ZFunc said:

You're right.

I think this thread needs a before it spirals completely out of control.

UCantHavaDaMango said:

NO way... it is really very calm... has there been even one flame?

SlamGlam said:

Not yet. But it's bound to happen.

It's already gone off topic.
[Edited 4/27/07 13:19pm]

SlamGlam said:

This is just one report, don't look at this as the "exact" total that suffered and died from it, and it doesn't include the total of people that were born into slavery once they were here years later. That is just one source of information to basically give you a brief idea of what happened during the "Middle Passage", but I see now that no matter what anyone explains to you about this slavery issue, you will keep a "blind eye" about it. Well, go right ahead and sleep on it, because it still won't erase the fact that it happened.
[Edited 4/27/07 13:22pm]

Empress said:

If TRC's lyrics were more secular, I would go as far as to say in my opinion It couldve been as great as Sign O The Times in terms of one of his greatest albums.

-Dolphinking23

Dolphinking23 said:

I concur. I have no quibble with the album musically. It's the sloppy rhetoric that makes me cringe.

Good Grief!

2elijah said:

And there it is.

This twisting of what people are trying to explain to you Slam is kinda shameful.

datdude said:

This should be the saved response for every race thread in pandr.

okay, I haven't even read thru this entire thread yet as I've kind of been avoiding it all day....but maybe some humor is in order.
I'm watching UTCM right now and thought this; maybe when he looks back on some of the lyrics on this album it goes like this....
Mary Sharon: reading his lyrics and laughing uncontrollably
P: laughing "I must have that disease...what's it called?"
MS: "Stupid?"

of course, shortly thereafter her father has him killed.

The album could b construed as racist even if that wasnt his intention.
It's just an overzealous result of his brainwashing at the time IMO.

lilgish said:

"Clueless white folks"?
**** pls
The color of ur skin makes U 'equipped'? U guys r a joke!

okay, now that I've read the whole thread (and UTCM has ended) I have a few more comments.

1. I cannot help myself but think the P&R people were bored and came over here for fun to mess with us, as happened once not long ago with G&D. (don't you know those of us who hang out in M&M purposely avoid P&R? j/k sort of...

2. Plenty of immigrants of various nationalities "lost" their family name when coming through Ellis Island (by their own free will of course) as well. (even the Sopranos made reference to this last week). The difference is that their country of origin had records. Hard to find records, but records exist of some kind. If willing to do the work, it can be found. I do not know if descendants of slaves could ever do that however.

3. I am neither Black nor Jewish. I do know that I did not find the lyrics disturbing simply due to assumed racist tones. I found the overt religious themes way more disturbing. I'm a fan for many, many years. I quoted Uptown in my 1986 yearbook. That's the Prince I love and learned from. TRC is too singular, exclusive, and dogmatic for me. (and too jazzy, but that's another thread)

4. I took my best friend to that show and soundcheck. I warned her (a child of a Polish father and a Hungarian mother who met during WWII- when said mother could speak no english but married a man just to get out of that area of the world although he soon proved to be a difficult and verbally abusive man) that some saw the album as "racist". After the show when I asked her what she thought- she was fine. Prince live- even for "non-fams" is so compelling that it mostly went over her head. Only those of us who think about every line he writes have these arguments. I'd like to know if any Jewish fans jumped ship after TRC. I've def. never encountered a Jewish person saying, F*** Prince, he wrote TRC!
Non-fans never heard the album, and I think he expected that to be the case before it was released. And maybe took some liberties knowing his fan base could deal with it. Or wasn't thinking- knowing the album would be heard only limitedly- and was caught up in his new found beliefs.

5. As far as some of the other comments here and the Imus reference- being "PC" is not necessarily a bad thing. I don't think it's unfair to tell Imus he can't say the things he said. White folks have gotten away with all kinds of shit for many years. Black folks have all kinds of things in their or their families histories like being told they have to sit in the back of the bus, can't vote, can't go to a decent school, or even lynchings. White people need to get over it and realize- NO you can't just cop black peoples
"slang" and be funny. (but see now I'm getting sucked into a P&R discussion, arrgghh )

6. Slavery was a horrible thing and should not have happened. The Holocaust was a horrible thing and should not have happened. Slavery encompassed a longer period, so it sucks more. I feel the same way about Sept 11th, (and btw I HATE when people call it 9/11- also another thread). September 11th was a horrible day for America, but you know what- we have been quite lucky compared to other places in the world today.
[Edited 4/27/07 23:36pm]

Is the Rainbow Children album racist? No, I don't think so. However there are
a few lyrics in there that are a bit misjudged IMO.

It also has to be said that it gets a lot of flak for what people think he says,
rather than what he actually says a lot of the time.

