. not traditional: representing a departure from traditional or previous practice
5. source for copies: relating to or being something from which a copy or alternative version has been made

If these don't define Prince I don't know what does. He has definately demonstrated the ability to think creativily; The span of his career he has been non-traditional and does things his way, which is a departure from previous practice; Furthermore, he has created the 'Minneanapolis Sound' and many has emulted him. and even if you think this was the result of some one elses tinkering... remember my last posted statement... this is where it would apply.

But before i degress, let's look at the word 'original' further
As a 'noun'
1. first version: the first or unique item from which copies or alternative versions are made
2. authentic piece of art: a genuine work of art that is not a copy or forgery
3. eccentric person: an unusual or eccentric person
4. creative person: a person of outstanding creativity or revolutionary thinking
Just as before... only one aspect supports any thing you have said (#2)..and just as it was prior in its use as an adjective, this is debatable. the rest...further define Prince in many ways. Albeit not just Prince... but any who would be considered a Genius and/ or an Original.


For him to be as "...a puppet or a lump of clay", you need to be able to say who is the 'puppet master' or is the 'molder of the clay'. If it were just one or two people... then you would have a strong point. But your argument suggest he is taken from dozens of sources... thus dozens of 'puppet masters' or ' clay molders'. Have you ever tried to work a single puppet with 20 people simultaneously? (which is what would have to be occuring in his multi-dimensonal little body) You would get chaos. How about mold a lump of clay with 20 sets of hands in the way... you get a grey lump of shit.

In both cases in order for things to work, there must be ONE mind coordinating all others with the desire, will, motivation, imagination and vision of what needs to be done. That way you end up with a puppet which would have had a career spanning nearly three decades or a fine peice potery in itself a work of art.

I don't care for the sponge analogy because that to me, suggest something soaking up randomly and with out a purpose or plan... neither of which define Prince.

Here's somethingelse for you to chew on...

Pablo Picasso is known as an artistic genius and is credited for creating one art form in particular... collages. A collage takes from many related and un-related sources and together form a 'new' work of art. Based on your defintion of Prince... he is more like a collage than any puppet, lump of clay or sponge... since you say he has 'taken' from dozens of other sources and to build his persona. But even that said... the collage still falls under the same rules... there needs to be ONE mind single handedly or through coordination of others, in control for a masterpiece to be created.

Not only is Prince 'the master piece'... He is the ONE mind behind the creation of the master piece.

He still is an independant-thinking innovator... he just has done what every other artist before him has done as well, derive what they do from their influences and every genius... take that to another level by presenting it in a way which it has never before been presented.


If you need to search a data base to find that a phrase 'purple rain' composed of two common words in the English dictionary had been uttered together once before... and then use that fact as one of the reasons behind Princes 'fall from grace' in your eyes... then you truly did 'deify' him. You put him in an impossible postion to begin with.

Welcome to 'reality' babe. Close the door and leave all the bullshit on the out side. I know it may hurt the first time or two... but after a while... you'll get used to it... and hopefully you'll enjoy it as much as I do.

QuakeXLE said:

Very well put, indeed!! Too bad it'll probably be ignored, but hey, I loved reading it!!

QuakeXLE said:

This thread has certainly been a good read for alot of different posts and especially this one. Thank U.

QuakeXLE said:

And that just about says it all!

Nice thread , a few points I dont see anywhere else also..

SynthiaRose said:

Maybe some individual aspects of Prince aren't as wholly original and uninfluenced by others as we're led to believe , but as others have said , the whole package of Prince and his artistic vision and music is as unique as youre gonna get in this day and age . The only totally original music act not influenced by previous generations was the neanderthal caveman banging a bone on a rock and thinking it sounded good most likely

Is Prince Mo' Original Than Vince?

wallysafford said:

That is absolutely Horrid!

SynthiaRose said:

Joni Mitchell said that prince wasn't an innovator to her, some twenty years ago I think. She called him a hybrid. She had a point but...Prince may have not been at the front of any one particular thing but he still was treading in not to heavily laden land. The sexuality of the eighties was still very rigid, Prince gets little credit for making the idea of sexuality more fluid, he also gets little credit for being a major pioneer of synthesizers and electronic instruments and how he used them. There were many who used them before but I'd say you could safely call him a pioneer in terms of genre and use of electronic sound. Was he as original as Elvis,Jimi,the Beatles,Sly,James, no but he is in their realm somewhere and surpasses each in enough areas to make up for what he lacks. Not only that but I don't think we have to worry about our man self-destructing, possibly having learned from some of these guys. It's all evolution and it's all good.

DorothyParkerWasCool said:

Nice to have someone with an informed and balanced opinion still holding on here.

mozfonky said:

Very true. No other feminine, frilly man has ever been quite as masculine.

mozfonky said:

Yes! Yes. I've been trying to think ... OK in what ways HAS Prince been original. And his synth sound definitely seems an unprecendented signature move.