I both enjoy them a lot. Saw Sting live once and it was great. Prefer Prince tho; but that doesn't make Sting something inferior.

You folks, sigh...

1725topp said:

NDRU said:

1725topp said: None of this makes Prince a better lyricist than Sting

If you would read clearly, I was answering someone's request that I clarify what I mean by using the term, "metaphysical" or "metaphysics." In fact, the person was challenging whether I understood the terms "metaphysical" or "metaphysics." So, the post to which you have responded is not my post where I assert that Prince is a better lyricist than Sting. However, if you are willing to do some work and locate the actual post where I make my argument for Prince being a well-crafted lyricist, then we may have something to discuss. Finally, I never said in any of my post that Prince is a better lyricist than Sting. My point was simply to refute those who are asserting that Prince is a poorly crafted lyricist. Reading is fundamental, you know.

Fair enough. You are right, I did not follow your entire conversation.

I actually agree that Prince has plenty of thought provoking ideas in his music, but to me (and this is where my premature response came from) those are not his most well crafted lyrics. In my opinion his most well crafted lyrics are the simplest ones--Kiss, I Feel For You, I Wanna Be Your Lover, When You Were Mine come to mind. I feel that when he tries to introduduce more complex concepts that he has trouble making his point clear--particularly lately.

There is no doubt in my mind that Prince is a better instrumentalist and arranger than Sting. There is really nobody in pop music that can compare to him.

But I have never seen Sting try to show off on an instrument. I am not the biggest fan of Sting (though I was a fan as a kid), but when he plays, it always seems to be in service of the song, not to wow you with his skills. For what he does he succeeds as well as he possibly could.

He hired the best musicians he could for Dream of the Blue Turtles, and he played guitar, but the guitar was not any kind of showcase. Still, he came up with a subtly brilliant guitar part for Fortress Around Your Heart which is the heart of the instrumentation. Very simple sounding, but not so simple once you look closer at the actual chord progression. Not to mention the song itself is beautiful, creative, and has as good a hook as almost any song.

Sting is a unique voice in pop music. To me he does not hit the heights of Prince, but he does not hit the lows, either. He presents a very consistent (if increasingly boring) and well constructed product that is very musical and intelligent.

[Edited 3/7/13 20:41pm]

NDRU said:

1725topp said:

If you would read clearly, I was answering someone's request that I clarify what I mean by using the term, "metaphysical" or "metaphysics." In fact, the person was challenging whether I understood the terms "metaphysical" or "metaphysics." So, the post to which you have responded is not my post where I assert that Prince is a better lyricist than Sting. However, if you are willing to do some work and locate the actual post where I make my argument for Prince being a well-crafted lyricist, then we may have something to discuss. Finally, I never said in any of my post that Prince is a better lyricist than Sting. My point was simply to refute those who are asserting that Prince is a poorly crafted lyricist. Reading is fundamental, you know.

Fair enough. You are right, I did not follow your entire conversation.

I actually agree that Prince has plenty of thought provoking ideas in his music, but to me (and this is where my premature response came from) those are not his most well crafted lyrics. In my opinion his most well crafted lyrics are the simplest ones--Kiss, I Feel For You, I Wanna Be Your Lover, When You Were Mine come to mind. I feel that when he tries to introduduce more complex concepts that he has trouble making his point clear--particularly lately.

I understand your point and preference, so we'll just have to agree to disagree because I never have trouble following his complex concepts possibly because I just love/prefer his particular style of literary devices.

NDRU said:

There is no doubt in my mind that Prince is a better instrumentalist and arranger than Sting. There is really nobody in pop music that can compare to him.

But I have never seen Sting try to show off on an instrument. I am not the biggest fan of Sting (though I was a fan as a kid), but when he plays, it always seems to be in service of the song, not to wow you with his skills. For what he does he succeeds as well as he possibly could.

He hired the best musicians he could for Dream of the Blue Turtles, and he played guitar, but the guitar was not any kind of showcase. Still, he came up with a subtly brilliant guitar part for Fortress Around Your Heart which is the heart of the instrumentation. Very simple sounding, but not so simple once you look closer at the actual chord progression. Not to mention the song itself is beautiful, creative, and has as good a hook as almost any song.

Sting is a unique voice in pop music. To me he does not hit the heights of Prince, but he does not hit the lows, either. He presents a very consistent (if increasingly boring) and well constructed product that is very musical and intelligent.

