NiceNBreezy said:

TrevorAyer said:

Prince old music was a reflection of himself and his environment. I don't believe it was as calculated as some suggest.

you don't get songs like "Head," "Sister," "Jack U Off," "Sexy MF," or "Pussy Control" without quite a bit of calculation.

errant said:

TrevorAyer said:

Prince old music was a reflection of himself and his environment. I don't believe it was as calculated as some suggest.

you don't get songs like "Head," "Sister," "Jack U Off," "Sexy MF," or "Pussy Control" without quite a bit of calculation.

Or do it to push people's buttons. There's a certain calculation in it that is actually a beautiful thing to witness one's horror of hearing another man saying he'll give a woman head or that a man needs "pussy control".

TrevorAyer said:

NiceNBreezy said:

He RAPS because he is not afraid to cross musical genres and, like every great artist, is experimental; he avoids dirty words because of religious beliefs; and he sings about whatever, whenever the mood strikes. There are a many artists whose music you can point to as blatant 'product', but Prince isn't one of them.

As to the baiting comments made by a certain other, those will be ignored. Inexplicably (or maybe not) the image of a delusional Don Quixote tilting at windmills comes to mind. Poor thing.

I always saw his attempts at rap as an attempt to seem more black, even tho he is horrible at it, and white folks buy it, its mostly a "black" art form. My point is that because he sucks at rap, its not honest, it comes from a place of ego, trying to be something he is not, than a true expression of who he is, especially when it was preceeded by "dead on it" which is far more honest than anything he subsequently "rapped" or whatever he calls it. Its like prince writing a death metal song .. sure he could pull it off, sorta, maybe fool a few people, but its not neccessary, not what prince is good at, and does not come from a place of true feeling or true artistic expression of himself. I don't see it as about prince not being afraid to cross musical genres. He certainly has not taken any real chances. Choosing to rap is more about not being afraid to sound like an old dad who thinks he is cool because he uses catch phrases that younger kids think sounds cool. Sound bad. And prince really does not explore genres very much .. his rock is rock lite, his jazz is jazz lite, his rap is rap lite, even his r+b fails to deliver goose bumps, his funk is funk lite, nothing of "flashlite" or 'papa don't take no mess" caliber coming out of prince these days, and his pop .. you guessed it, pop lite .. watered down, no real chances being taken .. so I can't agree with you there.

Prince strikes me as a man who (especially these days) is very very comfortable in his own skin. So it's odd to hear someone say he's trying to be 'more black'. I've watched and read a lot of interviews, trying to get fix on him, and out of all of that, I never once questioned that he 'owned' his African American heritage (admittedly, mixed race). It's a deep part of who he is, not a community he needs to pander to. As to quality, "Get Off", if you call that Rap, is very good, and there are others. I've also heard Rap where he was not so great, but he's had 'fails' whether funk, or pop, or rock, or jazz. Bottom line, I give him credit for mixing it up (N.E.W.S.?? Loved that).

[Edited 10/2/11 13:19pm]

eros said:

irreverence said:

English is not my first language, so I don't know what it means to palate. But I do resent your condescending tone. I am not making these comments because of my lack of intelligence! And don't count me as one of some group without knowing me.

And your socalled observations may be just that, but they don't count as arguments or clarifications or anything like that. I believe that you disprove your interest in your own post by your sarcastic remarks.

That makes absolutely no sense at all
No + sense = nonsense
You were the antagonist, remember.....and no that's not me being rhetorical if there was any uncertainty ....moving right along

Baffling. I don't even know how to reply to this, so I won't, except for:

God damn, you communicate like one strange individual! Effed up with a vengiance...

irreverence said:

1725topp said:

Tremolina said:

Eloquently put, but still not explaining what exactly he did wrong. So he wanted to be himself and promote individuality, racial and gender equality, while also being a bit controversial about it, to make a buck. Is that so bad? So he usesd bigger African American back up singers, because they could actually sing but he was doing something wrong? You wanted to see Boni Boyer dance on Hot thing while Cat was doing the backing vocals? How about Sheila on drums? Too latin for your taste? Cora then? Doesn't respect her afro enough? IOW and not so eloquently put: that is all saying more about the OP than Prince.

It's really always the same old usual usual. Ever since Prince became really "popular" somewhere in the early 80's, to some people Prince is "not white enough", while to others he is "not black enough".

What does it really matter? And why is Prince always doing something "wrong" in that respect?

The facts are that Prince has had more "black" band members than "white", but they all played all kinds of music. Yet for some that is never enough.

He also has made a lot more "black" music than "white". But just a couple of albums predominantly "white" like ATWIAD or Parade and he is "not black enough" anymore. Make "the Black album" consisting of 90% pure funk and to some he is still a weird effiminate midget betraying his own race.

Do people forget he wrote "Controversy" and what he actually said? Yes they really do!

Prince also actually did have "black" girlfriends and dancers, but neither enough of that for some. More latina and white, so as a black man he does the community a disfavour. As if his own life and personal choices should ever be dictated by anything so general and vague as such a concept that in this case only serves as a way of projecting somebody's own fears and prejudices on him.

How would you feel if people told you to date a certain race they prefer instead of your own individual choice? Or what "race" of music and people to make music with? That's in fact the opposite of freedom and individuality. Values Prince has always stood for and apparantly some of his fans still don't understand.

[Edited 10/1/11 15:04pm]

Both of your posts do not consider how calculating Prince was being in regards to racial and sexual imaging, and you seem to present my comments as merely my subjective feelings that I am projecting onto Prince. (As in, “oh boy, here comes another one of those angry Negroes who thinks that Prince has sold-out or does not play enough Black music.”) However, Prince was calculating and considered race and sex when he choose to associate publically with anyone, and this is not what I feel. This is what he and most of the people around him have already stated—for the record. According to Pepe Willie and others, Prince chose Bobby Z because he was white. Yes, Z was/is a good/great drummer, but by all accounts he was not the best drummer in Minneapolis. Additionally, as I have stated many times before, Wendy was a much a cultural (racial and sexual) prop as she was an excellent musician. As Prince stated in one of the Rolling Stone interviews, “She makes me alright in the eyes of some people. When I sneer, she smiles.” Furthermore, in three different interviews in 1980 Prince lied about his race and couldn’t even keep the lie straight. In the first interview his mother was African American and his father was mixed. In the second interview his father was African American and his mother was mixed. By the time he gets to the third interview, both parents are mixed. And, of course, he is doing this because he knows that Dirty Mind will not get much if any play on Black radio, but he also knows that White radio will not play him if he is perceived as Black. And, again, this is something that either he or somebody close to him has confirmed. I am saying all of this because your two posts attempt to paint my posts as my personal feelings that Prince’s isn’t “Black” enough, which was never my point. I give Prince credit for being cunning enough to manipulate the racial and sexual issues, anxieties, and hang-ups of America and the world, but that does not negate the fact that he also perpetuated as many stereotypes as he was trying to break or manipulate.

*

Secondly, if you notice, my discussion was more about imaging, particularly physical imaging. While I do admit that certain types of music tend to be more popular with certain types of people, I don’t get into the discussion of whether or not Prince makes more “Black” or “White” music because most people identify rock or rock-n-roll as White music when it is clearly the child of the blues and was first played by African American artists. But, for the record, I love Prince’s rock as much as I love his funk and soul, if not more in some cases. In fact, even though I have been a Prince fan since 1980, “Colonized Mind” moves or touches me more at this period of my life than any other work. I loved it when I first heard it, and it is still in heavy rotation in my crib and car.

*

Third, my discussion is not about his private choices of romantic partners, but more about the types of women he has chosen to use as a part of his professional image. Now, because Prince chooses to blur the lines of reality to sculpt his image, my comments about certain female artistic associates do cross into the area of his personal associates, but my comments are about his professional imaging. Yes, Prince, any man or woman, can date whom he desires. But given the history of America and his above statement about Wendy, one must wonder why the vast majority of the women he has flaunted have been more Eurocentric than Afrocentric. And, given what Owen Husney and others have stated about Prince’s early desire for crossover appeal, it seems that Prince is no different than the vast majority of African Americans who struggle with various levels of self-hate from being absorbed in a sea of American whiteness. And this is particularly true of Prince’s childhood, being raised in a town that was only three percent African American at the time. He, like so many other African Americans, was absorbed in whiteness, struggled to navigate it, and it shows in certain areas of his art. I’m not saying that any of this is Prince’s fault, but we can’t ignore it just because he makes songs that we like. The ideology of “Paisley Park” and “Race” is a wonderful ideology, but we must also be mindful and question when multiculturalism becomes an excuse to deny or marginalize blackness. Teaching the universal aspects of all mankind is wonderful. But, often, according to Langston Hughes, universality is code for African Americans to show how like White people they are, producing an urge for or toward whiteness to be as much like White and as less like Black to pacify and ingratiate oneself to the White power structure, or in Prince’s case the White consumer. Thus, it is laughable that someone can ask me or anyone else who questions Prince’s racial and sexual imaging if we have forgotten what Prince states in “Controversy.” What I realize is that Prince was trying to have it both ways: challenge stereotypes while manipulating them at the same time.

*

Fourth, given your perversion of my statement about Prince’s singers, I don’t even know if it would be useful for me to respond. Yet, my point was that while Prince has been quite revolutionary in supporting African American women as artists, especially if we include Patrice Rushen, when it came to the love interests of stage, video, and movies, the female was almost always Eurocentric. So counting Cat, possibly Tamar (which was more of a cat and mouse game and not overtly presented as a romantic relationship), and the female from the “Black Sweat” video, how does that compare to the others? And I’ll even throw in the African American female dancer from the 1999 Hit and Run Tour and the dancer who appeared on the George Lopez show, but he has never presented them as “love” interest in the same way as Vanity, Apollonia, JJ, Shelia E, Sheena Easton, Kristin Scott Thomas, and Ingrid Chavez who were presented on a much larger stage to which only Cat shared that same type of stage (movie and/or major tour) with him. So, again, I’m not discussing his personal dating habits. I am discussing the types of calculated female imaging that he has used for the duration of his career. That speaks to racial and sexual issues of American culture and the same issues that cause little African American girls to desire the White doll rather than the African American doll because they are constantly told if you are White you are better, which means you are treated better. And, yes, Prince’s physical imaging has contributed to the perpetuation of certain racial and sexual sensibilities because as a major artist/entertainer he is a part of mass media, even though, in many cases, he may have intended to refute or destroy them.

