wonder505 said:[quote]

BorisFishpaw said:

U guys are leaving out very important facts. After the 1st generation or so, a LOT of Slaves were the product of RAPE from the slave masters. This goes a lot DEEPER than just the name. The same CANNOT be said of the Jews who CHANGED their names.

SlamGlam said:

You have to understand that Africa at the time consists of different tribes, dialects, beliefs, and practices. You say ancestor as if all were one, but one tribe recognized themselves distinctly than the other. Many of the slaves sold by Africans were prisoners of wars as a result of tribal warfare, which to me, the colonial slave purchasers took advantage of. Many whites entered the tribal villages as missionaries, pretending to be interested in the culture, when their motive was to undermine the tribal's belief system and unity and turn the villagers against each other with offerings of materialist things and fake promises. I suggest reading a powerful book called "Things Fall Apart" by Chinua Achebe which chronicles how this was done.

Does this excuse Africa's role in the slave trade. No. But you make it seem as if the Africans were literally selling their own kind just like that. Slavery was based on a well-developed, very complex, coercive system of murder, lies, and greed just to name a few. Then when they were placed on a ship and landed here, if they survived, opened up another realm of horror.
[Edited 4/29/07 8:51am]

BorisFishpaw said:

Were the 3 jewish names a coincidence or a conscious choice by Prince? Why is a comparison being made with Jews?

coolcat said:

ONLY Prince can answer that.

Graycap23 said:

Gray, your comment reminds of the scene in the movie Roots, when they were beating "Kunta Kinte" and they said to him "What's your name boy?" He responded" "Kunta Kinte", When he said that, they beathim like an animaluntil he couldn't take it anymore and he responded "Toby"...in comparison to this line in the song "Family Name" "Come on, Come on, keep it moving here" What's your name boy? "Abu Cah" Well, it ain't now, it's Tom Lynch"


Also, Gray, on that other subject, slave women being raped, has been mentioned in a few of the posts here. I'm not sure if many who posted on this thread realize that many of our African/African-American ancestors were products of "rape" and the women who were the victims of it had to nurture, love and raise these "babies of rapists" while their men/husbands could do nothing about it, but watch it happen in shame. If the men took action they would have been killed. That had to be some major psychological pain to carry a child of a rapist around inside of you for 9 months, then nurture, love and raise this child as your own and face the man/men that raped you constantly while robbing your dignity and pride as a human being with a soul. It had to be extremely psychologicallly painful for the African/African American Males that were shamed by this and having their manhood, pride, dignity and soul robbed from them as well, as they really couldn't do much about it or risk losing whatever family they had left.It also had to be a painful experience for the children born from these mothers knowing the circumstances of how they came to be. Just real, psychological damage that would affect an entire race generations later, who are still walking around in 2007, "branded" with their ancestors' slave owner's names.

Just to think that all we ask for is a "simple apology" and to acknowledge that what happened to these people was wrong-and not discard it like it didn't happen. They at least deserve that. As many in power today are descendants of these rapists, because no one will ever pay for those crimes since those who committed those crimes are no longer alive, and the victims of it died without ever knowing what it was like to live the life of a "free and decent human being". There were still "freed" slaves and early descendants of slaves around in the early 1900s, but they themselves lived through racial discrimination and segregation and our country could have issued and acknowledge it then, while some were still alive.

For the Jews that suffered in the holocaust, that had to change their names or drop part of it, then later were able to trace their lineage/family name, at least they were able to do that, like wonder505 said. They were also able seek and punish many, but not all, of the people that took part in those crimes, and many received reparations; and this not to desensitize what happened to the jews, but Africans/African-American slaves did not have the choice of changing their names or were able to"go back home" or trace their lineage/history/family name, even to this day.

Like I said, even today, we can't even get a decent apology for our ancestors without major criticism, because you will only hear "well, I wasn't alive in that time, so why should we apologize?" but there's descendants of Jews that even today, were not alive when the holocaust happened, but they make sure they educate the public about what took place about 65 or so years ago. so we don't forget, and I give them credit for that, but I will never understand some of the "cold" responses African-Americans get when we ask for an apology for the African/African American slaves that died without knowing what it was like to live a life of a "free" human being. They at least deserve that much. (sigh)...Maybe one day that will change, we shall see...only time will tell.
[Edited 4/30/07 12:14pm]

coolcat said:

Maybe he was comparing the two groups, because one group was able to trace their lineage/family name and the other group couldn't, like wonder505 said, There were many tribes in Africa. It would have been impossible for the African slaves, to trace their names/lineage, Well, at least, those that survived and were still alive when they were freed. They only had the names they were given by the slave ovners that had possession of them. Not to mention those of us today, that are stuck with names we have no real connection to other than those names were given to our ancestors by those that "owned" them.
[Edited 4/29/07 10:06am]

I wouldnt call it racist, nor would i call it a very good album

2elijah said:

Well, there are other groups that are able to trace their lineage... so why choose the Jews?

paisley16 said:

... that's what it comes down to.

coolcat said:

Guess you will have to ask the person who wrote the song, I still do not find TRC a racist album at all, but to each its own.
[Edited 4/29/07 14:02pm]

Shorty said:

Jim Crow was not that long ago. My parents are 56 and couldn't go to "white only" establishments.

2elijah said:

I don't think it's a racist album either. I can understand where people who think it is are coming from but what is so amazing about this CD is the fact that 6 years later, this CD is still causing such a serious debate. Just goes to show you how powerful this CD really was and still is.

How do yall live in a world disproportionately, adversely affected by racist, white supremacy and ask if a Prince record is racist? He spent his career making lemonade out of his racist reality, sometimes at his own expense, and he makes one record that eludes to the problem and gets this. To Be clear, most white male dominated and controlled governments have been, and still are white supremacist and racist. The fact that I point it out dosent make me racist. If I have to debate w/ a govt. whether I'm three fifths a man, its racist. If my people have to struggle and die to be able to vote, just 40 years ago, its racist. If I have to go to extraordinary measures to do things that my white counterpart takes for gramted, its racist. Give me a break.

jackmitz said:

Don't bother apologizing. I purchased the CD based on Greycap bringing up the anti-semitism in particular songs (in another past forum)_. I listened to the music and read the lyrics. I also watched a video of Prince being interviewed by one of the Spice Girls where they're playing a word game. When the word jewelry was mentioned, his response was "Jews".
If I were Jewish, I wouldn't like Prince's public statements. He manages to slide by on the issue.

wonder505 said:[quote]

BorisFishpaw said:

Of course, there's also the issue of Native Americans' family names. We've mostly all either got adopted European names that were given or chosen for us, like Richard or George, or oddly Anglicized "native" names like Little Feather and Red Bear. None of which are our true family names either.

I kow that's added a somewhat unrelated element to the conversation, but it's worth remembering blacks and Jews aren't the only ones lacking a verbal attachment to their heritage.

JonnyApplesauce said:

So you're saying if a person's been on the receiving end they're incapable of dishing it out?

Horseshit, my man. Read my post way, WAY above: I'm in the "it's not racist" camp. BUT to say a person (in this case Prince) can't be racist because they've experienced it themselves is stupid.

meow85 said:

I don't think that's unrelated at all. The history of native Americans is an inherent part of American history and the atrocities commited against them are equally horrific and should equally have never taken place.

But comparing atrocities is exactly what got this thread lost.

Comparing atrocities by itself is already quite impossible to do, but moreso often undermines the point that has to be made, because it entices an emotional, angry response from those offended by the comparison, which does not lead to understanding, let alone agreement.

This thread takes the bait of comparing atrocities, which leaves everybody divided and in disagreement. The whole point of debating the issue then gets lost.

It's a shame Prince wrote those lyrics because they entice these endless discussions that rarely lead to better understanding and agreement, but usually more bitterness and misunderstanding. I think he could have and should have written a song about every major atrocity itself and asked our attention for all of them equally, because:

Hundreds of years of slavery, Jim Crow and (institutionalised) racism against African American people that is still going on today is more than enough atrocity to deserve attention, eradication, protection, prevention ánd reparation on its own.

There is NO NEED to get into comparisons to get that point across.

Likewise:

Hundreds of years of anti-semitism, the Holocaust and continuing hatred against Jewish people is more than enough atrocity to deserve attention, eradication, protection, prevention ánd reparation on its own.

There is NO NEED for comparisons to get that point across.

And equally:

Hundreds of years of theft and genocide on Native American people and an institionalised apartheid that is still going on today is more than enough atrocity to to deserve attention, eradication, protection, prevention ánd reparation on its own.

There is NO NEED to get into comparisons to get that point across.

I respect Prince for having the guts to bring the issue up and make people talk about it, but I believe he should try to make people talk not about what is worse, but about what happened, what is still going on today and what we can do about it, instead of consolidating and creating more divisions that lead us nowhere.
[Edited 4/30/07 3:21am]

Aloisio said:

Musically, I think TRC is, in parts, among Prince's best and most interesting work in years. Lyrically however, Prince has always been dogmatic and whether or not he truly believed in what he was singing/preaching about or was just being a mouthpiece for his idol, Larry Graham, there is a lot of questionable content on the album, not just on matters of race, but gender equality, too.

Tremolina said:

I agree. I don't see the purpose of saying that one group's suffering was greater than another's. What good does that do but just offend one group? And how does it help the other group?

meow85 said:

I am well aware that blacks and Jews are not the only ones who do not have attachment to their heritage. The song "Family Name" touches upon Jewish names and slavery, so that is where my discussion lies. I was also pointing out the conditions under which the African slaves got their American name, which are slave names, forced upon them to mark which white man they belong too.

Tremolina said:[quote]

meow85 said:

No matter how lyrics are written, touching upon race is always going to divide people on opinion because its a sensitive issue and folks are not going to agree on everything. Perhaps he should have left out the word "aside" because that to me is the word that leads to many interpretations. I myself, did not see anything wrong with it because I've studied this subject for years and I understood what he meant. Again, this is not something Prince made up. If you google Black/Jewish issues, you will find this comparable discussion has been going on for a long time. I had this same discussion in college 15 years ago.

I understand what you are saying in comparing atrocities, but in a way, at least it continues to spark discussion and judging by the answers of some folks, it is apparment many needed to be educated on a lot of things. It may not change how they feel about the song but at least they are aware of some elements that they didn't know before.
[Edited 4/30/07 7:09am]

I don't think it's exactly racist but Prince very clearly explains that he believes that as a man he is superior to women and women around here don't seem to mind which I find very amusing.

It's also clearly anti-semantic.

wonder505 said:

Yes, "mark" it was sort of like a form of "branding" the slaves, so to speak, like they were cattle; because you have to remember, they considered slaves "property" not "humans". Let me break it down mildly...sit back, relax and get the popcorn out:

Imagine about 1000+ African slaves from different tribes given the same last name as their slave owners on the very same plantation. Then you had them mixed in on the same plantations, as the African-Americans that were born into slavery. All of them given the same last name of the slave owner, because they "owned" them as "property." Then the slaves would be sold or traded to other slave owners. Now when that happened, the slaves went through various last name changes as they were sold to new slave owners. This cycle continued for years.

This happened every time each slave was bought or traded. Same went for the children of the slaves, who basically did not even belong to their parents after awhile, because they were born on the slave owner's plantation and could be bought and traded at anytime, and taken away from their parents, never to be seen again.

So now you had thousands if not millions of slaves and freed slaves, walking around confused with 2 or 3 different name changes, which made it impossible for them to trace their lineage and true family names. By the time all the rapings, selling and trading of slaves happened, it basically just made it impossible to trace family members/names/lineage. If they were born with a "slave" name how were they going to find their "African" ancestors? Many African tribes were mixed together on the ships when they were brought over to this country. When that happened, their lineage/language/family name/family members/dignity/culture was lost at that very moment. . So with the last names that the slaves were given, they were basically "branded for life" with the slave owners last names, as their only form of "identity" at the time. You still with me on this?

