Wildboy said:

JudasLChrist said:

This is waaay off topic, but I just got to tell you there's not a thing that you are saying there that is true. Oscar Grant was shot while he was face down and the cops had a knee pressed up against his kneck. The piece of shit cop that shot him changed his story and eventually said he thought Grant had a gun. Many, many people saw what hapenned. I live downtown where the riots where, and I'll tell you that this community in Oakland has reached concensus that Oscar Grant did not deserve to be murdered by a cop. And no he ws not homeless. He was a father and was employed and had housing. Not that any of that matters, but it shows that you have the story COMPLETELY wrong.

Quit calling him Oscar Grant. That's not what you would have called him had he been mugging your sister. As for him popping out a few kids he probably didn't take care of I have no doubt. Just Googled it. As of the time of his death he was NOT living with his children and hadn't had contact with them in a while. Why? Because he was a drug addicted criminal who attacked police officers (a huge sign someone is very dangerous, as this is an automatic trip to jail and often you get a bonus ass whipping for your troubles). Here was this guy who if you saw him walking down the street at night you would cross the street to avoid, and all of a sudden after his death he's an upstanding citizen.

Then enter the Jesse Jacksons of the world, who turn something that is obviously NOT an issue of race into a god damn race riot where local businesses (which weren't even owned by white people) get destroyed. Disgusting ass "political leaders" who instead of stressing things like education and trade programs and getting the % of black voters up decide they should whip people into a frenzy and destroy their own town. And last time I checked, 12 people from Oakland were on that jury and ended this cops career. What else do people want? Take him out to the gallows and string him up?

People just don't like cops, and relish the chance to see them put on trial and made a mockery of. Question for you? Why is Oakland still standing right now instead of a burned up pile of shit like LA was after the Rodney King Fiasco? Because the very same police whom the people of Oakland were saying were racist pigs went in and kept the peace in the most NON VIOLENT way possible. When huge mobs were raging and even hurting one another the police deployed tear gas as a means to stop the violence (read: tear gas as opposed to riot shield ass beatings, which would have been completely justified and could have just as easily occurred).

My point, what happened with Oscar 'crack head' Grant was not related to race, you are looking for racism where there is none, just as with this retarded thread revolution. Why don't you go to somewhere like Thailand or Peru so you can see what REAL racism looks like.

Fin!

[Edited 7/26/10 7:54am]

Yeah, people just don't like the cops. That's why all us Oaklanders were upset that a cop murdered Oscar Grant, a defenseless unarmed man, a father, a black man, in cold blood. I'm sure white people get shot in the back by cops all the time when they get into fights in public. Which is what hapenned to Oscar grant that night.

I'm sorry, but no. The fact that you can't see the injustice of him merely getting shot, even, doesn't bode well for your argument that the killing wasn't racist.

Do me a favor, instead of hijacking my thread, start a new one if you want to discuss the Oscar Grant murder.

2elijah said:

babynoz said:

It's just appalling the lenghts people will go to and the absurd arguments they will fabricate in order idealize and romanticize the golden years. *cue violins*

I get it already...I got it the first thousand times it's been said...and the next thousand times it will be said every single week for the forseeable future.

Honestly, it's like Revolultion Evangelists trying to convert the heathens or something,

I hear you. It's funny because I don't recall anyone saying they actually hated the members of the Revolution, nor does their participation as members of Prince's group have a damn thing to do with 'white supremacy'. If it did, those white members of Prince's group would not have been part of his band. They made their contribution, moved on with their lives and so did Prince. Prince trying to attract a multiracial audience was no crime. The poster should look at other artists today, and the music industry and see how they are now doing that today. I guess record company execs took a good lesson from Prince in not 'limiting' or forcing specific artists into one box just to attract one specific, type of audience. No artists should have limits on the type of music they choose to play. Prince has been there, done that, and has already obtained and achieved, what he set out to do, and has a major following of fans from all over the world, throughout his 30-year plus career. He doesn't have to prove, as a black artist, what he can or cannot play, because he never did, nor did he allow anyone to put limits on his creative music skills as an artist.

The poster seems to forget that the Revolution consisted of black/white memberss, so what does this have to do with 'white supremacy?' I think the problem is not so much fans can't discuss those former band members and their contributions to a segment of Prince's music career, as well as, other non-Revolution band members, I just think that some fans have this 'crazy' idea that Prince can't survive, musically without the former 'white members' of the Revolution, specifically Lisa/Wendy. and so many of them, tend to fantasize about bringing that 'era' of Prince back.

Wendy, Lisa, Dr. Fink and the other members of the former Revolution band, have moved on, and so has Prince. It's some of the fans that refuse to embrace Prince without the former Revolution members. and they made that their own issue, not Prince or the former Revolution band members.

[Edited 7/24/10 19:48pm]

Frame this shit....

murph said:

2elijah said:

I hear you. It's funny because I don't recall anyone saying they actually hated the members of the Revolution, nor does their participation as members of Prince's group have a damn thing to do with 'white supremacy'. If it did, those white members of Prince's group would not have been part of his band. They made their contribution, moved on with their lives and so did Prince. Prince trying to attract a multiracial audience was no crime. The poster should look at other artists today, and the music industry and see how they are now doing that today. I guess record company execs took a good lesson from Prince in not 'limiting' or forcing specific artists into one box just to attract one specific, type of audience. No artists should have limits on the type of music they choose to play. Prince has been there, done that, and has already obtained and achieved, what he set out to do, and has a major following of fans from all over the world, throughout his 30-year plus career. He doesn't have to prove, as a black artist, what he can or cannot play, because he never did, nor did he allow anyone to put limits on his creative music skills as an artist.

The poster seems to forget that the Revolution consisted of black/white memberss, so what does this have to do with 'white supremacy?' I think the problem is not so much fans can't discuss those former band members and their contributions to a segment of Prince's music career, as well as, other non-Revolution band members, I just think that some fans have this 'crazy' idea that Prince can't survive, musically without the former 'white members' of the Revolution, specifically Lisa/Wendy. and so many of them, tend to fantasize about bringing that 'era' of Prince back.

Wendy, Lisa, Dr. Fink and the other members of the former Revolution band, have moved on, and so has Prince. It's some of the fans that refuse to embrace Prince without the former Revolution members. and they made that their own issue, not Prince or the former Revolution band members.

