Author | Message |
Pitchfork article: "Seeing Purple: Prince in the 80s" Cool article, they even managed to find some non-banned videos!
| |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
creepy article. | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
moderator |
The article fails to make an actual point. I've read far better studies into Prince's gender-twisting, androgynous ways. |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
yup. I concur. creepy and pointless AND a gross misappropriation of the writer's own identity/sexual issues, then and now onto Prince's art. that seems to happen here at the Org a lot too. SMH. | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Pitchfork just found out about Prince, but they don't quite "get it" yet... | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Meh, I disagree with the harsh sentiment so far in this thread. | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
The Black Album could not have been called Purple Album if it was meant to remind people that he is black. And I see black. What? | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Militant said: The article fails to make an actual point. I'm glad you said that. I read it twice trying to get the point and couldn't find one. | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
It's a mere pretext to talk about his feelings of androgyny, all about the author and his feelings, nothing much about Prince who is basically just a person that made an impression for his looks, and his early music. | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
You nailed it. I found it meandering and I couldn't even get through it. | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
| |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |