maybe the reviewer of the book is better equipped to write the book Toure apparently couldn't. I'm not sure who can give the complex religious, sacred/profane, underpinnings in P's body of work the "contextual heft" they deserve

good review. sounds like a half-baked and poorly written book with some decent ideas that contradict.

sort of a newpowersoul of bios.

cborgman said:

good review. sounds like a half-baked and poorly written book with some decent ideas that contradict.

sort of a newpowersoul of bios.

its not

read it you ignoramous

jonylawson said:

cborgman said:

good review. sounds like a half-baked and poorly written book with some decent ideas that contradict.

sort of a newpowersoul of bios.

its not

read it you ignoramous

i'm not paying 20 bucks for a 150 page pamphlet that sound like badly copped org posts.

feel free to buy me a copy and send it to me, and i will read it. but im not wasting my money on something that sounds rather amateurish and poorly written.

.

[Edited 5/31/13 14:54pm]

"eventually unveiled himself as the most important religious artist ever" sounds like some really piss-poor writing and hyper-famdom, for instance.

cborgman said:

"eventually unveiled himself as the most important religious artist ever" sounds like some really piss-poor writing and hyper-famdom, for instance.

your reviewing a book from a review.....

jonylawson said:

cborgman said:

"eventually unveiled himself as the most important religious artist ever" sounds like some really piss-poor writing and hyper-famdom, for instance.

your reviewing a book from a review.....

well, the entire point of reviews is to tell you whether the product is worth spending your money on or not.

and that bit of hyperbolic nonsense about him being the most important religious ever is not only a complete joke, it's also a very fair sampling of the work that shows you exactly how bad the writing is.

do you have this same angry reaction to all reviews, or is this just famdom run amok?



.

[Edited 5/31/13 18:06pm]

cborgman said:

philmoreliz said:

cborgman said:

well, the entire point of reviews is to tell you whether the product is worth spending your money on or not.

and that bit of hyperbolic nonsense about him being the most important religious ever is not only a complete joke, it's also a very fair sampling of the work that shows you exactly how bad the writing is.

do you have this same angry reaction to all reviews, or is this just famdom run amok?



.

[Edited 5/31/13 18:06pm]

I would never avoid reading a book or movie based on a review. I do not like letting others think for me. Some reviewers are better than others but, as a rule, history proves them wrong. I liked the reviewers description of Prince in the opening passage.

i actually think the review is very well written.

if we didnt listen to others, we would end up reading crap like anne heche's auto-biography where she claims she is the reincarnation of jesus from the 4th dimension named celestia who healed the sick of their twisted ankles and took people to heaven in her spaceship. or even worse; vanity's book. i actually bucked the reviews and read those, mostly because i have morbid curiousity and love a literary train wreck. sometimes a horrible review makes me want to read something.

you guys dont want to read reviews, fine. although, the obvious next question is why jony's review calling this book one of the greatest books he has ever read in his life in a different thread should be used as guidance, whereas a NY times review by someone who is paid to assess literary validity and thought should be shunned?



.

[Edited 5/31/13 19:06pm]

cborgman said:

philmoreliz said:

cborgman said: I would never avoid reading a book or movie based on a review. I do not like letting others think for me. Some reviewers are better than others but, as a rule, history proves them wrong. I liked the reviewers description of Prince in the opening passage.

i actually think the review is very well written.

if we didnt listen to others, we would end up reading crap like anne heche's auto-biography where she claims she is the reincarnation of jesus from the 4th dimension named celestia who healed the sick of their twisted ankles. or even worse; vanity's book. i actually bucked the reviews and read those, mostly because i have morbid curiousity and love a literary train wreck. sometimes a horrible review makes me want to read something.

you guys dont want to read reviews, fine. although, the obvious next question is why jony's review calling this book one of the greatest books he has ever read in his life in a different thread should be used as guidance, whereas a NY times review by someone who is paid to assess literary validity and thought should be shunned?

9:02pm]

[Edited 5/31/13 19:21pm]

philmoreliz said:

cborgman said:

i actually think the review is very well written.

if we didnt listen to others, we would end up reading crap like anne heche's auto-biography where she claims she is the reincarnation of jesus from the 4th dimension named celestia who healed the sick of their twisted ankles. or even worse; vanity's book. i actually bucked the reviews and read those, mostly because i have morbid curiousity and love a literary train wreck. sometimes a horrible review makes me want to read something.

you guys dont want to read reviews, fine. although, the obvious next question is why jony's review calling this book one of the greatest books he has ever read in his life in a different thread should be used as guidance, whereas a NY times review by someone who is paid to assess literary validity and thought should be shunned?

[Edited 5/31/13 19:02pm]

Somehow, my words mingled with yours.

I have lots of friends who review books for the Times and other places. I would not trust them to make any decisions about anything, love them though I might! Often, if a critic hates hates hates something, it can be brilliant. Negative reactions are often telling. Lots of people have such a personal reaction to Prince that they guard him and believe that their perception is the only valid one.

If I believed citics, I never would have seen Kill Bill. That alone would have been a tragedy indeed 'cept I never would have known what I was missing!

You can, however, get the gist of a book very quickly. Oh my, you READ Ms. Heche's opus?

philmoreliz said:

philmoreliz said:

Somehow, my words mingled with yours.