Now, America had become the only home most of the African slaves and African-American-born slaves had known. There was no "going back to Africa", Who would they have been going back to Africa to? What relative? What were their original tribal languages? What tribe? How would they get there? These "Human Beings" lost a lot more than one can imagine and the brutality that they suffered was unimaginable. Now generations later, these slave names have been transferred to their living descendants of today, who are walking around with those "slave" last names, still not knowing their true "Family Names". (as you have noticed, while I talked about the slave owners, I didn't refer to them as "Master", I refuse to give them that credit, because there's only one Master and his name isn't pronounced as "Massa")

Anyway, it is really sad, that anyone could actually believe that a human being could be "a piece of "property"..as though they have no breath of life or a soul. Just a sickening thought, and if any of you can tell me my true language and family name...give me a call at 1-800-555-US-SHAME. Won't cost you a dime.

In closing, racism and the atrocities of slavery in any form, is not an easy topic to discuss. There's a lot of emotion and anger involved when we speak about it. It is also no secret, that our nation really needs some serious psychological and spiritual healing, because we have such a scarred, shameful and devastating past, regarding these atrocities, and I doubt if there will be much change to cure the ills of it during my lifetime, since it seems we have difficulty discussing these issues.


Peace!
[Edited 4/30/07 20:03pm]

lovemachine said:

I want 2 make sure I understand U. If any person mentions Jews in ANY light that is NOT positive that is anti-semetic?

I'd like to recommend "The Slave Trade" by Hugh Thomas. It covers the Atlantic slave trade btween 1440-1870. It's 862 pages of data acquired from historical documents, shipping logs, diaries, banking records. It's the most accurate, well researched narrative. Appendix four has selected prices for slaves:
1440's-one horse for 25-30 slaves.
1864- Slaves in Cuba at $1,250-$1,500.
There's a long international list as time went on, between those two stats.

The Atlantic slave trade shipped an approximation of 11,000,000 slaves between 15th and 19th centuries. No accurate # is possible as the illegal slave trade after abolition continued and those #'s aren't documented.
[Edited 4/30/07 18:17pm]

xplnyrslf said:

Thanks Xplnyrslf,

I would like to recommend visiting the New York Historical Society's Website, if you live in the New York City area. They currently have an exhibition called "New York Divided: Slavery and the Civil War". Here's their website address if anyone is interested:

https://www.nyhistory.org/web/

In October, 2005, I visited their first exhibition called "Slavery in New York" which was about the "Transatlantic Slave trade". They had visitors give testimonies after they saw the exhibit. There were people from all backgrounds there. It was interesting because you could go in a booth and give a testimony about the exhibit, then watch it playback from diffferent video displays throughout the museum.

It was very interesting and emotional to hear visitors' views about it. Many parents brought their children to the museum to see this exhibit. My son and I attended and it was worth the trip. The exhibit was supposed to end on March 2006, but the NY Historical Society decided to create a "permanent" exhibit of it in a different area of the museum.

Feel free to visit the NY Historical Society's website if you wish, link posted above..

Peace .
[Edited 4/30/07 19:50pm]

Rainbow children isn't racist. it's a personal statement colored by the affect american history has on it's "new-natives".

i always thought the phrase "rainbow children" referred to:

1.) all people of different colors (hence rainbow)

2.) and their new life under God's promise 2 Noah (hence rainbow)

...Family Name, imo, is commentary on the destructive nature of the american race crisis- and it stands, in the album, as an example of one of the big walls (prejudice and ignorance) blocking us from truly "rising" under the "new translation". but of course, not many of us a "willing 2 do the work" anyway

I'll check out the NY Historical info on Wednesday when I have a day off.
Not to turn this into a history lesson, but, slaves were a commodity at the time. The ships had data on the # of slaves who boarded the ship and the # that arrived. This information happened to be saved over time.
The controversy on # thrown overboard would be the difference between the two, which is available. This doesn't reflect the actual facts as the illegal trade continued and there was no record keeping. Same circumstances: death as a result of treatment, poor nutrition, disease, etc. I'll see if Hugh Thomas's book has enough data to calculate the details. Better yet, see if he has a website and if stats exist. Get back to you....

No, it is not a racist album.