[Edited 7/24/10 19:48pm]

Frame this shit....

It's the same shit that gets said every-time The Revolution is mentioned on The Org. This being the Prince fan site. I'd think this is the place to go if one wanted to discuss The Revolution.

The issue about me 'forgetting' that Prince's band is Black and White so what does that have to do with white supremacy misses the point entirely. White supremacy is the context that Prince chose to form his mixed band under.

Wildboy said:

JudasLChrist said:

This is waaay off topic, but I just got to tell you there's not a thing that you are saying there that is true. Oscar Grant was shot while he was face down and the cops had a knee pressed up against his kneck. The piece of shit cop that shot him changed his story and eventually said he thought Grant had a gun. Many, many people saw what hapenned. I live downtown where the riots where, and I'll tell you that this community in Oakland has reached concensus that Oscar Grant did not deserve to be murdered by a cop. And no he ws not homeless. He was a father and was employed and had housing. Not that any of that matters, but it shows that you have the story COMPLETELY wrong.

Quit calling him Oscar Grant. That's not what you would have called him had he been mugging your sister. As for him popping out a few kids he probably didn't take care of I have no doubt. Just Googled it. As of the time of his death he was NOT living with his children and hadn't had contact with them in a while. Why? Because he was a drug addicted criminal who attacked police officers (a huge sign someone is very dangerous, as this is an automatic trip to jail and often you get a bonus ass whipping for your troubles). Here was this guy who if you saw him walking down the street at night you would cross the street to avoid, and all of a sudden after his death he's an upstanding citizen.

Then enter the Jesse Jacksons of the world, who turn something that is obviously NOT an issue of race into a god damn race riot where local businesses (which weren't even owned by white people) get destroyed. Disgusting ass "political leaders" who instead of stressing things like education and trade programs and getting the % of black voters up decide they should whip people into a frenzy and destroy their own town. And last time I checked, 12 people from Oakland were on that jury and ended this cops career. What else do people want? Take him out to the gallows and string him up?

People just don't like cops, and relish the chance to see them put on trial and made a mockery of. Question for you? Why is Oakland still standing right now instead of a burned up pile of shit like LA was after the Rodney King Fiasco? Because the very same police whom the people of Oakland were saying were racist pigs went in and kept the peace in the most NON VIOLENT way possible. When huge mobs were raging and even hurting one another the police deployed tear gas as a means to stop the violence (read: tear gas as opposed to riot shield ass beatings, which would have been completely justified and could have just as easily occurred).

My point, what happened with Oscar 'crack head' Grant was not related to race, you are looking for racism where there is none, just as with this retarded thread revolution. Why don't you go to somewhere like Thailand or Peru so you can see what REAL racism looks like.

Fin!

[Edited 7/26/10 7:54am]

Your ridiculous and jaded assumption that Oscar Grant, was someone who would have mugged one's loved one, is totally out of context. There is absolutely no justification for any cop to shoot an unarmed individual, who was face down on the ground, in the back. Fact is, this was a case of a cop with a racist attitude in the way he handled the individual in the first place. Perhaps you should get out of that fantasy world you live in and accept the fact that much of America still has a plantation mentality, when it comes to persons of color, including many white cops and how they approach and come into these communities, with ingrained prejudices. If they didn't, America would not have such a high rate of white cops murdering unarmed, black males, and yes it is unfortunate that this has happened and is still happening. Please try and gravitate towards reality, and leave that fantasy world behind, because it doesn't help the situation.

[Edited 7/26/10 9:03am]

JudasLChrist said:

murph said:

Frame this shit....

It's the same shit that gets said every-time The Revolution is mentioned on The Org. This being the Prince fan site. I'd think this is the place to go if one wanted to discuss The Revolution.

The issue about me 'forgetting' that Prince's band is Black and White so what does that have to do with white supremacy misses the point entirely. White supremacy is the context that Prince chose to form his mixed band under.

Based on many threads I’ve seen posted here on this forum, regarding Prince’s choice of band members, and his early group of racially, diverse members, why do some fans assume or think it was/is Prince’s job to be their “sole educator” in teaching them about racial diversity or relations, based on the members in his band? Prince was not the only musician to have a racially-diverse group of members in his band. Nor is or was it his job to be society’s main or sole educator in race relations. It is the personal responsibility of individuals within this society to make an effort to learn about the history and cultures of the many race/ethnic groups, that live within our society or the world period, and how to embrace and respect them.

Many musicians/artists’ have sung about racial and other societal ills, and it was/is a way of enlightening or raising awareness of social/political ills that exists within our society and the world, but that’s all their message is..to raise awareness and enlighten the listener. You can “get” the message the musician/artists transmits to you in their songs regarding race, political or socio-economic issues, but it’s how you choose to accept/embrace that message, and how you apply yourself among individuals of racially, diverse communities, throughout your life, will determine the outcome of that experience, and your outcome with that, is not the sole responsibility of any musician or artist, it’s based on how you apply yourself to the society.

Also, Prince having a racially-diverse band, throughout his career, does not mean that he is not allowed to have a band consisting of more members from his own race group vs having less members outside his race in it. Nor does it imply that his is racially prejudiced. If some orgers claim music has no color, then why complain or question who he chooses to participate as members of his band? From reading the Ebony magazine interview , it is obvious he has major concern/interests and future of many, talented black artists/musicians, and his concerns of their ownership of the music they create, and how they deal with record execs/companies, on a financial and contractual basis, and how much knowledge they have about the business side of the music industry, given how many of them have been bamboozled by record execs/companies in the past, by many white record execs/companies, due to either the record execs intentional and mishandling of those artists contracts, due to greed and financial gains, as well as, the musicians/ artists’ lack of knowledge of the business side of the music industry and the handling/understanding of signed contracts. This also does not imply that Prince is not concerned about the interests and future of all musicians/artists, but there’s nothing wrong with Prince recognizing the talents of artists he has interest in, regardless of their race/ethnicity.

Let's also not forget that 'white supremacy' is a fallacy and was created with the intentions of keeping races divided, as well as, the use of the trickery of 'classism', specifically designed to keep people divided economically (aka the haves vs the have nots), and brainwash specific members of a particular group, that they came from a 'supreme' race that never existed in the first place. So how can you acknowledge something that is a fallacy and doesn't exist? Racism and classism exists, but white supremacy does not, as there is no supreme white race, never has been, never will be. Sorry, but it looks like you've been bamboozled.

[Edited 7/26/10 9:15am]

2elijah said:

Let's also not forget that 'white supremacy' is a fallacy and was created with the intentions of keeping races divided, as well as, the use of the trickery of 'classism', specifically designed to keep people divided economically (aka the haves vs the have nots), and brainwash specific members of a particular group, that they came from a 'supreme' race that never existed in the first place. So how can you acknowledge something that is a fallacy and doesn't exist? Racism and classism exists, but white supremacy does not, as there is no supreme white race, never has been, never will be. Sorry, but it looks like you've been bamboozled.

[Edited 7/26/10 9:15am]

Yeah, I'm confused why you are going down this path. I'm using the term "white supremacy" to talk about racism. It is a commonly used term and is used by non-academic folks and academics alike. People like Bell Hooks, Cornell West, etc... White Supremacy is not the truth, yes, but there's no denying it's an idea that exists.

All that writing and explanation, and asking us to make assumptions about society, etc... -- JUST so you could provide cover for saying that the Revolution was a better band? Umm.... Four words: IT AINT THAT DEEP!!

JudasLChrist said:

2elijah said:

Let's also not forget that 'white supremacy' is a fallacy and was created with the intentions of keeping races divided, as well as, the use of the trickery of 'classism', specifically designed to keep people divided economically (aka the haves vs the have nots), and brainwash specific members of a particular group, that they came from a 'supreme' race that never existed in the first place. So how can you acknowledge something that is a fallacy and doesn't exist? Racism and classism exists, but white supremacy does not, as there is no supreme white race, never has been, never will be. Sorry, but it looks like you've been bamboozled.

[Edited 7/26/10 9:15am]

Yeah, I'm confused why you are going down this path. I'm using the term "white supremacy" to talk about racism. It is a commonly used term and is used by non-academic folks and academics alike. People like Bell Hooks, Cornell West, etc... White Supremacy is not the truth, yes, but there's no denying it's an idea that exists.

No reason to be confused. I should have stated that, that type of mentality exists, but an actual ‘white supremist race’ doesn’t. Those who fell for that fallacy, and believed they were/are actually above, better, more intelligent than other human beings, based on their ethnicity or skin color, have been duped or bamboozled by the historic creation of the racism and classism system, created solely to keep various people divided, with the intention of giving one particular group power/control over others.

It is a shame that many from that particular group were duped into believing in that fallacy, which caused many to react towards others, in nasty and disrespectful ways. When you have generations of people believing in that fallacy, and passing that fallacy from one generation to another, it is not surprising that it could/will take years to uncondition that type of mentality, which has infected so many generations to present day.

[Edited 7/26/10 13:09pm]

Jatrig said:

All that writing and explanation, and asking us to make assumptions about society, etc... -- JUST so you could provide cover for saying that the Revolution was a better band? Umm.... Four words: IT AINT THAT DEEP!!

Actually whether the Rev was a 'better' band or not is a seperate issue.

2elijah said:

Your ridiculous and jaded assumption that Oscar Grant, was someone who would have mugged one's loved one, is totally out of context. There is absolutely no justification for any cop to shoot an unarmed individual, who was face down on the ground, in the back. Fact is, this was a case of a cop with a racist attitude in the way he handled the individual in the first place. Perhaps you should get out of that fantasy world you live in and accept the fact that much of America still has a plantation mentality, when it comes to persons of color, including many white cops and how they approach and come into these communities, with ingrained prejudices. If they didn't, America would not have such a high rate of white cops murdering unarmed, black males, and yes it is unfortunate that this has happened and is still happening. Please try and gravitate towards reality, and leave that fantasy world behind, because it doesn't help the situation.

[Edited 7/26/10 9:03am]

You are the one with a ridiculous and Jaded assumption, the Police officer in question had no 'racist attitude,' he was dealing with someone who was high on drugs and had attacked other police officers. In his career he had no history of 'racism' and no complaints had been filed against him as such. Oscar Grant on the other hand had a LONG history of crime and drug abuse. He had just initiated a fist fight with someone half his size before assaulting a police officer. That is why I say he is the type of person who might mug you. It doesn't matter if the person is white, black, asian whatever, ANYBODY with that kind of wrap sheet is not someone I want to meet at midnight in the bart station.

Go ahead and live in your fantasy world where ever white person looks down on black people. Here is the way it is from sage god Adam Carolla: http://www.youtube.com/wa...S_HClm45O4

Wildboy said:

2elijah said:

Your ridiculous and jaded assumption that Oscar Grant, was someone who would have mugged one's loved one, is totally out of context. There is absolutely no justification for any cop to shoot an unarmed individual, who was face down on the ground, in the back. Fact is, this was a case of a cop with a racist attitude in the way he handled the individual in the first place. Perhaps you should get out of that fantasy world you live in and accept the fact that much of America still has a plantation mentality, when it comes to persons of color, including many white cops and how they approach and come into these communities, with ingrained prejudices. If they didn't, America would not have such a high rate of white cops murdering unarmed, black males, and yes it is unfortunate that this has happened and is still happening. Please try and gravitate towards reality, and leave that fantasy world behind, because it doesn't help the situation.

[Edited 7/26/10 9:03am]

You are the one with a ridiculous and Jaded assumption, the Police officer in question had no 'racist attitude,' he was dealing with someone who was high on drugs and had attacked other police officers. In his career he had no history of 'racism' and no complaints had been filed against him as such. Oscar Grant on the other hand had a LONG history of crime and drug abuse. He had just initiated a fist fight with someone half his size before assaulting a police officer. That is why I say he is the type of person who might mug you. It doesn't matter if the person is white, black, asian whatever, ANYBODY with that kind of wrap sheet is not someone I want to meet at midnight in the bart station.

Go ahead and live in your fantasy world where ever white person looks down on black people. Here is the way it is from sage god Adam Carolla: http://www.youtube.com/wa...S_HClm45O4

Dude that is your fantasy world which is why you're defending it. There is no justification for any cop shooting an unarmed individual. You scream not to make assumptions of the cop, yet you're doing the same to people who respond to your post. There are other measures that could have taken place to manage the situation, that is why police get training. How many white males consumed by drugs, unarmed, who tried to fight cops while being arrested, then laid faced down on the grown, while handcuffed, and get shot in the back by cops? Show me the high numbers like the ones with unarmed, black males who have been shot by cops? You're jaded. Fact is, many police and sheriff depts in this country, have a history of shooting, unarmed black males.

There's absolutely no justification for that, and your ridiculous assumptions that I think every white cop is racist, is completely off track. I happen to be a sister of a retired police officer, as well as having family members working in police depts throughout this country, so save your assumptions for folks who are as jaded in their thinking as you are. Point is, there was no reason for Oscar Grant to be murdered, regardless of his life's history, and because of his life's history, doesn't justify a cop shooting an unarmed individual, who had no weapon to threaten him with. Now like JC said, if you want to start a thread about Oscar Grant, and the police officer who murdered him, go start your own thread in the p&r forum.

[Edited 7/26/10 11:31am]

uhm,prince is from minnestota,what were the chances of him not having 50%-90% of the people in his band being white?

Zinzi said:

uhm,prince is from minnestota,what were the chances of him not having 50%-90% of the people in his band being white?

He's still from Minnesota, and I'm sure there were many black musicians during the same time Prince had a band, who did not have white members as part of their band. I still don't see what someone's race, in particular, has to do with a musician's creative, music skills though, and what difference does it make who he personally chooses to ask to join his band. At the end of the day, Prince's decision and desire as to whom he chooses to join his band is not required by his fans. Seems since the Ebony interview, there's been threads like this one popping up all over the forums lately.

[Edited 7/26/10 11:37am]

2elijah said:

Zinzi said:

uhm,prince is from minnestota,what were the chances of him not having 50%-90% of the people in his band being white?

He's still from Minnesota, and I'm sure there were many black musicians during the same time Prince had a band, who did not have white members as part of their band. I still don't see what someone's race, in particular, has to do with a musician's creative, music skills though, and what difference does it make who he personally chooses to ask to join his band. At the end of the day, Prince's decision and desire as to whom he chooses to join his band is not required by his fans. Seems since the Ebony interview, there's been threads like this one popping up all over the forums lately.

[Edited 7/26/10 11:37am]

yeahmy point was that he probs didnt do it deliberately, all the other black musicians in the middle of minnesota who had a black only band..probably might have

Zinzi said:

2elijah said:

He's still from Minnesota, and I'm sure there were many black musicians during the same time Prince had a band, who did not have white members as part of their band. I still don't see what someone's race, in particular, has to do with a musician's creative, music skills though, and what difference does it make who he personally chooses to ask to join his band. At the end of the day, Prince's decision and desire as to whom he chooses to join his band is not required by his fans. Seems since the Ebony interview, there's been threads like this one popping up all over the forums lately.

[Edited 7/26/10 11:37am]

yeahmy point was that he probs didnt do it deliberately, all the other black musicians in the middle of minnesota who had a black only band..probably might have

Nope, it seems whether it's an all white band, all black band or mixed band, it's about various musicians getting together, connected through similar and specific sounds in music, where they work together to create music to share with others, as well as, their fans. It's about the music, nothing more, unless one is looking for a personal reason to scream 'racism', based on their own self-iimposed uncertainties.

[Edited 7/27/10 6:55am]

If the OP is asking if people on the org who hate The Revolution, do so because they are racists - I would disagree. People on the org tend to be passionate for or against The Revolution based on their musical output.

If the OP is asking if The Revolution included white band members in order to try to win over the racist, white Americans - I would disagree. First of all there were other members of the bad who were black, including our boy. It may be that Prince and/or the record company wanted him to have white band members in order to increase sales, and that might make you assume that white Americans only like to listed to music made by other white people and are therefore racist. A bit of a stretch and a lot of assumption... I tend to agree with the orgers who think Prince picked his band based on musical talent and the sound that he wanted to create at that time.

Regardless...the OP needs to make sure he is not using racism and white supremacy interchangeably. They are very different concepts. And I am going to focus on his use of the term "vestiges" of white supremacy, which means "traces." I can agree that there are traces of both racism and white supremacy in America. I cannot and will not acknowledge that America as a whole is a racist or white supremacist society.

Jatrig said:

All that writing and explanation, and asking us to make assumptions about society, etc... -- JUST so you could provide cover for saying that the Revolution was a better band? Umm.... Four words: IT AINT THAT DEEP!!

That was pretty much how I summed it up in reply #4,

I mean, to me it makes a lot more sense to conclude that any Revolution backlash might possibly be due to the weekly and sometimes daily efforts by some fans to rationalize a simple preference, rather than it being based on some unlikely notion of race based bias.

I don't mind people showing them love but what I do wonder is why it has to be a contest...people like what they like and there's no need to justify your preferences at all.

The Revolution was the most exciting, charismatic and fun, to me.

The SOTT-era band was neat too... but the Revolution was always cooler.

Prince wanted a mixed band. According to Owen Husney, his manager at the time, it was partly for radio play/economic success and partly because that was Prince's artistic vision--to have a band of diverse sounds. Even Pepe Willie, the man who taught Prince how to write songs, stated that Prince wanted Bobby Z because he was a white drummer, continuing to say, "There were a lot of better drummers, including Prince's own cousin Chazz." So, Prince used the race and gender cards or gender bender cards to capture our attention and to also comment on race and gender, sometimes literally but most times figuratively in those early years with the emphasis on a multicultural utopia. Most of us fed into it or embraced it for one reason or another. Later Prince even admitted that Wendy plays a physical role of making him seem alright in the eyes of some people. I always wondered who those people were/are: women, whites, white women, guitar playing white women, guitar playing white women with twins??? So, Prince clearly understood that the visual is important.

Now, as an African American whose high school years were spent listening to the Revolution, I have fond memories of them, but I've never desired to have them return because I'm one of those fams or Kool Aid drinkers who likes what he as continued to do since then, including Lotusflow3r/MPLS and now 20Ten. But, I'll admit that I do wonder when someone wishes for the return of the Revolution is it because they miss that sound or because of something else. So, I do get the gist of the thread, and think that it is an interesting topic, especially since Prince has made his living by playing with or manipulating all of these issues, including lying about his own racial construct to get more radio play for Dirty Mind. But, of course, Prince wasn't the first to do this, which is why the tragic mulatto was so popular during the Harlem Renaissance (1920s). The fact that we continue to return to this issue just shows that race is still an issue in America, and it is a complex issue because depending on whom you ask they will tell you that it is a major or minor issue, which proves Aristotle's notion that perception is reality because the thing--chair, comb, hatred, love, money---is only real when it has meaning, and meaning is mostly perception. Prince was/is a genius at manipulating perception. "Am I Black or White? Am I straight or Gay?" He invented or created the race question. No one had even considered that he was anything other than African American before he started changing his racial construct in three interviews in early 1980. (At least I don't remember any articles that had addressed the issue of his race before those interviews.)

As for those posts by WildBoy, all I can do is shake my head and quote James Baldwin from The Evidence of Things not Seen. "If hard work were all it took to be a success in America, then slaves would have been millionaires hundreds of years ago." However, what I find most interesting about people who have the ideas that WildBoy has is that they always tell African Americans to get over it, stop crying, and get off our butts, but then when an African American calls for Black unity, collective economics, and some form of Black Nationalism, then we are racists? So, if we discuss the truth of America's continued institutional racism, we are lazy whiners. But, if we desire to unite under some banner like Black Nationalism to create our own autonomy, we are militant racists. Interesting, to say the least—as an African American I just hope that WildBoy never has a job that requires him to have a gun, but I digress.

So, again, as an African American who loved the Revolution in my teens, I don't hate the Revolution. I just love what Prince has done since then that I don't desire or need to have a Revolution reunion. I wouldn't scoff at a Revolution reunion, but I'll admit that the Revolution seems a bit cold and inflexible to me as they compare to later bands. But, that's just my subjective tastes. I think that the Sign "O" the Times/Lovesexy Tour bands were jazzier and blusier than the Revolution. This does not mean that I don't think that the members of the Revolution were talented. I'm just more partial to the sounds created by other/later bands, though I still love the sound of Dirty Mind and Controversy. And I'll also admit that maybe my liking of the jazzier and blusier bands has to do with being raised in the home of the blues. But I have never said, "Prince needs more black people in his band," though I am aware and had some friends who are former fans who have made that comment just like I'm sure that some of the white members on the org have friends who have said the same thing about Prince needing more white members. That's the world in which we live. Some people, including Prince fans, are going to like something because of how it appeals to their racial or cultural sensibilities. To ignore that does a disservice to our ability to construct healthy and enlightening dialogue where we can learn something from someone even if we disagree with them.

On a final and probably unrelated note, I struggle returning to the org daily because so many people here are dissatisfied with Prince's past ten to twenty year productivity. And when I read the post I do wonder how much of their dissatisfaction, both Black and White members, is linked to their racial or cultural sensibilities. And for me, more than anything, it is the intense anger that so many people have who are dissatisfied with Prince's latest or current productivity. I just don’t get it. I don't understand how you can be angered because you didn't like a song or an album. If it is about the money, then stop spending money you can't afford to spend. Again, I've probably digressed, but I wonder how much of that anger is related to race--to Black fans thinking that Prince doesn't write enough "Adore" type songs, and White fans thinking that Prince doesn't write enough pure rock tunes. (And, of course, I'm being overly general.) Regardless of what each of us likes or dislikes, is the seething anger really necessary?

Prince is a human being; that's all. Regardless of what band he chooses or what music he produces, it is foolish to think that one will love all of his work over an extended period of time or that he will make the same choices or decisions that we would make. I would have liked for him to have chosen different performers for his Lifetime Achievement Award, but I didn't think it was necessary for me to create a thread where I could rant about him not choosing the artists I would have liked to seen. Art is by nature subjective, and to be angry when an artist whose work you have loved and supported in the past creates art that you don't like or works with other artists that do not play the music of your tastes seems to be quite irrational. It is one thing to have a serious debate about the styles, strengths, and weaknesses of various bands that Prince has had over the years. It is something else altogether to post bit-pull raging posts filled with expletives and insults about Prince, band members, and other orgers who disagree with you. So, this thread has some major negative org history to justify its question. It is a shame that some of us are not closer to having a real conversation about it. What is really funny or ironic is that it wasn’t The Rainbow Children that caused me to lose hope in a multicultural, Paisley Park world, but the many negative posters on the org.

The Revolution is always going to be Princes golden ticket whether or not he wants to believe it.

Prince only cares about making cash dollars. If he really cared about the music he would be making good records with them, but he only cares about VOLUME and CASH.

Who needs art? Look at his most recent cover. Jesus what a load of shit.

JudasLChrist said:

Mars23 said:

Too early? Maybe, but I think you could be on the right track...

Race baiting is what fox news does when they try to make white people afraid of black people. I'm not doing anything like that here.

Its similar to what's happening here in Australia at the moment with the election coming up. Both major political parties are pedling the "boat people arriving on our shores" matra. Except, instead of the "black peril", here its "the yellow peril". When in reality, refugees that arrive by boat make up only a very small fraction of the total yearly refugee intake which in itself is very small by global standards anyway. It's politics of the lowest common denominator. It's breathtakingly unfortunate that they feel they need to do this in order to win an election. People need leaders to take them where they feel they are afraid to go, when in reality, the fear is just the unknown.

Sorry, off topic....sort of.

I also dont think the revolution is the be all and end all. I didnt really even like Prince when the revolution was around (i remember hearing When Doves Cry as a kid, and my sister and I would scramble to change the radio station). Everything changed though -BIGTIME- with Mountains and then SOTT. I think the reason i dont have the same love for the revolution as some is because i came to love Prince's (pre SOTT) music retrospectively. I was probably too young at the time to get it, and when i did, the music world had caught up to him.

Your post touched on racism in general and i agree that race did and does now, maybe to a lesser extent though, influence the marketing of musical product that the record co's produce. Maybe they did want to have a multi racial/gender band to get more sales. but it's not an entirely bad thing. Prince seemed to genuinely want to break down the race barrier, as did Sly, MJ and many others before and after him. His music spoke of this too, many times. THat was early 80's and still in the late 80's Aerosmith and Run DMC had a hard time with their collaboration. My opinion is that its a long bow to stretch to negatively link Prince, the revolution, and racism together in a post, as you will really only come up with a mostly positive conclusion.

So, to me, the racist "subtext" regarding whether some of us like the revolution or the npg or whatever band of muso's that Prince carries around with him seems like a waste of energy. Just enjoy the music and dont worry about loving something some of us dont....which on reflection of your post seems to be the root of it.

The title to your post ".....subtext of Revolution hatred". Makes it sound like it is evil not to love the Revolution, and i am not suggesting that was your intention.

Never thought I would write a post about the Revolution and refugees. Interesting.

Oh, and by the way, I do love When Doves Cry.....dont flame.....I grew up....very quickly.

1725topp said:

So, again, as an African American who loved the Revolution in my teens, I don't hate the Revolution. I just love what Prince has done since then that I don't desire or need to have a Revolution reunion. I wouldn't scoff at a Revolution reunion, but I'll admit that the Revolution seems a bit cold and inflexible to me as they compare to later bands. But, that's just my subjective tastes. I think that the Sign "O" the Times/Lovesexy Tour bands were jazzier and blusier than the Revolution. This does not mean that I don't think that the members of the Revolution were talented.

Agree! And those SOTT/Lovesexy Tour bands went places that The Revolution could never have gone.

The Revolution is always going to be Princes golden ticket whether or not he wants to believe it.

Thank God he gave up that "golden ticket"! I think this idea of "The Revolution" as the beginning and the end of Prince needs to stop.

And for what it's worth I like The Revolution.

Wildboy said:

JudasLChrist said:

This is waaay off topic, but I just got to tell you there's not a thing that you are saying there that is true. Oscar Grant was shot while he was face down and the cops had a knee pressed up against his kneck. The piece of shit cop that shot him changed his story and eventually said he thought Grant had a gun. Many, many people saw what hapenned. I live downtown where the riots where, and I'll tell you that this community in Oakland has reached concensus that Oscar Grant did not deserve to be murdered by a cop. And no he ws not homeless. He was a father and was employed and had housing. Not that any of that matters, but it shows that you have the story COMPLETELY wrong.

Quit calling him Oscar Grant. That's not what you would have called him had he been mugging your sister. As for him popping out a few kids he probably didn't take care of I have no doubt. Just Googled it. As of the time of his death he was NOT living with his children and hadn't had contact with them in a while. Why? Because he was a drug addicted criminal who attacked police officers (a huge sign someone is very dangerous, as this is an automatic trip to jail and often you get a bonus ass whipping for your troubles). Here was this guy who if you saw him walking down the street at night you would cross the street to avoid, and all of a sudden after his death he's an upstanding citizen.

Then enter the Jesse Jacksons of the world, who turn something that is obviously NOT an issue of race into a god damn race riot where local businesses (which weren't even owned by white people) get destroyed. Disgusting ass "political leaders" who instead of stressing things like education and trade programs and getting the % of black voters up decide they should whip people into a frenzy and destroy their own town. And last time I checked, 12 people from Oakland were on that jury and ended this cops career. What else do people want? Take him out to the gallows and string him up?

People just don't like cops, and relish the chance to see them put on trial and made a mockery of. Question for you? Why is Oakland still standing right now instead of a burned up pile of shit like LA was after the Rodney King Fiasco? Because the very same police whom the people of Oakland were saying were racist pigs went in and kept the peace in the most NON VIOLENT way possible. When huge mobs were raging and even hurting one another the police deployed tear gas as a means to stop the violence (read: tear gas as opposed to riot shield ass beatings, which would have been completely justified and could have just as easily occurred).

My point, what happened with Oscar 'crack head' Grant was not related to race, you are looking for racism where there is none, just as with this retarded thread revolution. Why don't you go to somewhere like Thailand or Peru so you can see what REAL racism looks like.

Fin!

[Edited 7/26/10 7:54am]

Do you even know the trial was in Los Angeles?

Why would there be Oakland jurors?

"[r]elish the chance to see them put on trial . . ."

That statement is unbelievable starting with 'Police' actually.

1725topp said:

Prince wanted a mixed band. According to Owen Husney, his manager at the time, it was partly for radio play/economic success and partly because that was Prince's artistic vision--to have a band of diverse sounds. Even Pepe Willie, the man who taught Prince how to write songs, stated that Prince wanted Bobby Z because he was a white drummer, continuing to say, "There were a lot of better drummers, including Prince's own cousin Chazz." So, Prince used the race and gender cards or gender bender cards to capture our attention and to also comment on race and gender, sometimes literally but most times figuratively in those early years with the emphasis on a multicultural utopia. Most of us fed into it or embraced it for one reason or another. Later Prince even admitted that Wendy plays a physical role of making him seem alright in the eyes of some people. I always wondered who those people were/are: women, whites, white women, guitar playing white women, guitar playing white women with twins??? So, Prince clearly understood that the visual is important.

Now, as an African American whose high school years were spent listening to the Revolution, I have fond memories of them, but I've never desired to have them return because I'm one of those fams or Kool Aid drinkers who likes what he as continued to do since then, including Lotusflow3r/MPLS and now 20Ten. But, I'll admit that I do wonder when someone wishes for the return of the Revolution is it because they miss that sound or because of something else. So, I do get the gist of the thread, and think that it is an interesting topic, especially since Prince has made his living by playing with or manipulating all of these issues, including lying about his own racial construct to get more radio play for Dirty Mind. But, of course, Prince wasn't the first to do this, which is why the tragic mulatto was so popular during the Harlem Renaissance (1920s). The fact that we continue to return to this issue just shows that race is still an issue in America, and it is a complex issue because depending on whom you ask they will tell you that it is a major or minor issue, which proves Aristotle's notion that perception is reality because the thing--chair, comb, hatred, love, money---is only real when it has meaning, and meaning is mostly perception. Prince was/is a genius at manipulating perception. "Am I Black or White? Am I straight or Gay?" He invented or created the race question. No one had even considered that he was anything other than African American before he started changing his racial construct in three interviews in early 1980. (At least I don't remember any articles that had addressed the issue of his race before those interviews.)

As for those posts by WildBoy, all I can do is shake my head and quote James Baldwin from The Evidence of Things not Seen. "If hard work were all it took to be a success in America, then slaves would have been millionaires hundreds of years ago." However, what I find most interesting about people who have the ideas that WildBoy has is that they always tell African Americans to get over it, stop crying, and get off our butts, but then when an African American calls for Black unity, collective economics, and some form of Black Nationalism, then we are racists? So, if we discuss the truth of America's continued institutional racism, we are lazy whiners. But, if we desire to unite under some banner like Black Nationalism to create our own autonomy, we are militant racists. Interesting, to say the least—as an African American I just hope that WildBoy never has a job that requires him to have a gun, but I digress.