[Edited 3/7/13 20:41pm]

Very interesting post. However, I don't agree with the idea, shared by many people, that Sting's output is "increasingly boring". Actually, I prefer his solo records until Ten Summoner's Tales to his work with The Police.

[Edited 3/7/13 23:03pm]

Javi said:

NDRU said:

There is no doubt in my mind that Prince is a better instrumentalist and arranger than Sting. There is really nobody in pop music that can compare to him.

But I have never seen Sting try to show off on an instrument. I am not the biggest fan of Sting (though I was a fan as a kid), but when he plays, it always seems to be in service of the song, not to wow you with his skills. For what he does he succeeds as well as he possibly could.

He hired the best musicians he could for Dream of the Blue Turtles, and he played guitar, but the guitar was not any kind of showcase. Still, he came up with a subtly brilliant guitar part for Fortress Around Your Heart which is the heart of the instrumentation. Very simple sounding, but not so simple once you look closer at the actual chord progression. Not to mention the song itself is beautiful, creative, and has as good a hook as almost any song.

Sting is a unique voice in pop music. To me he does not hit the heights of Prince, but he does not hit the lows, either. He presents a very consistent (if increasingly boring) and well constructed product that is very musical and intelligent.

[Edited 3/7/13 20:41pm]

Very interesting post. However, I don't agree with the idea, shared by many people, that Sting's output is "increasingly boring". Actually, I prefer his solo records until Ten Summoner's Tales to his work with The Police.

[Edited 3/7/13 23:03pm]

Sure, whether something is boring or not is totally subjective. But he has definitely been consistently moving away from uptempo, catchy pop/rock. I was a fan through The Soul Cages, so I suppose I actually liked some of his "boring" music just as much as his earlier stuff. But somewhere I lost interest, I guess it finally began to seem boring to me. I've recently had a renewed respect for him, though, just more from a distance.

Dandroppedadime said:

My dad's penis is bigger than your dad's penis.

I've never really gotten the impression that Sting would get the same type of love and appraisal from other musicians as Prince does. Just think of the musicians that performed in that Tribute concert and who have spoken about how much they love Prince's music in interviews.

I don't know Sting's music that well, so I can't really comment how well the parts he performs himself "serve the rest of the music". However, Prince's skills as a musician are not just limited to his grasp on the various instruments he plays, but to his unique style of making different parts work together in ways that no one else could have thought of.

My parents (and therefore me too) listened to Sting & The Police albums a lot.

So, Sting his voice brings me back to that period.

Hearing his songs, evokes a strong melangolia inside. And I love it.

As a teenager, I loved Prince. Very dissaproved by my stephdad.

Since than, every Prince album, for me, is an association with an episode in my life.

Both artist are great.

And they both can make me cry, just by singing a song.

Every breath you take, Every move you make, I'll be watching you.

Sometimes, sometimes, I wish life was never ending.

1725topp said:

pray4rain said:

Maybe a bit of a sidestep as related to the original topic (Prince vs. Sting), but anyway interesting to discus.

If you really mean that any of Prince's lyrics touch metaphysical elements, please elaborate. Maybe you mean "religious" rather than metaphysical.

Not to disvalue your argumentation concerning your points on Prince's lyricism, but I wouldn't call ANY of his stuff metaphysical.

Surely his lyrics are drenched in religion, often linked to sex ... reaching God trough sex. This connection has a lot of depth, though it somehow stays on a dualistic level, almost dogmatic.

I believe that under the influence of Mayte, Prince entered a more New Age understanding of his own Christian belief, only rush back to dogmatism of the Jehovah’s Witnesses.