I have lots of friends who review books for the Times and other places. I would not trust them to make any decisions about anything, love them though I might! Often, if a critic hates hates hates something, it can be brilliant. Negative reactions are often telling. Lots of people have such a personal reaction to Prince that they guard him and believe that their perception is the only valid one.

If I believed citics, I never would have seen Kill Bill. That alone would have been a tragedy indeed 'cept I never would have known what I was missing!

You can, however, get the gist of a book very quickly. Oh my, you READ Ms. Heche's opus?

oh, yeah. i tend to devote time and money only towards reading the very good, the very relevant to my writing (mostly scripts few non-theatre people would have heard of), or to literary disasters. the train wrecks are my guilty pleasure, like a deep-fried twinkie with pages and a slipcover. you know it's terrible for you, but it's impossible to not take the bite and savor the awful.

i have a sick love of "so bad it's good" and heche's book is one of the worst i have ever read, but in a very entertaining page-turning way. i am amazed her people even let it see the light of day. if you like a terrible book in a tongue-firmly-in-cheek way, i highly recommend it.

cborgman said:

philmoreliz said:

Somehow, my words mingled with yours.

I have lots of friends who review books for the Times and other places. I would not trust them to make any decisions about anything, love them though I might! Often, if a critic hates hates hates something, it can be brilliant. Negative reactions are often telling. Lots of people have such a personal reaction to Prince that they guard him and believe that their perception is the only valid one.

If I believed citics, I never would have seen Kill Bill. That alone would have been a tragedy indeed 'cept I never would have known what I was missing!

You can, however, get the gist of a book very quickly. Oh my, you READ Ms. Heche's opus?

oh, yeah. i tend to devote time and money only towards reading the very good, the very relevant to my writing (mostly scripts few non-theatre people would have heard of), or to literary disasters. the train wrecks are my guilty pleasure, like a deep-fried twinkie with pages and a slipcover. you know it's terrible for you, but it's impossible to not take the bite and savor the awful.

i have a sick love of "so bad it's good" and heche's book is one of the worst i have ever read, but in a very entertaining page-turning way. i am amazed her people even let it see the light of day. if you like a terrible book in a tongue-firmly-in-cheek way, i highly recommend it.

Sounds divine.

I have not read Toure's book yet; money is a bit tight. (My wife has made it clear that if I cancel our summer vacation then I can’t get the Toure book. And since I don’t want to see my wife’s family…) But, it seems that the reviewer, Howard Hampton, is making the same mistake that a lot of people on the org make. Instead of reviewing Toure's book on its structural and ideological merits, he is mostly saying it's a poorly written book because he has a different view of Prince than Toure. The second half of the last paragraph is classic Prince.org of "I disagree with and dislike anything that presents or positions Prince differently than from my own fantasy of Prince." I'm not saying that Hampton isn't correct in demanding that Toure provide more evidence to develop and support his ideas, but I find this review a bit untrustworthy. So, when my cash flow improves, I'll get a copy and read for myself.

philmoreliz said:

cborgman said:

oh, yeah. i tend to devote time and money only towards reading the very good, the very relevant to my writing (mostly scripts few non-theatre people would have heard of), or to literary disasters. the train wrecks are my guilty pleasure, like a deep-fried twinkie with pages and a slipcover. you know it's terrible for you, but it's impossible to not take the bite and savor the awful.

i have a sick love of "so bad it's good" and heche's book is one of the worst i have ever read, but in a very entertaining page-turning way. i am amazed her people even let it see the light of day. if you like a terrible book in a tongue-firmly-in-cheek way, i highly recommend it.

Sounds divine.

get a used copy on amazon. they're going for a penny. it's worth a penny and shipping. it takes bad writing to a new level. it doesnt even sound like they used a ghost writer.

also be sure to check out vanity's book. it has a jaw-dropping amount of typos and reads like a 7th grader with a coke habit and no editor wrote a book of auto-biographical prose. someone posted screenshots when it came out and it was so bad i ran out and bought it. it goes for about 75 on amazon, which i cant really recommend. but, should you manage to stumble on a cheaper copy... GET IT

[Edited 5/31/13 19:35pm]

i found the screenshot from vanity's book. prepare to have your mind blown...

it looks she is still selling copies for 40 on her site, which includes shipping.

cborgman said:

it looks she is still selling copies for 40 on her site, which includes shipping.

I think the screen shot gives a good idea of the treats therein. But I adore Vanity and will forgive her all nature of gaudy font.

And ill-advised similes.

[Edited 5/31/13 20:42pm]

I have that book. If you removed the words, "gene ration x", the book would be 14 pages.

[Edited 6/1/13 6:01am]

from what little i have rerad of this book ...its nice to ssee someone delve into the whole biblical lyrical content of his music.....i dont know of any otherr books that have

luvsexy4all said:

from what little i have rerad of this book ...its nice to ssee someone delve into the whole biblical lyrical content of his music.....i dont know of any otherr books that have

*

Dave Hill's Prince: A Pop Life addresses how Prince makes use of biblical imagery, and C. Liegh McInnis' The Lyrics of Prince does so more in-depth.

That review is awesome (and, I agree with cborgman, very well written). Thanks for sharing!