So, again, as an African American who loved the Revolution in my teens, I don't hate the Revolution. I just love what Prince has done since then that I don't desire or need to have a Revolution reunion. I wouldn't scoff at a Revolution reunion, but I'll admit that the Revolution seems a bit cold and inflexible to me as they compare to later bands. But, that's just my subjective tastes. I think that the Sign "O" the Times/Lovesexy Tour bands were jazzier and blusier than the Revolution. This does not mean that I don't think that the members of the Revolution were talented. I'm just more partial to the sounds created by other/later bands, though I still love the sound of Dirty Mind and Controversy. And I'll also admit that maybe my liking of the jazzier and blusier bands has to do with being raised in the home of the blues. But I have never said, "Prince needs more black people in his band," though I am aware and had some friends who are former fans who have made that comment just like I'm sure that some of the white members on the org have friends who have said the same thing about Prince needing more white members. That's the world in which we live. Some people, including Prince fans, are going to like something because of how it appeals to their racial or cultural sensibilities. To ignore that does a disservice to our ability to construct healthy and enlightening dialogue where we can learn something from someone even if we disagree with them.

On a final and probably unrelated note, I struggle returning to the org daily because so many people here are dissatisfied with Prince's past ten to twenty year productivity. And when I read the post I do wonder how much of their dissatisfaction, both Black and White members, is linked to their racial or cultural sensibilities. And for me, more than anything, it is the intense anger that so many people have who are dissatisfied with Prince's latest or current productivity. I just don’t get it. I don't understand how you can be angered because you didn't like a song or an album. If it is about the money, then stop spending money you can't afford to spend. Again, I've probably digressed, but I wonder how much of that anger is related to race--to Black fans thinking that Prince doesn't write enough "Adore" type songs, and White fans thinking that Prince doesn't write enough pure rock tunes. (And, of course, I'm being overly general.) Regardless of what each of us likes or dislikes, is the seething anger really necessary?

Prince is a human being; that's all. Regardless of what band he chooses or what music he produces, it is foolish to think that one will love all of his work over an extended period of time or that he will make the same choices or decisions that we would make. I would have liked for him to have chosen different performers for his Lifetime Achievement Award, but I didn't think it was necessary for me to create a thread where I could rant about him not choosing the artists I would have liked to seen. Art is by nature subjective, and to be angry when an artist whose work you have loved and supported in the past creates art that you don't like or works with other artists that do not play the music of your tastes seems to be quite irrational. It is one thing to have a serious debate about the styles, strengths, and weaknesses of various bands that Prince has had over the years. It is something else altogether to post bit-pull raging posts filled with expletives and insults about Prince, band members, and other orgers who disagree with you. So, this thread has some major negative org history to justify its question. It is a shame that some of us are not closer to having a real conversation about it. What is really funny or ironic is that it wasn’t The Rainbow Children that caused me to lose hope in a multicultural, Paisley Park world, but the many negative posters on the org.

Very thouhtful, intelligent, unangry reflections. In spite of the many words I decided to read it through and feel a wiser man for it.

This is the way to start conversation and dialogue, instead of name-calling and monologue.

Thanks for that, 1725topp!

1725topp said:

Prince wanted a mixed band. According to Owen Husney, his manager at the time, it was partly for radio play/economic success and partly because that was Prince's artistic vision--to have a band of diverse sounds. Even Pepe Willie, the man who taught Prince how to write songs, stated that Prince wanted Bobby Z because he was a white drummer, continuing to say, "There were a lot of better drummers, including Prince's own cousin Chazz." So, Prince used the race and gender cards or gender bender cards to capture our attention and to also comment on race and gender, sometimes literally but most times figuratively in those early years with the emphasis on a multicultural utopia. Most of us fed into it or embraced it for one reason or another. Later Prince even admitted that Wendy plays a physical role of making him seem alright in the eyes of some people. I always wondered who those people were/are: women, whites, white women, guitar playing white women, guitar playing white women with twins??? So, Prince clearly understood that the visual is important.

Now, as an African American whose high school years were spent listening to the Revolution, I have fond memories of them, but I've never desired to have them return because I'm one of those fams or Kool Aid drinkers who likes what he as continued to do since then, including Lotusflow3r/MPLS and now 20Ten. But, I'll admit that I do wonder when someone wishes for the return of the Revolution is it because they miss that sound or because of something else. So, I do get the gist of the thread, and think that it is an interesting topic, especially since Prince has made his living by playing with or manipulating all of these issues, including lying about his own racial construct to get more radio play for Dirty Mind. But, of course, Prince wasn't the first to do this, which is why the tragic mulatto was so popular during the Harlem Renaissance (1920s). The fact that we continue to return to this issue just shows that race is still an issue in America, and it is a complex issue because depending on whom you ask they will tell you that it is a major or minor issue, which proves Aristotle's notion that perception is reality because the thing--chair, comb, hatred, love, money---is only real when it has meaning, and meaning is mostly perception. Prince was/is a genius at manipulating perception. "Am I Black or White? Am I straight or Gay?" He invented or created the race question. No one had even considered that he was anything other than African American before he started changing his racial construct in three interviews in early 1980. (At least I don't remember any articles that had addressed the issue of his race before those interviews.)

As for those posts by WildBoy, all I can do is shake my head and quote James Baldwin from The Evidence of Things not Seen. "If hard work were all it took to be a success in America, then slaves would have been millionaires hundreds of years ago." However, what I find most interesting about people who have the ideas that WildBoy has is that they always tell African Americans to get over it, stop crying, and get off our butts, but then when an African American calls for Black unity, collective economics, and some form of Black Nationalism, then we are racists? So, if we discuss the truth of America's continued institutional racism, we are lazy whiners. But, if we desire to unite under some banner like Black Nationalism to create our own autonomy, we are militant racists. Interesting, to say the least—as an African American I just hope that WildBoy never has a job that requires him to have a gun, but I digress.

