TRON said: I can see your point S3V3N. But there's also Prince the control freak. It was very generous to give songs away to well-known artists and not take the credit. On the other hand, with artists that he discovered and made a protege, he was anything but generous. Of course he gave them their big break but he took away what matters to most artists- individuality and the creative process. If he had let Paisley Park artists have the say in their careers, maybe they would be more invested in what they were doing, and in turn, excite more of an audience. I know people are tired of the comparison but with Madonna's Maverick, she has a diverse group of acts that she doesn't meddle with. Many of them are quite successful. They don't have the Madonna stamp all over their sound. And this only makes her look better. With Prince, I sometimes get the feeling that his attitude is, "so what if this flops, it's not my thing." But really it is. And the more he watered down his catelogue with assosciated artists, the worse it made him look.
I agree! Yes,Prince did everything for his proteges',wrote the songs,played all the instruments,etc,but in the end,he didn't give them "individuality" which,in the long run,may have hurt their post-Prince careers (Jill Jones and Sheila E. are prime examples of this). | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |