Most of the people who Criticize Princes music with the 80's is better tag are just Piss Artists....

We can be artist's without being recognized by the public. Art is self expression.

I believe that artist's like constructive criticizm...I do personally. Teacher's have helped me along the way..I've watched my own writing grow over the years. It may not have...If I wouldn't have accepted criticizm.

I do think that it is easier for an artist to criticize, preferably in a positive sense.

As far as some of these negative Prince reviews go...I just don't trust the depth of them.

In a word yes.....it is easier 2 criticize when u have no idea what goes into an artistic endeavor.
[Edited 4/17/09 6:22am]

datdude said:

You seem under the impression that expressing an opinion is a bad thing.

Isn't this all you are doing now, propogating an opinion?

you don't have to be an artist yourself, to have an opinion about Prince & his music....

I know I love The Gold Experience very much, but not the 3121 and Planet Earth albums.

it's all about musical taste, I know what I like, and I'm only speaking for myself.


[Edited 4/17/09 6:35am]

Graycap23 said:

What he said.

So because can't cook means you dont know what tastes good? Attacking critics for not being successful artists themselves is the last refuge of the failed artist.

If you think your art can't be understood by the non-artist community then don't release it to the public at large. Just sit in your room an make tapes for yourself and your "real musician" friends.


.
[Edited 4/17/09 6:55am]

i appreciate the feedback so far. a couple direct answers to the question. in asking the question i was NOT propagating an opinion. And though this IS a prince fan site, the question isn't JUST about him, or his music and who likes whatever they like (of course everyone has that right and to express it if they so desire).

Nouveau, my ceasing to write reviews (never of P's music incidentally) because i couldn't do a bad review wasn't because I believe expressing an opinion is a BAD thing, being aware of how fickle and bandwagonesque ppl can be, i just felt like i was pre-spinning how ppl could potentially process a project.

Tame, you make a good point about "trusting the depth" of reviews. (the person who pointed out that a recent review compared 4Ever to P-Funk is a great example).

emesem said:

Agreed.

thedance said:

Exactly.

SoulAlive said:

The reality is some people like and and some don't. Either way it's all good. A true artist doesn't really worry about the critics. Positive or negative.

I agree that there is a definite difference in tone and perspective in the commentary of someone who has a sensitivity/awareness of artistic endeavor. I don't believe that only artists possess that though.

thedance said:

You're right about that.

tomato said:

I agree but it seems that some people here especially take some form of pleasure in being over the top with their critic. We all know who they are and most times it seems unneccesary.

tomato said:

great point tomato!

emseem, i like your cooking analogy and the point about "public consumption". i agree with the latter, but with the former, when you spoke about not knowing what "tastes good" even if you can't cook makes my point in some way. all taste buds are not the same right, and i can't tell you what's GOOD to you shouldn't be because its nasty to someone else. our tastes buds are a different sensory response to how we hear music, apart from how something is mixed, and mastered from a technical standpoint, the rest may be all subjective based on preferences and how we're socialized

Actually, I think the harshest criticisms of any artists endeavor come from those who are indeed artistic themselves because they can tell if another artist put their best effort forward or just threw something together to make a buck, far more precisely than any layman.

datdude said:

I have a whole blog full of reviews, which by the way I'm always updating.

And YES, I have plenty of Prince stuff on there.

Sometimes I might say something which could be preceived as negative, but I generally try to stay away from all that.

If the review is way too negative, then I simply don't post it....or if need be, I'll change it up so that it's just a tad bit more positive.

At the end of the day, I'm no critic, just a music lovin' dude expressin himself. That's it.

On another note....I recently showed somebody my blog and she thought that what I was saying was fricken hilarious!!!

So hey, if some people out there think that my work is funny, then I'm cool with that too.

Whateva floats ya boat or finds ya lost remote.

The problem with that is that most critics r NOT artists in their own right and yet they relentlessly criticize anothr's work without even lnowing the process of creating something which think is a very unjust thing 2 do. Prince himself said once in an interview that he didn't care what critics said xactly bcause they weren't artists like Prince is. feel that if the person is educated in the art4m he will b able 2 give good output.

PurpleRain747 said:

Yet Prince is the first to post media reviews on his website and print reviews in the One Nite Alone live cd booklet....

I think thats a huge sign that he cares
[Edited 4/17/09 8:58am]

All the critics Love U.....in New York.

Graycap23 said:

datdude said:

Great point. I don't like cilantro. Many people love it. Yuck! Doctors and scientist say 1/3 of people do not like cilantro due to some genetic component.
I love Prince's music.

You don't need to be a baker to know the bread is good....or crap....

it's ok to criticize ,you like something or don't but you can say with some dignity

I'm not sure a clear distinction between 'artist' and 'critic' can really be made. From Wikipedia 'Critic':

Critic and genius
The critic is considered to be the psychic inverse of genius.[3] This insight was formulated early by Lessing as "not every critic is a genius, but every genius is born a critic...genius has the proof of all rules within itself." Kant scholar Jane Kneller has read this to indicate that, as opposed to the externally oriented and culturally dependent critic, "genius demonstrates its autonomy not by ignoring all rules, but by deriving the rules from itself."[4] [me: never trust what a continental philosopher says, ever!)


[edit] Criticism of Criticism
Notable scholars of the Post-Structuralist tradition have often emphasized the self referential nature of all criticism. Stanley Fish argues that all interpretations are subjective projections and have no inherent meaning; therefore, the critic undermines himself for he undermines only his own interpretation. Thus, concludes Fish, all criticism is self criticism [me: does this include Fish's own criticism of criticism? I think Fish is insane].


3) The Harvard Crimson, "To be a critic is to trade transcendence in for self-awareness and proficiency which is not to say that geniuses don’t know what they’re doing...genius involves a sort of freefall, brave, bold and fluent, that most of us aren’t capable of."
4) Paul Guyer, ed (2003). Kant's Critique of the Power of Judgement: Critical Essays. Rowman and Littlefield. ISBN 0742514196.