Religion and spirituality are sub-headings of metaphysics as metaphysics is merely the understanding and exploration of the realm of reality that exists beyond the physical, specifically with the attempt to answer what is there beyond the physical and what is “it” like (whatever “it” is beyond the physical). Thus, to engage any religious aspect is to engage the metaphysical, no matter how dogmatic one's approach may be. This understanding of metaphysics and the metaphysical is basic freshman 101, but I'll continue to humor you. Now, setting aside Prince's strict religious quest to know the world that has existed throughout his career, early in his life he was quite willing to mix or amalgamate various religious and secular ideologies in the quest to explore what is there beyond the physical and what is it like, but he was also willing the engage this quest in a purely secular manner. For instance, “Paisley Park’s” notion that happiness and inner peace are internal elements and not at all dependent on external forces is quite gnostic and shows that Prince has spent time thinking equally about understanding the world from both a religious and non-religious manner. Of course, it seems that for Prince everything is about finding completion through a higher power and through human relationships, so in a song, such as "Glam Slam," which is pop metaphysics, the point is to examine the manner in which human beings can create relationships that exist on more than a physical level and examine whether the development of those relationships can lead to an even higher understanding of oneself and the world. So, it would seem that for Prince intellect or an intellectual understanding of the universe without love is meaningless. Even Einstein stated that the purpose of religion should be to serve as the moral guide of science, posing the question of just because science can do something should it. Thus, Prince's notion of the importance of love in knowing and experiencing life can be compared to Octavio Paz’s poem, “Two Bodies,” where Paz asserts that the only thing that keeps our existential life from being meaningless are the human relationships we are able to develop and maintain. (And the most ironic aspect of this discussion or the desire to wrestle religion from the family tree of metaphysics is that existentialism was started because the man considered to be the first existential philosopher, Søren Kierkegaard, began wondering what was God’s plan for his life.) So, by basic definition of the term, regardless of how many people wish to wrestle religion from the family tree of metaphysics as well as by Prince's exploration of the metaphysical through non-orthodox religious manners, Prince has and continues to explore metaphysics or the metaphysical.

Thanks for your extensive answer, appreciated you took the time to explain your understanding of metaphysics and especially your idea of metaphysical elements in Prince’s lyrics.

I Don’t agree with what you write about what metaphysics deal with. Don’t know what they teach you guys in college but to approach the whole field of religion as a sub-heading of metaphysics is simply nonsense. Metaphysics is a philosophical discipline that certainly touches on religious phenomena, but not as a given fact, but rather to question its validity. For example God’s existence is questioned in metaphysic rather than taken as a starting point, like in religion. Religion most of the time deals with belief and faith, whereas metaphysics deal with rationality and following the rules of logics.

Concerning Prince’s lyrics, it is nice that you mentioned Paisley Park, showing a more free interpretation (heaven as a state of mind, accessed her and now). I see that however more as an exception to the rule. TRC and lots of other lyrics seem to show a far more dogmatic, strict interpretation and a need to prosthelytize – not a healthy sign when it comes to personal spiritual development.

Although I am often amazed and impressed by Prince’s lyrics, when it comes to his religious side, it often provokes me negatively to the extent that the enjoyment of the music suffers a bit. During the LoveSexy concerts he frequently preached to the audience, yelling “Do you believe … Do you believe?” … I remember that the crowd, the part that actually was listening, started buhing ... at least in Holland.

If you have more examples of what you call metaphysical lyrics, please share them, much appreciated

pray4rain said:

1725topp said:

Religion and spirituality are sub-headings of metaphysics as metaphysics is merely the understanding and exploration of the realm of reality that exists beyond the physical, specifically with the attempt to answer what is there beyond the physical and what is “it” like (whatever “it” is beyond the physical). Thus, to engage any religious aspect is to engage the metaphysical, no matter how dogmatic one's approach may be. This understanding of metaphysics and the metaphysical is basic freshman 101, but I'll continue to humor you. Now, setting aside Prince's strict religious quest to know the world that has existed throughout his career, early in his life he was quite willing to mix or amalgamate various religious and secular ideologies in the quest to explore what is there beyond the physical and what is it like, but he was also willing the engage this quest in a purely secular manner. For instance, “Paisley Park’s” notion that happiness and inner peace are internal elements and not at all dependent on external forces is quite gnostic and shows that Prince has spent time thinking equally about understanding the world from both a religious and non-religious manner. Of course, it seems that for Prince everything is about finding completion through a higher power and through human relationships, so in a song, such as "Glam Slam," which is pop metaphysics, the point is to examine the manner in which human beings can create relationships that exist on more than a physical level and examine whether the development of those relationships can lead to an even higher understanding of oneself and the world. So, it would seem that for Prince intellect or an intellectual understanding of the universe without love is meaningless. Even Einstein stated that the purpose of religion should be to serve as the moral guide of science, posing the question of just because science can do something should it. Thus, Prince's notion of the importance of love in knowing and experiencing life can be compared to Octavio Paz’s poem, “Two Bodies,” where Paz asserts that the only thing that keeps our existential life from being meaningless are the human relationships we are able to develop and maintain. (And the most ironic aspect of this discussion or the desire to wrestle religion from the family tree of metaphysics is that existentialism was started because the man considered to be the first existential philosopher, Søren Kierkegaard, began wondering what was God’s plan for his life.) So, by basic definition of the term, regardless of how many people wish to wrestle religion from the family tree of metaphysics as well as by Prince's exploration of the metaphysical through non-orthodox religious manners, Prince has and continues to explore metaphysics or the metaphysical.