*

Does Prince have a right to do what he desires? Yes, and because he usually follows his heart, I continue to love his art. However, as an individual, a critical thinker, and someone who cares about the African American community and understands that artistic imaging does affect societal values, I also have a right to critique Prince’s work just as someone has the right to critique what I do or say. Ultimately, I, like anyone should, will do what I think and feel is best for me, but I am also going to consider, objectively, any critique of myself, my ideas, and my art to ensure that what I am doing is constructive for me and my community. Thus, like most artists, Prince has contributed work/ideas to society that can be considered as positive and negative, but it is the responsibility of the receiver to take what one can use constructively and reject what cannot be used constructively. Finally, returning to my first post, this choice by the receiver is easier and more effective if one has proper parenting.

*off topic*

Damn you're a good writer! Can you write my sociology essay for me?

* on topic*

eros said:

irreverence said:

Baffling. I don't even know how to reply to this, so I won't, except for:

God damn, you communicate like one strange individual! Effed up with a vengiance...

But if nothing more.....you'll take one more opportunity to feign innocence while insulting me ..because that's the very least you can do for my efforts

If you had framed this more as a discussion of how Prince's music impacted YOU (which you did to some degree), I doubt anyone would have had a problem with that. Because that's a subjective experience. But to state as a matter of fact that Prince effed us ALL up (in the thread title) is inviting disagreement and offense. No, he most certainly did not eff us all up, and some would say, to the contrary, he has brought joy and light into our lives. He's a great entertainer. He figured out his purpose in life early on and he lives it. And some feel we benefit from that. I don't begrudge him the earlier, raunchier stuff (kind of glad someone had the nerve to say those things, actually), or the androgyny, or the assless chaps, or any of the other entertainment schtick that made us want to watch and listen. Btw, a lot of those 'sexy' lyrics are hilarious. Too, too funny. Definitely not meant for children's ears, however.

babyjubilation said:

Damn you're a good writer! Can you write my sociology essay for me?

NiceNBreezy said:

MadamGoodnight said:

I am sure Ron O'Neal was in curlers and hot rollers getting his hair done just like all the others with the hustler-pimp style. That is how the style was achieved. The men wore suits in pastels, and bright colors, suits with exagerrated collars, cuffs, and lengths. They DID wear high heeled platform boots in those days as well. Even rappers Ice T and DJ Quik have worn long flowing hair that was the result of wearing curlers, a roller set. They're effeminate too now?

Old groups wore tight, sparkly sequined outfits, midriff tops, & nuthhuging jumpsuits. The Commodores did it, the Isley Brothers, Heatwave, so did earth Earth Wind and Fire. Let's not get started on Verdine White's hair. This gender bending stuff did not start with Prince, nor did it end with Prince.

I LUV Verdine White's hair!! A few years ago I saw him (up close and personal)...he's fierce (and really nice). Good summary. They all dressed provocatively and bent the gender a tad. What fun.

Verdine's hair is laid! Good to know that he's nice in person. What a great experience!

Great thread, this is what i love about the org, it should really be renamed catharsis.org

NiceNBreezy said:

eros said:

irreverence said: But if nothing more.....you'll take one more opportunity to feign innocence while insulting me ..because that's the very least you can do for my efforts

If you had framed this more as a discussion of how Prince's music impacted YOU (which you did to some degree), I doubt anyone would have had a problem with that. Because that's a subjective experience. But to state as a matter of fact that Prince effed us ALL up (in the thread title) is inviting disagreement and offense. No, he most certainly did not eff us all up, and some would say, to the contrary, he has brought joy and light into our lives. He's a great entertainer. He figured out his purpose in life early on and he lives it. And some feel we benefit from that. I don't begrudge him the earlier, raunchier stuff (kind of glad someone had the nerve to say those things, actually), or the androgyny, or the assless chaps, or any of the other entertainment schtick that made us want to watch and listen. Btw, a lot of those 'sexy' lyrics are hilarious. Too, too funny. Definitely not meant for children's ears, however.

^ well said...

1725topp said:

So, am I projecting the words that Prince and others close to him said? If you state that I am misinterpreting or misconstruing their words, we could simply agree to disagree. But to state that I am “projecting” is stating that I am so blinded by my own subjective concerns that I am asserting something about Prince without any evidence whatsoever. So, can you show me were my posts are merely projections?

Yes, a pretty clear example of that is when you said

"you seem to present my comments as merely my subjective feelings that I am projecting onto Prince. (As in, “oh boy, here comes another one of those angry Negroes who thinks that Prince has sold-out or does not play enough Black music.”) "

Basically what you doing here is projecting two things about yourself onto me:

1) that I somehow disregarded your views as "merely" your own, when I have not done such a thing and

2) that I basically did that with a prejudiced or even a racist undertone or intention, when that is in fact not what I've done in any way either.