Ok... I've got 2 questions.

1. Does Prince compare Slavery to the Holocaust?

2. If he does, what is his intention in making this comparison? If he doesn't, never mind.

BorisFishpaw said:

well, he said this: "Holocaust aside, many lived and died
But when all truth is told, would U rather be dead or be sold?
Sold 2 the one who can now mate
The displaced bloodline with the white jailbait"

see my post above for my opinion.

on another note....
"we'll have 2 kick your pants!" and "We don't give a duck what U got on" which is all just silly, if you can't say it better than that, don't bother imo.

Dolphinking23 said:

... what this thread has taught me so far, is that there's power in music and in lyrics. we all subjectively choose how to analyse them. it's like reading a book - we shouldn't condemn the writer for messages therein. instead, the book and the writer have some separateness. prince has referred to his songs as children, so the child is not the same as the parent; lawd ... nevermind ... but wait, thing is - oh, nevermind

lilgish said:

christos7 said:

They exist.


The orger never said that.


please what?

paisley16 said:

Actually, that's the exact line I was thinking of when I posted. It's almost
always misinterpreted as comparing the holocaust with slavery, when that's
the one thing it's NOT doing. Can't people read? Or don't they know what
the word "aside" means?

BorisFishpaw said:

I can definitely read -- and I have a degree in rhetoric. Saying "Holocaust aside" means he's dismissing the Holocaust as an argument.

I don't know anyone who takes kindly to having their argument dismissed -- especially when the person they are arguing with introduced the issue in the first place (as Prince did by using Jewish-sounding names in "Family Name").

Genesia said:

I have to agree with that fully.

That sort of points to what I was getting at....I myself, do not find the lyrics offensive but can see why some people might. I think overall, it was simply not his smartest (or clearest) attempt at making an argument or telling a story through his lyrics.

"aside" means he's dismissing it from the argument, not as an
argument.

Like if I said "Diamonds and Pearls aside, the 90's were a commercial
disappointment for Prince in terms of record sales". It's a way of basically
saying "other than...". It means that the thing being put 'aside' is recognized
as the exception to the argument the writer is making. i.e. The 90's were
basically a disappointing decade for Prince in terms of record sales, apart
from the Diamonds and Pearls album which actually did extremely well.

BorisFishpaw said:

Well, I think the problem there is subject matter for one. Big difference between the example you give and talking about 2 of the biggest atrocities in human history.

Would you disagree with my remarks that he could have made his point in a clearer or more sensitive fashion?

Also, as Genesia points out, he was the one to bring in the subject himself and continues it from the line referenced above into Family Name.

BorisFishpaw said:

What is the argument being made and why is the Holocaust mentioned at all?

paisley16 said:

Oh yes, we actually basically agree about this.

I simply put the exact same use of the word "aside" that Prince used in an
uncontroversial sentence, just to show that Prince wasn't trying to
compare the two as most people seem to think, but to exclude it from
his argument. Whether that in itself was a particularly good idea or not
is another matter. Though the fact that it isn't very clear and is misinterpreted
by most people I think shows that it actually wasn't a good idea (or at least
not very well put).

As for the names in Family Name, I don't see them particularly connected
to the lines above. I think they actually connect more with Digital Garden
and the "Love, like a Rose In Bloom" bit (Mr. Rosenbloom). In the case of
Family Name, I think Prince's choice of names actually make a nonsense of
the point he's trying to make, as all those names (Rosenbloom, Pearlman,
Goldstruck) are adopted Jewish names. i.e. they're not original 'family
names', but surnames Jews adopted to fit in, surrendering their real names.
Which of course makes a mockery of Prince's point! Why pick such
Jewish sounding names as examples of true hereditary family names, when
for all intents and purposes these names were no truer than the slave names.

BorisFishpaw said:

good point. And of course, as I mentioned earlier- many people of various nationalities lost their real names when entering America due to their not speaking English- and some jerk with a clipboard who felt like giving them a new name.

BorisFishpaw said:[quote]

paisley16 said:

Right, but the names most African Americans have are slave names, names of their master which owned their ancestors as as property and marked who they belonged too. In essence, the fact that Jewish families had to change their names to fit in is just as bad ofcourse, but at least, and this is not downgrading their suffering at all, they were able to hang on to their lineage and identity,whereas with African slaves those ties were cut dead. For an African American to trace his African lineage is extremely difficult. That to me is the underlying point in Family Name. This is not something Prince came up with, this type of discussion on this subject matter has been going on for decades.

^ Very true. I almost added something that effect to my original post,
but didn't wanna make it too long.

wonder505 said:

if only their own ancestors did not sell them in mass to the slave traders..

SlamGlam said:

who undeniably coerced them into doing so!