Thanks for your extensive answer, appreciated you took the time to explain your understanding of metaphysics and especially your idea of metaphysical elements in Prince’s lyrics.

I Don’t agree with what you write about what metaphysics deal with. Don’t know what they teach you guys in college but to approach the whole field of religion as a sub-heading of metaphysics is simply nonsense. Metaphysics is a philosophical discipline that certainly touches on religious phenomena, but not as a given fact, but rather to question its validity. For example God’s existence is questioned in metaphysic rather than taken as a starting point, like in religion. Religion most of the time deals with belief and faith, whereas metaphysics deal with rationality and following the rules of logics.

Concerning Prince’s lyrics, it is nice that you mentioned Paisley Park, showing a more free interpretation (heaven as a state of mind, accessed her and now). I see that however more as an exception to the rule. TRC and lots of other lyrics seem to show a far more dogmatic, strict interpretation and a need to prosthelytize – not a healthy sign when it comes to personal spiritual development.

Although I am often amazed and impressed by Prince’s lyrics, when it comes to his religious side, it often provokes me negatively to the extent that the enjoyment of the music suffers a bit. During the LoveSexy concerts he frequently preached to the audience, yelling “Do you believe … Do you believe?” … I remember that the crowd, the part that actually was listening, started buhing ... at least in Holland.

If you have more examples of what you call metaphysical lyrics, please share them, much appreciated

I am always amazed that people who claim to be empirical, non-religious beings are often more myopic and subjective than the religious people that they demonize. And, what is either sad or interesting is that you don't even realize how myopic/subjective it is to state that "lyrics [that] seem to show a far more dogmatic, strict interpretation and a need to proselytize [are] not a healthy sign when it comes to personal spiritual development." Healthy for whom? Here, you are asserting your subjective notion of personal development as "fact" or "law". I love clarity, order, and discipline, and none of these aspects has ever hindered my intellectual, emotional, or psychological growth. Accordingly, since the concept of FYI (for your information) is, itself, nonsensical because anytime someone provides information they want you to do something with it, then whenever one is providing information, there is an aspect of persuading, i.e. "proselytizing". There is no other reason to give someone information accept in hopes that they will do something with the information to change/improve one's life. So, again, your premise is flawed. Additionally, you subjectivity rears its head again when you write "when it comes to his religious side, it often provokes me negatively to the extent that the enjoyment of the music suffers a bit." This simply shows that you are so biased against any religious discussion that you are unable to objectively entertain the idea, but it doesn’t show you to be empirical. And, as for people booing, that only proves that many fans don't want that subject from Prince, don't want it from their popular music, or both. It doesn't prove anything in regards to how empirical those customers are.

*

Next, when you stated that "to approach the whole field of religion as a sub-heading of metaphysics is simply nonsense," I notice that you did not take the time to refute my use of Søren Kierkegaard or Einstein. Secondly, while theology does begin with the given that God exists, it does not stop there. Don't confuse a serious student of theology with a religious nut case, and I will not lump you into the myopic idiots that Einstein admonished for mindlessly using his words to prove or affirm their atheism. So, songs, such as "Beginning Endlessly" and "Future Soul Song," use a theological approach to exploring the universe, asserting the connection between humans and the universe by showing that much of the particles that exist in the universe also exist within the human body, and then they attempt to locate an existence of spiritual phenomena. And connecting a song like "Lavaux" with "Paisley Park" with an understanding of Plato's Republic helps us to see the discussion of the human desire to create a republic based on the purity of ideals as the energy (beginning or origin) of physical development is another manner in which the theological study of morality becomes a sub-heading of metaphysics. Serious scholars of religion/theology don’t just say “there is a God, and that’s it,” they study the physical history of the universe to show connections and probabilities that may indicate the presence of a God, which is, then, a sub-heading of metaphysics, which is studied, as such, in most universities around the planet.

novabrkr said:

I've never really gotten the impression that Sting would get the same type of love and appraisal from other musicians as Prince does. Just think of the musicians that performed in that Tribute concert and who have spoken about how much they love Prince's music in interviews.