So, again, as an African American who loved the Revolution in my teens, I don't hate the Revolution. I just love what Prince has done since then that I don't desire or need to have a Revolution reunion. I wouldn't scoff at a Revolution reunion, but I'll admit that the Revolution seems a bit cold and inflexible to me as they compare to later bands. But, that's just my subjective tastes. I think that the Sign "O" the Times/Lovesexy Tour bands were jazzier and blusier than the Revolution. This does not mean that I don't think that the members of the Revolution were talented. I'm just more partial to the sounds created by other/later bands, though I still love the sound of Dirty Mind and Controversy. And I'll also admit that maybe my liking of the jazzier and blusier bands has to do with being raised in the home of the blues. But I have never said, "Prince needs more black people in his band," though I am aware and had some friends who are former fans who have made that comment just like I'm sure that some of the white members on the org have friends who have said the same thing about Prince needing more white members. That's the world in which we live. Some people, including Prince fans, are going to like something because of how it appeals to their racial or cultural sensibilities. To ignore that does a disservice to our ability to construct healthy and enlightening dialogue where we can learn something from someone even if we disagree with them.

On a final and probably unrelated note, I struggle returning to the org daily because so many people here are dissatisfied with Prince's past ten to twenty year productivity. And when I read the post I do wonder how much of their dissatisfaction, both Black and White members, is linked to their racial or cultural sensibilities. And for me, more than anything, it is the intense anger that so many people have who are dissatisfied with Prince's latest or current productivity. I just don’t get it. I don't understand how you can be angered because you didn't like a song or an album. If it is about the money, then stop spending money you can't afford to spend. Again, I've probably digressed, but I wonder how much of that anger is related to race--to Black fans thinking that Prince doesn't write enough "Adore" type songs, and White fans thinking that Prince doesn't write enough pure rock tunes. (And, of course, I'm being overly general.) Regardless of what each of us likes or dislikes, is the seething anger really necessary?

Prince is a human being; that's all. Regardless of what band he chooses or what music he produces, it is foolish to think that one will love all of his work over an extended period of time or that he will make the same choices or decisions that we would make. I would have liked for him to have chosen different performers for his Lifetime Achievement Award, but I didn't think it was necessary for me to create a thread where I could rant about him not choosing the artists I would have liked to seen. Art is by nature subjective, and to be angry when an artist whose work you have loved and supported in the past creates art that you don't like or works with other artists that do not play the music of your tastes seems to be quite irrational. It is one thing to have a serious debate about the styles, strengths, and weaknesses of various bands that Prince has had over the years. It is something else altogether to post bit-pull raging posts filled with expletives and insults about Prince, band members, and other orgers who disagree with you. So, this thread has some major negative org history to justify its question. It is a shame that some of us are not closer to having a real conversation about it. What is really funny or ironic is that it wasn’t The Rainbow Children that caused me to lose hope in a multicultural, Paisley Park world, but the many negative posters on the org.

Excellent post.

2elijah said:

Zinzi said:

yeahmy point was that he probs didnt do it deliberately, all the other black musicians in the middle of minnesota who had a black only band..probably might have

Nope, it seems whether it's an all white band, all black band or mixed band, it's about various musicians getting together, connected through similar and specific sounds in music, where they work together to create music to share with others, as well as, their fans. It's about the music, nothing more, unless one is looking for a personal reason to scream 'racism', based on their own self-iimposed uncertainties.

[Edited 7/27/10 6:55am]

where did i say it wasn't about the music? prince did it for the music and nothing else i'd say

Zinzi said:

2elijah said:

Nope, it seems whether it's an all white band, all black band or mixed band, it's about various musicians getting together, connected through similar and specific sounds in music, where they work together to create music to share with others, as well as, their fans. It's about the music, nothing more, unless one is looking for a personal reason to scream 'racism', based on their own self-iimposed uncertainties.

[Edited 7/27/10 6:55am]

where did i say it wasn't about the music? prince did it for the music and nothing else i'd say

The very fact that Prince did it intentionally shows that he did for extra-musical reasons. Whether that was to be more marketable or to make a statement about values or both is something we don't know for certain cause Prince has never commented on it.

[Edited 7/27/10 11:32am]

Zinzi said:

2elijah said:

Nope, it seems whether it's an all white band, all black band or mixed band, it's about various musicians getting together, connected through similar and specific sounds in music, where they work together to create music to share with others, as well as, their fans. It's about the music, nothing more, unless one is looking for a personal reason to scream 'racism', based on their own self-iimposed uncertainties.

[Edited 7/27/10 6:55am]

where did i say it wasn't about the music? prince did it for the music and nothing else i'd say

You didn't. My point was as far as other bands during era in Minnesota was that, whether they were racially diversed or not, is that most musicians got together to create specific/similar sounds of interests, and in my opinion, not for the sole purpose of it being based on race, since racially-diverse bands in America by the late 70s, was no longer something new.

As far as Prince, early in his career, (late 70s through mid 80s), I'd say it was more about not wanting to be pigeon-holed with his music, by only attracting one specific demographic, and being labeled as just another r&b artist because of his race. As well as not being forced into one category of music, like what happened to so many other black artists at that time.

Also, because the type of music he played/created, which was a mixture of funk, rock, r&b/soul, pop and blues, if Prince's intentions to have some white members in his band, at the time, to reach a crossover audience, it seemed gaining financial success had to be a part of that move as well. The more fans, the possibility of more money. Just like with the “Purple Rain” movie, where the parents of his character were cast as a “biracial” couple in the movie, and that I cannot argue was done intentionally to attract a crossover audience – once again, more fans/moviegoers from various demographics, more profits and success. At the same time, Prince was on his own mission, making genius moves, by keeping his persona mysterious, and fans interested/wondering about his race/gender (latter referencing the image he presented to the public/fans).

Even back in the Motown days, groups like the Temptations, Supremes, etc., started gravitating towards obtaining a white audience, once they established a dedicated black audience financially. Some of the sounds in their music started changing, to attract a more diverse audience, and to pull in funds from them. When it comes down to it, the music industry is about music, but we also shouldn't forget that it is also about business, and musicians/artists/record execs using/finding various ways to make a profit from it, while trying to attract and maintain a dedicated fan base.

[Edited 7/27/10 12:44pm]

I have no opinion to express here, but I will say: JudasLChrist, you got cajones making a thread like this