I have not said nor implied any things such as "another one of those angry negroes" and I have specifically and repeatedly also referred to "white" people. Why should I not take offense by that and say: sorry fellow Prince fan, but that's all projection of your own issues onto others.

I am not trying to be adversarial. But, it is clear to me that Prince was partly calculating and partly freely expressing himself. One cannot create art without a bit of calculation.

If you read what i said again you would see that I agree he sometimes calculated to be "controversial" in order to get the necessary attention to his music. And I asked what was really so wrong with that?

Additionally, I do not begrudge anything Prince did in his past. I enjoyed nearly all of it. But, as a fan, an artist, and someone who cares about my community, I, like everyone else, have a duty to celebrate what I think helps people and question and discuss what I thinks may have some damaging effects on people. And Prince did perpetuate some negative stereotypes while he was trying to challenge them.

Sorry but I still haven't seen you give an example of how he "perpetuate some negative sterotypes" that have had "damaging effects on people". I don't think you can say such things, make such accusations without backing them up with some really good examples.

Of course, returning to my first post, the stereotypes and explicit sex in his work are not as much of a problem if more parents are doing their jobs. When most people were shocked and offended over the Dirty Mind cover, my mother simply shrugged her shoulders and said, "That boy need to put some clothes on his narrow behind before he catch a cold." Then, we proceeded to have a discussion about the imaging of African Americans in American media.

[Edited 10/3/11 3:16am]

eros said:

irreverence said:

Baffling. I don't even know how to reply to this, so I won't, except for:

God damn, you communicate like one strange individual! Effed up with a vengiance...

But if nothing more.....you'll take one more opportunity to feign innocence while insulting me ..because that's the very least you can do for my efforts

Well, I don't feign innocence. I guess I don't get your whole aggressive battle discourse. Why don't you argue your point instead of engaging in rebutting every single reply to your thread?

NiceNBreezy said:

irreverence said:

eros said:

NiceNBreezy said:

If you had framed this more as a discussion of how Prince's music impacted YOU (which you did to some degree), I doubt anyone would have had a problem with that. Because that's a subjective experience. But to state as a matter of fact that Prince effed us ALL up (in the thread title) is inviting disagreement and offense. No, he most certainly did not eff us all up, and some would say, to the contrary, he has brought joy and light into our lives. He's a great entertainer. He figured out his purpose in life early on and he lives it. And some feel we benefit from that. I don't begrudge him the earlier, raunchier stuff (kind of glad someone had the nerve to say those things, actually), or the androgyny, or the assless chaps, or any of the other entertainment schtick that made us want to watch and listen. Btw, a lot of those 'sexy' lyrics are hilarious. Too, too funny. Definitely not meant for children's ears, however.

Your 'advice' to me is complete and utter bullshit. A simple scroll back reveals that the post that I began this thread with was presented from a purely subjective veiwpoint of which I followed up with a question. Maybe you would have noticed that if you hadn't been so determined to try to prove me to be an idiot by pompously fixating on and calling attention to the gramatical errors in my posts. What I think the source of your discomfort--angst--outrage even, stemmed from was the fact that I introduced issues of race as one of the supports to my proposed theory and forced you to have to look past your fantastical world where music and happy thoughts conquers all evils and actually consider for s moment that others may have a different reality. Furthermore, that this unwanted dose of reality was being force fed to you by someone who you probably perceived to be an ungrateful, upitty, militant negro with his own agenda. Good day

Wow. Toxic. Thanks for that. "Gramatical" is spelled with two "m"s, btw.

NiceNBreezy said:

NiceNBreezy said:

eros said:

irreverence said:

Well, I don't feign innocence. I guess I don't get your whole aggressive battle discourse. Why don't you argue your point instead of engaging in rebutting every single reply to your thread?

Again...you were the antagonist, my friend You came at me--albeit in a veiled sort of way--but you did. My intent was to make people think and to stimulate an honest dialogue....definitely not to be repeatedly attacked by posters here. I find it extremely interesting that you've now somehow managed to convince yourself that I was the aggressor and that I've been in fact attacking you. Seriously?

Again: You are the one using aggressive and sometimes passive aggressive (sarcasm) discourse. You are the one with the aggressive tone. I am not saying anything about you being the aggressor, that's again your discourse, not mine. I just argue against your points and against your whole way of communicating.

I just looked at my first post again, and I agree that I am not conceiling that I find the thread odd. This feeling hasn't subsided.

But the fact stays: You haven't argued your points, just claimed them. I may agree to some degree on your ideas, but I have yet to see you answer the questions I raised in my first post. So I find it hard to take it seriously.

But again again: Maybe this whole thread has just gone awol and started living its own life, so you might have better luck with starting a new thread instead. I don't have anything bad to say about you as a person, I don't know you, but you seem caught by the battle instead of the issue.

irreverence said:

eros said:

NiceNBreezy said:

Wow. Toxic. Thanks for that. "Gramatical" is spelled with two "m"s, btw.