Well for Sting's 60th birthday concert a year or so ago the artists that showed up to pay their respect and play his songs were all huge A-List talents ...Stevie Wonder, Bruce Springsteen, Banford Marsalis, Herbie Hancock, Rufus Wainwright, Billy Joel etc.

The Prince tribute concert seemed to lack any real big name A-listers, (I'll give you Elvis Costello)

johnny2000 said:

Well for Sting's 60th birthday concert a year or so ago the artists that showed up to pay their respect and play his songs were all huge A-List talents ...Stevie Wonder, Bruce Springsteen, Banford Marsalis, Herbie Hancock, Rufus Wainwright, Billy Joel etc.

that crowd shows up to every one of these things

The Prince tribute concert seemed to lack any real big name A-listers, (I'll give you Elvis Costello)

this one wasn't an official. and he didn't even end up being there, did he?

johnny2000 said:

novabrkr said:

I've never really gotten the impression that Sting would get the same type of love and appraisal from other musicians as Prince does. Just think of the musicians that performed in that Tribute concert and who have spoken about how much they love Prince's music in interviews.

Well for Sting's 60th birthday concert a year or so ago the artists that showed up to pay their respect and play his songs were all huge A-List talents ...Stevie Wonder, Bruce Springsteen, Banford Marsalis, Herbie Hancock, Rufus Wainwright, Billy Joel etc.

The Prince tribute concert seemed to lack any real big name A-listers, (I'll give you Elvis Costello)

Ok, thanks for letting me know.

I was really just referring to how so many other musicians, certainly big names too, just seem to love Prince. I haven't seen a clip of Dave Grohl stopping a Foo Fighters concert just in order to speak several minutes about how great Sting is and how stoked he was about getting to jam together with him.

I disagree about the musician claim, but he's a far better songwriter, IMO.

ufoclub said:

Do not fool yourselves into thinking that the songs by The Police should be credited to Sting. He wasn't the best musician in the three man group, he was the lead singer star, bass player, and a brilliant lyricist. As a musician, Sting plays bass, right?

Well, there's some debate around here about what a "musician" really is. In my opinion (and the dictionary's) a musician includes singers, songwriters, composers, conductors, arrangers, etc

So Sting plays bass (including upright bass), guitar, lute, piano, and he sings, plus he writes and arranges music, and he can read music unlike Prince. According to the internet he also plays sax, harmonica, and pan flute (I have no evidence of this). I'm still not saying he's better, just that Sting does more than play bass. And his end product is consistently good.

Plus, this comparison aside, wouldn't you agree that someone who's great on one instrument trumps someone who is medocre on several?

NDRU said:

ufoclub said:

Do not fool yourselves into thinking that the songs by The Police should be credited to Sting. He wasn't the best musician in the three man group, he was the lead singer star, bass player, and a brilliant lyricist. As a musician, Sting plays bass, right?

Well, there's some debate around here about what a "musician" really is. In my opinion (and the dictionary's) a musician includes singers, songwriters, composers, conductors, arrangers, etc

So Sting plays bass (including upright bass), guitar, lute, piano, and he sings, plus he writes and arranges music, and he can read music unlike Prince. According to the internet he also plays sax, harmonica, and pan flute (I have no evidence of this). I'm still not saying he's better, just that Sting does more than play bass. And his end product is consistently good.

Plus, this comparison aside, wouldn't you agree that someone who's great on one instrument trumps someone who is medocre on several?

I was more referring to that fact that Stewart Copeland was a more accomplished musician than Sting in The Police, and went on to compose scores for films.

ufoclub said:

NDRU said:

Well, there's some debate around here about what a "musician" really is. In my opinion (and the dictionary's) a musician includes singers, songwriters, composers, conductors, arrangers, etc

So Sting plays bass (including upright bass), guitar, lute, piano, and he sings, plus he writes and arranges music, and he can read music unlike Prince. According to the internet he also plays sax, harmonica, and pan flute (I have no evidence of this). I'm still not saying he's better, just that Sting does more than play bass. And his end product is consistently good.

Plus, this comparison aside, wouldn't you agree that someone who's great on one instrument trumps someone who is medocre on several?

I was more referring to that fact that Stewart Copeland was a more accomplished musician than Sting in The Police, and went on to compose scores for films.

yes, he's actually a great musician. Didn't he write an opera?

Your comment reminded me of someone allegedly asking John Lennon if Ringo was the "best drummer in the world" and he said he was not the best drummer in the Beatles

Prince is the best musician on the planet-lock this shit up

who can last longer in bed? sting beat prince to the 6 hour tantric sex claim .. prince never even tried to brag on that .. it was like sting made it off limits .. don't forget that prince plays a mean triangle and tamborine and can probably clap his hands really good .. and sting only plays the bass .. so prince must be way better .. its also funny how people think musicians only play one instrument .. most musicians dabble on numerous different instruments just like prince .. prince just hypes it up more for publicity

Sting only plays the bass, sucka. Sting has been a hasbeen for years.

it depends who is listening an its a matter of opinion

with stuff like music an musicianship it aint like a race where theres a clear winner

people like what they like ... its a matter of taste

i can appreciate sting as an artist an as a muscian an he is definetely a tallented guy .. but him an prince aint in a competition .. me personally i am a prince fan .. so its a no brainer

PRINCE U DUMB ARSES!!! ... U ever seen sting doing Purple Rain guitar solo

Who does better downward dogs? Tough call, right?

TrevorAyer said:

who can last longer in bed? sting beat prince to the 6 hour tantric sex claim .. prince never even tried to brag on that .. it was like sting made it off limits .. don't forget that prince plays a mean triangle and tamborine and can probably clap his hands really good .. and sting only plays the bass .. so prince must be way better .. its also funny how people think musicians only play one instrument .. most musicians dabble on numerous different instruments just like prince .. prince just hypes it up more for publicity

1725topp said:

pray4rain said:

Thanks for your extensive answer, appreciated you took the time to explain your understanding of metaphysics and especially your idea of metaphysical elements in Prince’s lyrics.

I Don’t agree with what you write about what metaphysics deal with. Don’t know what they teach you guys in college but to approach the whole field of religion as a sub-heading of metaphysics is simply nonsense. Metaphysics is a philosophical discipline that certainly touches on religious phenomena, but not as a given fact, but rather to question its validity. For example God’s existence is questioned in metaphysic rather than taken as a starting point, like in religion. Religion most of the time deals with belief and faith, whereas metaphysics deal with rationality and following the rules of logics.

Concerning Prince’s lyrics, it is nice that you mentioned Paisley Park, showing a more free interpretation (heaven as a state of mind, accessed her and now). I see that however more as an exception to the rule. TRC and lots of other lyrics seem to show a far more dogmatic, strict interpretation and a need to prosthelytize – not a healthy sign when it comes to personal spiritual development.

Although I am often amazed and impressed by Prince’s lyrics, when it comes to his religious side, it often provokes me negatively to the extent that the enjoyment of the music suffers a bit. During the LoveSexy concerts he frequently preached to the audience, yelling “Do you believe … Do you believe?” … I remember that the crowd, the part that actually was listening, started buhing ... at least in Holland.

If you have more examples of what you call metaphysical lyrics, please share them, much appreciated

I am always amazed that people who claim to be empirical, non-religious beings are often more myopic and subjective than the religious people that they demonize. And, what is either sad or interesting is that you don't even realize how myopic/subjective it is to state that "lyrics [that] seem to show a far more dogmatic, strict interpretation and a need to proselytize [are] not a healthy sign when it comes to personal spiritual development." Healthy for whom? Here, you are asserting your subjective notion of personal development as "fact" or "law". I love clarity, order, and discipline, and none of these aspects has ever hindered my intellectual, emotional, or psychological growth. Accordingly, since the concept of FYI (for your information) is, itself, nonsensical because anytime someone provides information they want you to do something with it, then whenever one is providing information, there is an aspect of persuading, i.e. "proselytizing". There is no other reason to give someone information accept in hopes that they will do something with the information to change/improve one's life. So, again, your premise is flawed. Additionally, you subjectivity rears its head again when you write "when it comes to his religious side, it often provokes me negatively to the extent that the enjoyment of the music suffers a bit." This simply shows that you are so biased against any religious discussion that you are unable to objectively entertain the idea, but it doesn’t show you to be empirical. And, as for people booing, that only proves that many fans don't want that subject from Prince, don't want it from their popular music, or both. It doesn't prove anything in regards to how empirical those customers are.

