Got this from a friend who does review for the local paper, sent to him by the bosses

AP/UPI Guidelines for Critics reviewing any new Prince album:

As we all know, Prince produces a lot of music, averaging more than one new release a year; far too many for a busy music critic to create in-depth reviews of each and every one. In an attempt to codify the current methods for overcoming this difficulty, AP/UPI has developed the following guidelines, already practiced by many of our leading critics. Following these guidelines will allow you, the reviewer, to appear both edgy and smart, while requiring little or no time spent actually listening to the music.

Guidelines:

A. In any new review, in summing up Prince's contribution to music over the last 30 years, the most important factors to refer to are:

1. Prince’s age

2. Prince’s height

3. Prince’s name change in the 90’s

It cannot be stressed enough the importance of these three facts as tools to break down the ‘mystique’ of Prince. Referring only to his musical output paints the critic into a tough corner, as it requires a serious commitment to thoughtful analysis. Additionally, whenever possible, create a play on words by referring to Prince’s former name with a sarcastic twist (e.g. The Artist Formerly Known as Relevant, etc, etc).

B. With every review, remember to describe the output in question in one of two ways:

1. A retread of older, better material: Material that is similar to Prince’s 80’s work should be described as derivative, repetitive, run of the mill, out of step, etc. Comparing every song on any new release to another song on a prior release is a great way to reinforce this point while at the same time establishing the critic as a true music historian.

2. Self Indulgent: Applies to any music that is not a retread of earlier work.

Distinguishing between the two does not require more than a cursory sampling of the new album. Does it sound fun and fresh on the first hearing? Go with number 1. Is it challenging, with complex arrangements, or instrumentation not familiar to you? Go with number 2.

C. In each review, describe the character of the release in one of two ways:

1. Tame/Boring (For songs with no sexual content): Here it is important to mention Princes faith as a Jehovah’s Witness, even if the lyrics offer only subtle clues. Demeaning these influences allows the reviewer to sound hip and superior.

2. Creepy (For songs with any sexual content): This is where mentioning Prince’s age pays off nicely. Ridicule the idea that someone over 30 could or should have sexual impulses.

D. For every review, judge the output on its subject matter according to the following:

1. Contains content about important ideas (e.g. Race, Poverty, Religion, etc): Demean Prince for his simplistic point of view regarding these complex issues.

2. Contains content about unimportant ideas (e.g. Dancing, Clubbing, being a star, Seduction). Demean Prince for not being more aware of the world outside his door.

E. Other important points to work into any Prince review:

1. The fact that his sales/creative peak was in the 80’s. Emphasizing this point is a subtle but effective way of marginalizing everything since. While very few critics actually praised all of Prince’s output from Purple Rain through Lovesexy, those reviews are for the most part out of print and not available online. The danger of the critic appearing hypocritical is therefore quite remote.

2. In your summation, whether your review is anything from slightly positive to fairly negative, always be careful to point out that the album in question is “not a classic”.

3. Always maintain a superior attitude in reference to the music. Write your review as if you could create something better.

someone has too much free time

I think you're trying to tell us somthing...

Sounds about right. Anyone who reads reviews of music outside of the major music mags are asking for halfassed synopses anyway IMO.

This is a bit old. I saw this a few years ago. I'm sure someone else on this site will know how long this has been floating on the net. I don't know if it's real or fake, but it does accurately summarize most of the reviews of Prince's work.

Forget reviewers, many on the org seem to use these rules as well...

Looks like it's taking the piss out of his reviews to me because it includes what the majority of 'em say ..

Might as well be real in that case

1725topp said:

I don't know if it's real or fake

I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest it's fake...

'Plasticwood' is clearly being ironic

OnlyNDaUsa said:

someone has too much free time

Gay

in other news,

Whoever wrote those spoof guidelines has done a good job! Clever, funny, enjoyed it and annoyingly accurate!

Funny, but you could shoot this off for any act's bullet points, it's just what reviewers do - they need to pick out the most identifying features for those who don't follow a career with a microscope.

honer said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

someone has too much free time

Gay

are you 12 years old?

djThunderfunk said:

Forget reviewers, many on the org seem to use these rules as well...

So true; always makes me despair when org members comment so similarly to those predictable muso reviews.

1725topp said:

This is a bit old. I saw this a few years ago. I'm sure someone else on this site will know how long this has been floating on the net. I don't know if it's real or fake, but it does accurately summarize most of the reviews of Prince's work.

yep, its old. I wrote it as a joke on housequake a few years ago. It was my first post there (and last since the site then promptly shut down), and just for fun (I think after 3121 reviews were coming out).

I was cleaning up old files on my pc last night, saw this, and posted again here (where, just like HQ, I am a lurker). Hopefully prince.org does not fall prey to my posting curse like HQ did

An amusing deconstruction of all those negative reviews. For a deconstruction of the positive ones, which are even lazier (20Ten was his best album since SOTT according to the first 'exclusive' British review), the article would have been much shorter.

Guidelines:

A. Simply write 'Return to Form'.