Yeah? .....and assholes stink

Hey eros, here's an answer to two really stupid questions:

Did Prince use his power for good -- Um, YES.

Did Prince use his power to our detriment -- Um, NO.

The only thing detrimental here are your baiting, toxic posts.

And one more thing:

Waste your time spewing more nonsense in reply...I won't be opening this thread again to read it Count on it.

It's really always the same old usual usual. Ever since Prince became really "popular" somewhere in the early 80's, to some people Prince is "not white enough", while to others he is "not black enough".

What does it really matter? And why is Prince always doing something "wrong" in that respect?

The facts are that Prince has had more "black" band members than "white", but they all played all kinds of music. Yet for some that is never enough.

He also has made a lot more "black" music than "white". But just a couple of albums predominantly "white" like ATWIAD or Parade and he is "not black enough" anymore. Make "the Black album" consisting of 90% pure funk and to some he is still a weird effiminate midget betraying his own race.

Do people forget he wrote "Controversy" and what he actually said? Yes they really do!

Prince also actually did have "black" girlfriends and dancers, but neither enough of that for some. More latina and white, so as a black man he does the community a disfavour. As if his own life and personal choices should ever be dictated by anything so general and vague as such a concept that in this case only serves as a way of projecting somebody's own fears and prejudices on him.

How would you feel if people told you to date a certain race they prefer instead of your own individual choice? Or what "race" of music and people to make music with? That's in fact the opposite of freedom and individuality. Values Prince has always stood for and apparantly some of his fans still don't understand.

Well Said!

Okay, so I can see that this is going to be a circular debate, making it useless to you and me because not only has your last post completely ignored the evidence of Prince’s own words that I presented, you also do not admit to things that you have said. So, I will respond to your latest post with more evidence of what I initially and actually said, you can deny it, and that will end our discourse.

*

Tremolina said: Basically what you doing here is projecting two things about yourself onto me: 1) that I somehow disregarded your views as "merely" your own, when I have not done such a thing

*

Actually, you did disregard my views as “merely” my own subjective views without any evidence when you stated: “It's really always the same old usual usual. Ever since Prince became really "popular" somewhere in the early 80's, to some people Prince is "not white enough", while to others he is "not black enough”. By using the phrase “it’s the same old usual usual,” you are asserting two things about my post. One, you are asserting that my point is like “the same old usual” that Prince does not make enough black music, which is not the point of any of my posts. So, you are projecting that idea onto my posts. Two, by lumping my responses in the category of those who feel this way, you are asserting that my posts are a mindless rehashing of that notion or mentality. So, yes, based on your words or phrasing, you have disregarded my views as subjective, mindless, and possibly racist, but I don’t want to put words into your mouth.

*

Tremolina said: 2) that I basically did that with a prejudiced or even a racist undertone or intention, when that is in fact not what I've done in any way either. I have not said nor implied any things such as "another one of those angry negroes" and I have specifically and repeatedly also referred to "white" people. Why should I not take offense by that and say: sorry fellow Prince fan, but that's all projection of your own issues onto others.

*

In trying to show the benefits of Prince’s multicultural ideology, you lumped my initial post with the “Prince is not black enough” crowd. And yes, you did say that both the “Prince is not white enough” crowd and “Prince is not black enough” crowd are both flawed, but to respond to my post with, again, “it is the same old usual,” is to say essentially that there is no depth in my post and that it is “merely” a re-wording of “Prince is not Black enough,” which is also to assert that my posts are coming from a myopic or racially narrow place by lumping me or connecting my posts with that crowd since I have never said that “Prince is not Black enough” or that “Prince does not play enough Black music.” So, yes, your words have inferred that my posts are the product of someone “displeased,” “angry,” or “disappointed,” that Prince does not make enough Black music. That may not have been your intent, but I can only react to the words that you chose.

*

Tremolina said: If you read what i said again you would see that I agree he sometimes calculated to be "controversial" in order to get the necessary attention to his music. And I asked what was really so wrong with that?

*

It is a problem when anyone creates explicit sexual content for mediums (radio and television) that are openly accessible to children. Prince wanted heavy radio and video rotation, and he created well-crafted art but also sexually explicit art to gain the attention of the masses. Now, while I will state that I believe that his goal was the gain our attention with the sexual sensationalism and then slip deeper ideas in the music, it seems that in some cases Prince sacrificed didactic content for sensationalism. As he states in one song, “You wouldn’t have drank my coffee if I hadn’t use the cream.” Sometimes, the coffee or didactic message gets smothered or drowned in the cream. Additionally, Owen Husney and Pepe Willie are clear, in A Pop Life and in Prince: A Literary Look, that Prince worked radio early and then crafted Dirty Mind as a way to gain attention because of its sexual content. There is a fine line between art and spectacle because a spectacle is a show for the sake of a show without any purpose or desire to educate or uplift, which often ends in the opposite. Art without the desire to educate or uplift almost always becomes spectacle, which is the equivalent of the Jerry Springer Show or most reality TV. In “Sexuality” Prince is being sensational, but he is using sensationalism to get our attention to then educate or uplift. “Mamas don’t let your children watch television before they know how to read, or else all they’ll know how to do is cuss, fight, and breed. No child is bad from the beginning. They only imitate their atmosphere.” However, a long like “Sister” runs the risk of becoming or being perceived as spectacle because it is open-ended or ambiguous in that while it is clear to me that the speaker does not enjoy this relationship with his sister, some may not get this because of the ambiguous phrase “incest is everything it’s said to be.” So, in some cases Prince’s desire to be controversial or sensational to get the public’s attention supersedes or supplants his desire to inspire, educate, and uplift, which defeats the point of many of his messages. And since it seems that his goal is to be a songwriter with something serious to say, then the problem is that he is hindering his own message at times. Prince, in several interviews, including the Vh1 to One interview with Chris Rock stated that "Music is supposed to uplift and enlighten."

*

Tremolina said: Sorry but I still haven't seen you give an example of how he "perpetuate some negative sterotypes" that have had "damaging effects on people". I don't think you can say such things, make such accusations without backing them up with some really good examples.

*

So many hits, so little time…In Prince A Pop Life Dez Dickerson states that performing “Head” in an audience that included thirteen and fourteen year old children became a problem for him. And, yes, it is not Prince’s fault that parents would allow their children to attend a Prince show, but Prince is just as responsible for courting the young fans who listen to the radio and watch television. As an artist in the industry, Prince has as much responsibility to be mindful of the audience to which his work is being promoted. By the early eighties it was widely known that radio and most major record labels were catering to or promoting to a much younger audience. Accordingly, I can’t count the number of people, male and female, who have said that Prince inspired their first sexual encounter. In college one girl confided to me that at the age of twelve she wanted Prince to fuck her. Oprah Winfrey publically admitted that after a Prince concert she felt compelled to do things that she had never considered before. Was Tevin Campbell really old enough to sing “Shhh”? While some people may see all of this as liberating, it is damaging when popular art is used to introduce children before the age of eighteen to sex and sexuality. Of course, Prince is not the only culprit, but he is a part of mass media. He was a part of the changing of moral values., i.e. what could be played on radio and television. The man was so slick and creative he was able to get the “fuck” played on the radio. Every real Prince fan knows that the “Erotic City” lyric is “we can fuck until the dawn.” Should high school children be inspired to “fuck until the dawn”?

*

Transitioning from sex to race, American media makes money celebrating the beauty and intellect of whiteness and demonizing blackness as something exotic and unintelligent. (Do I really need to explain that the first American blockbuster was Birth of a Nation, that good guys where white, that natural African hair is still perceived as a liability to a career in corporate America, and that little African American girls still prefer the white dolls to the African American dolls because they have been taught to hate themselves?) Now, based on that history, Prince, as we all do, has the freedom to choose how he crafts his image based on the people with whom he associates, and he can choose to work to destroy those negative images of Africanness or blackness or he can choose to perpetuate them for his own checkbook. With that said, do you really think it was a coincidence in Under the Cherry Moon that when Christopher is getting drunk and having a change of heart about his gigolo ways that the image that scares the hell out of him is a black woman? Think about the juxtaposition of those images. He is trying to win the love of a thin, blonde white woman, and the face of horror is a black woman. That doesn’t strike you as a negative stereotype? Remember, they had already drawn our attention to the difference in skin complexion between Christopher and Tricky, when Christopher states: “He said what officer, my brother. Oh no, we definitely have different fathers. Check it out—butterscotch, chocolate. No way.” The “no way,” is Christopher’s response to Tricky’s desire to date Mary, meaning that Tricky, among other things, is too dark. When Tricky asserts that he would like to date Mary, Christopher replies: “Mother Dear, I’d like you to meet my new husband. And when the police come to carry yo’ ass down to the joint, this is me..” So, even in a film like Under the Cherry Moon where the theme seems to be love can conquer all, it seems that love can only conquer all if it is between a light or fair-skinned African American and a white woman. Then combine that with the fact that the vast majority of his leading ladies on stage, video, and film have been Eurocentric. As a part of mass media, whether he intended to do so or not, Prince has perpetuated the message that blackness is exotic if not ugly, and that the only way to find self-worth is to change one’s hair texture and surround oneself with as many white people as possible. Are you just going to ignore that Bobby Z was chosen as much for being white as for being a quality drummer? Are you going to ignore that Prince, himself, in his own words, understood the avenues that Wendy and Lisa provided both as great musicians and as white females? Do you know how many African American males began to perm their hair because they wanted to be like Prince? And, yes, this was happening long before Prince, but who has the self-awareness and the courage to end this cycle of self-hatred?

*

So if none of what I have presented proves to you that I am not projecting but using the available evidence to say that Prince is a great artist who has created songs that can have a positive and negative effect on society, then we must agree to disagree.

1725topp,

Sorry for my english here, but i try to react anyway.

In essence: I dont see your problem.