*

Next, when you stated that "to approach the whole field of religion as a sub-heading of metaphysics is simply nonsense," I notice that you did not take the time to refute my use of Søren Kierkegaard or Einstein. Secondly, while theology does begin with the given that God exists, it does not stop there. Don't confuse a serious student of theology with a religious nut case, and I will not lump you into the myopic idiots that Einstein admonished for mindlessly using his words to prove or affirm their atheism. So, songs, such as "Beginning Endlessly" and "Future Soul Song," use a theological approach to exploring the universe, asserting the connection between humans and the universe by showing that much of the particles that exist in the universe also exist within the human body, and then they attempt to locate an existence of spiritual phenomena. And connecting a song like "Lavaux" with "Paisley Park" with an understanding of Plato's Republic helps us to see the discussion of the human desire to create a republic based on the purity of ideals as the energy (beginning or origin) of physical development is another manner in which the theological study of morality becomes a sub-heading of metaphysics. Serious scholars of religion/theology don’t just say “there is a God, and that’s it,” they study the physical history of the universe to show connections and probabilities that may indicate the presence of a God, which is, then, a sub-heading of metaphysics, which is studied, as such, in most universities around the planet.

I really enjoy reading your posts.

Thank you for taking the time to write that down.

A lot of great thoughts.

I always did think Prince his lyrics to be symbolic, you did inspire me to reconsider some songs again and see if I can find different meanings in it. Again.

I stated before that lyrics and songs are to be considered withint the zeitgeist the were created. But now I also want to explore some songs on a different level.

dJJ said:

1725topp said:

I am always amazed that people who claim to be empirical, non-religious beings are often more myopic and subjective than the religious people that they demonize. And, what is either sad or interesting is that you don't even realize how myopic/subjective it is to state that "lyrics [that] seem to show a far more dogmatic, strict interpretation and a need to proselytize [are] not a healthy sign when it comes to personal spiritual development." Healthy for whom? Here, you are asserting your subjective notion of personal development as "fact" or "law". I love clarity, order, and discipline, and none of these aspects has ever hindered my intellectual, emotional, or psychological growth. Accordingly, since the concept of FYI (for your information) is, itself, nonsensical because anytime someone provides information they want you to do something with it, then whenever one is providing information, there is an aspect of persuading, i.e. "proselytizing". There is no other reason to give someone information accept in hopes that they will do something with the information to change/improve one's life. So, again, your premise is flawed. Additionally, you subjectivity rears its head again when you write "when it comes to his religious side, it often provokes me negatively to the extent that the enjoyment of the music suffers a bit." This simply shows that you are so biased against any religious discussion that you are unable to objectively entertain the idea, but it doesn’t show you to be empirical. And, as for people booing, that only proves that many fans don't want that subject from Prince, don't want it from their popular music, or both. It doesn't prove anything in regards to how empirical those customers are.

*

Next, when you stated that "to approach the whole field of religion as a sub-heading of metaphysics is simply nonsense," I notice that you did not take the time to refute my use of Søren Kierkegaard or Einstein. Secondly, while theology does begin with the given that God exists, it does not stop there. Don't confuse a serious student of theology with a religious nut case, and I will not lump you into the myopic idiots that Einstein admonished for mindlessly using his words to prove or affirm their atheism. So, songs, such as "Beginning Endlessly" and "Future Soul Song," use a theological approach to exploring the universe, asserting the connection between humans and the universe by showing that much of the particles that exist in the universe also exist within the human body, and then they attempt to locate an existence of spiritual phenomena. And connecting a song like "Lavaux" with "Paisley Park" with an understanding of Plato's Republic helps us to see the discussion of the human desire to create a republic based on the purity of ideals as the energy (beginning or origin) of physical development is another manner in which the theological study of morality becomes a sub-heading of metaphysics. Serious scholars of religion/theology don’t just say “there is a God, and that’s it,” they study the physical history of the universe to show connections and probabilities that may indicate the presence of a God, which is, then, a sub-heading of metaphysics, which is studied, as such, in most universities around the planet.