I mean: why should Prince be a spokesperson for or representative of the afro-american community? What is the afro-american community exactly? Is there some unifying. specific culture which covers people whose ancestors were african slaves, a Nigerian asylum seeker and a Zambian kid adopted by a Hollywood couple? Well, chances might be they are all dark(er)-skinned, but are they all representatives of the same easy to describe 'culture'?

Maybe its YOUR own perspective that Prince should be some kind of representative for some afro-american community as its perceived by YOU, but maybe Prince himself has different thoughts about it. Which of course are personal and individual. IMO he owes you nothing in that sense.

So what if he prefers lighter skinned black women and latina women? You also have skinny white guys who only love built dark ladies, or redheaded irish girls who happen to like asian guys. Those are individual preferences.

And whats the problem with him going for a 'multi-ethnic band'? He is a pop-musician, making decisions about his creativity and his image. He isn't Martin Luther King or Gandhi..lol

IMO the idea ITSELF that Prince should apply to a certain image / view other people might have about him when it comes to him being some kind of afro-american spokesperson, is racist in its core.

In that sense i agree with Tremolina: a long time during his career he seemed to me more about rising ABOVE these kind expectations and realising that it was actually giving you freedom to not limit yourself to a certain groupthinking.

[Edited 10/3/11 16:38pm]

[Edited 10/3/11 16:41pm]

Riverman37 said:

NiceNBreezy said:

Riverman37 said:

1725topp,

Sorry for my english here, but i try to react anyway.

In essence: I dont see your problem.

I mean: why should Prince be a spokesperson for or representative of the afro-american community? What is the afro-american community exactly? Is there some unifying. specific culture which covers people whose ancestors were african slaves, a Nigerian asylum seeker and a Zambian kid adopted by a Hollywood couple? Well, chances might be they are all dark(er)-skinned, but are they all representatives of the same easy to describe 'culture'?

Maybe its YOUR own perspective that Prince should be some kind of representative for some afro-american community as its perceived by YOU, but maybe Prince himself has different thoughts about it. Which of course are personal and individual. IMO he owes you nothing in that sense.

So what if he prefers lighter skinned black women and latina women? You also have skinny white guys who only love built dark ladies, or redheaded irish girls who happen to like asian guys. Those are individual preferences.

And whats the problem with him going for a 'multi-ethnic band'? He is a pop-musician, making decisions about his creativity and his image. He isn't Martin Luther King or Gandhi..lol

IMO the idea ITSELF that Prince should apply to a certain image / view other people might have about him when it comes to him being some kind of afro-american spokesperson, is racist in its core.

In that sense i agree with Tremolina: a long time during his career he seemed to me more about rising ABOVE these kind expectations and realising that it was actually giving you freedom to not limit yourself to a certain groupthinking.

[Edited 10/3/11 16:38pm]

[Edited 10/3/11 16:41pm]

It seems that you are asking me questions without understanding the history of Africans in America. So, with that, I don't know if you are just uninformed about American history or you are being selectively naïve to make your point, but I will try to answer your questions.

*

First, African Americans (people who are descendants of American slaves) are united by historical ancestry, collective culture created by them, and institutional racism. One of the aspects of institutional racism is art, such as the perverted imaging of African Americans by American media. Thus, when Prince chooses to incorporate the style and themes of James Brown, Sly Stone, Jimi Hendrix, even Parliament Funkadelic, he is making use of artists who have continued the tradition of using art as a socio-political force. But, of course, your post shows that either you do not know that history or wish to ignore it for your own multicultural fantasy that allows you to enjoy the art of an African American without having to be bothered or burdened with the socio-political commentary of what it means to be Black in America. Well, the history and tradition of African American music is political, and if Prince chooses to use resources from that tradition, those of us who love and value that tradition have a right to critique whether or not he his protecting or damaging that tradition. Accordingly to say that Prince isn't King or Gandhi as a way to minimize his or any African American's artist's role in the struggle for first-class citizenship and sovereignty for African Americans simply proves that you do not know or care anything about the history of African American art and how it has a tradition of being a socio-political voice and impact. Prince is the one who has consistently connected himself with and wrapped himself in this history and tradition. And for doing so, he will be judged accordingly. To call my posts racist is to call the history and tradition of African American art racist because the vast majority of African American artists, historically, have embraced W. E. B. DuBois' notion that all art is propaganda, and one is either supporting something or denouncing something when one creates art. Now, you can disagree with that assessment of art, but when Prince connects to and wraps himself in that history and tradition of African American art, then he is also connecting to and wrapping himself in that notion, and I, as a lover and supporter of that history and tradition, have a right to critique how he has impacted or affected that history and tradition. If he does not want to be judged by the socio-political standards and expectations that African American listeners have regarding the history and tradition of African American art, then he should stop coopting it when it is convenient for him. I did not force him to write songs, such as “We March,” “Uncle Sam,” “You Will be Moved,” “Free,” “Family Name,” and others. But, when he decides to write these types of songs that specifically relate to and address African American concerns or issues, then he is also opening himself to be measured and evaluated according to that tradition. And just because someone wants to make use of and enjoy African American sound, style, and creativity that is devoid of, divorced from, or separated from the condition and struggle that creates these things does not mean that those of us who love and understand that the sound, style, and creative are produced by and reflective of the condition and struggle must sit idly and allow the art that we love and value to be raped of its socio-political essence and history just because deleting the socio-political essence from the art will make it more palatable to a larger white audience.

*

Furthermore, do not be like Tremolina and misinterpret my words for your own purposes. As I clearly said in all of my posts, my comments are not about who Prince dates but about the imaging that he sells and promotes and about analyzing that imaging in the context of American history and media. And, as I have clearly proven, which you and Tremolina so desperately keep trying to ignore, Prince chose people as much for their race as for their talents. The problem with that criterion is that if Prince was truly "rising above" racial stereotypes and expectations would he not have chosen the best drummer? So, if I understand you properly, it is a good thing for Prince to choose a white musician because of his race because that perpetuates the notion of multiculturalism. Or, is that really a product or offspring of racism that Prince felt the need to have white members because he knew that he could not get rock radio and crossover appeal with an all-African American band? (Again, this is not my idea, but the testimony of those closest to him.) The point that you do not seem to understand or do not seem to want to understand is that Prince's multicultural, Paisley Park world was as much a calculated attempt to sell records as it was a true expression of his heart and ideology. And, in that case, Prince was willing to minimize and marginalize African American talent and imaging to appease the larger white audience. And since I am assuming you are white (I'm sure you will correct me if I am wrong.) you do not understand how that is negative and damaging to the history and legacy of African American art and African Americans because his choice does not affect your imaging negatively. To paraphrase Miles Davis, it seems, based on sales, that the larger white audience can only accept an African American artist when one is either assimilating oneself to be just like the white audience (hence the continued popularity of the mulatto) or when one is embracing the sexually exotic or aggressively violent stereotype given mass promotion through Birth of a Nation. I am not talking about you and your tastes because I don’t know you, but if you check the sales the vast majority of leading African American artists, especially in music, fall into one of these two categories.

*

Finally, for you to infer that my thinking is or that I am racist is, again, laughable, especially when you never bothered to refute any of the evidence of imaging that I presented in any of my posts. Yes, Prince, as a human being, has the right to associate with whomever he likes. However, when he makes use of the history and tradition of African American art to develop his imaging, those of us who love and value this history and tradition have as much right to protect it as he has to use it, especially when his use of it perpetuates stereotypes that perpetuate self-hatred within the race and the justification of mistreatment by others. To be clear, I do not care about the justification of mistreatment by others, but I do care about the dissemination of images that perpetuate self-hate in the African American community. Until African people learn to love themselves and stop embracing images of whiteness as beauty and intelligence, they will always be second-class citizens. And, if you do not know, in America, popular culture is a major disseminator of ideals and values. Thus, I'll say one final time. Being a major artist, while Prince was successful in challenging and denouncing certain stereotypes he also perpetuated a few negative stereotypes. That does not make him an evil person. That simply makes him another African American who struggled in a sea of American whiteness to define himself, reach his creative potential, and create art that he desired to have a positive impact on society. Prince has admitted several times throughout his career that his desire is to make socio-political relevant and impactful art. If this is the case and he publically connects with the history and tradition of African American art, then he must be judged accordingly. He made himself a spokesperson. He wanted his art to address socio-political issues, including those specific to the African American community. That is the role that he chose. My posts simply evaluate where he falls in that history and tradition.

Sorry, but IMO you put too much emphasis on dogmatic idea's about culture and ethnicity, when it comes to judging the actions of an INDIVIDUAL: in this case, prince.

I respect your views, but is not my type of mindframe.

And, to make it clear, i didnt say YOU were racist, i dont know you, i consider it a racist point of view to expect from a person he or she should act according to certain points of views, solely based on his or her skin-colour.

[Edited 10/4/11 8:38am]

Riverman37 said:

Sorry, but IMO you put too much emphasis on dogmatic idea's about culture and ethnicity, when it comes to judging the actions of an INDIVIDUAL: in this case, prince.

I respect your views, but is not my type of mindframe.

And, to make it clear, i didnt say YOU were racist, i dont know you, i consider it a racist point of view to expect from a person he or she should act according to certain points of views, solely based on his or her skin-colour.

[Edited 10/4/11 8:38am]

Then we agree to disagree on all points. And for the record, it is not about what I expect somebody to do solely because of their color, so, again, you are twisting or misinterpreting my words. It is a question of being able to protect myself and other African Americans from negative imaging. And if Prince or anyone else creates imaging that perpetuates negative stereotypes, then it is my human duty to say that it is damaging to me and my race. Of course, we can all have our own opinions. But, if Prince publically states that he desires to create art that uplifts humanity, generally, and African Americans, specifically, that means that his art must be measured for its effectiveness, and, of course, we all apply our individual and group standards to measure its effectiveness or damaging effects. And whether you think that I am too dogmatic in this case, I see how African Americas are harmed (emotionally, physically, financially, socially, and politically) daily by the bombarding of negative images. I teach young people and organize poor people whose minds are perverted with these negative images and stereotypes. And, until that reality changes, I will continue to be dogmatic to liberate African minds from European colonization.