I really enjoy reading your posts.

Thank you for taking the time to write that down.

A lot of great thoughts.

I always did think Prince his lyrics to be symbolic, you did inspire me to reconsider some songs again and see if I can find different meanings in it. Again.

I stated before that lyrics and songs are to be considered withint the zeitgeist the were created. But now I also want to explore some songs on a different level.

Thanks for the kind words. I agree that we must analyze art based on the spirit of the times and the mood of the artist, and I also think that within or along with the spirit of the times we can also consider how various aspects of the past and current times influenced the creation of the art, and in some cases we can even project forward, say from 1980 to some future period, to investigate or analyze how a particular work was laying the foundation for the artist's future direction, giving us a better understanding of the artist's narrative/career arc. I think studying/exploring all of that can be useful for developing a well-rounded or multidimensional understanding of the art.

1725topp said:

dJJ said:

I really enjoy reading your posts.

Thank you for taking the time to write that down.

A lot of great thoughts.

I always did think Prince his lyrics to be symbolic, you did inspire me to reconsider some songs again and see if I can find different meanings in it. Again.

I stated before that lyrics and songs are to be considered withint the zeitgeist the were created. But now I also want to explore some songs on a different level.

Thanks for the kind words. I agree that we must analyze art based on the spirit of the times and the mood of the artist, and I also think that within or along with the spirit of the times we can also consider how various aspects of the past and current times influenced the creation of the art, and in some cases we can even project forward, say from 1980 to some future period, to investigate or analyze how a particular work was laying the foundation for the artist's future direction, giving us a better understanding of the artist's narrative/career arc. I think studying/exploring all of that can be useful for developing a well-rounded or multidimensional understanding of the art.

yo brother, u didn't mention Rock n Roll Love Affair which is in my opinion is the most amount of biblical metaphors he has ever used. Honestly, it kind of turned me off. I felt as if I was reading Jehovah's teachings even though it may appear on the surface to be an innocent song about a girl and boy.
Whats up?

as the old testament says biblical studies upon the what? is it the Crhistian religion or Catholicism well two great artist as far as known as top composers shall never be judged by religion! I am the Italian that shall bring in friendship and harmony Prince and personal favorite sting. New years 2013 all will wonder why? for the money I know we as artist will raise for the children in need...... Now tell me two great souls would'nt agree??? P a rithmic genius!

ComeHereLetMeCutYourHair said:

1725topp said:

Thanks for the kind words. I agree that we must analyze art based on the spirit of the times and the mood of the artist, and I also think that within or along with the spirit of the times we can also consider how various aspects of the past and current times influenced the creation of the art, and in some cases we can even project forward, say from 1980 to some future period, to investigate or analyze how a particular work was laying the foundation for the artist's future direction, giving us a better understanding of the artist's narrative/career arc. I think studying/exploring all of that can be useful for developing a well-rounded or multidimensional understanding of the art.

yo brother, u didn't mention Rock n Roll Love Affair which is in my opinion is the most amount of biblical metaphors he has ever used. Honestly, it kind of turned me off. I felt as if I was reading Jehovah's teachings even though it may appear on the surface to be an innocent song about a girl and boy.
Whats up?

as the old testament says biblical studies upon the what? is it the Crhistian religion or Catholicism well two great artist as far as known as top composers shall never be judged by religion! I am the Italian that shall bring in friendship and harmony Prince and personal favorite sting. New years 2013 all will wonder why? for the money I know we as artist will raise for the children in need...... Now tell me two great souls would'nt agree??? P a rithmic genius!

I'm sorry, but you lost me about half way through your post. Yes, "Rock-n-Roll Love Affair" has a great deal of religious imagery, but I'm not sure that it has more than other songs, such as "Temptation," "Annie Christian," "Anna Steisa," "Lovesexy," "Eye No," "Thunder," or many others. So, I would say that "Rock-n-Roll Love Affair" merely follows in the tradition of Prince's use of religious imagery.

*

As for the song turning you off, I can understand how many do not like Prince's religious ideology, but your like or dislike of Prince's religious ideology does not refute his lyrical genius or his mastery of literary device. But, I have no idea what you are saying or mean with the remainder of your post. If you so desire, please clarify, but, as it is, I only understand about half of your post. Thanks.