New topic
PrintableBrendan said: And getting back to rap and jazz, it’s fascinating to me how these two musical genres seem to produce the most ardent (some would call it bigoted) fans. If you dare even use the word jazz or rap in explaining the make-up of a particular Prince song you immediately attract the protectors of the genres who will laugh at you for calling Prince a jazz or rap artist. Never mind that you are doing no such thing, that’s all they hear. I guess if I compared apples to oranges I’d being coming to similar conclusions. I mean after all, Prince’s tiny incorporation of rap into his sound certainly pales in comparison to Tupac Shakur’s amazing contributions to the hip-hop world and “Xpectation” and Madhouse pale in comparison to Miles Davis massive output in that genre. Well of course that’s true. But why on earth even make such a comparison? Prince isn’t really accepted in any musical genre as a giant or pioneer, save perhaps the funk field where he at least has some minority support for those that think outside the genre. But Prince is one of the greatest musicians of the 20th century because of how he has so uniquely and prolifically fused that which came before him. His mark is indelible, but those who so passionately compartmentalize music will likely never see it. Interestingly this jazz and rap phenomenon doesn’t happen nearly as much with the other genres (excepting perhaps classical). If Prince plays a blues song, or incorporates the blues into one of his compositions you don’t have people coming out of the woodwork to say things like: “Are you saying he’s a blues artist? That’s laughable! Have you ever heard Robert Johnson? Prince hasn’t done one innovative thing in the blues. I know the blues and Prince ain’t no blues artist!” You know, you're right! He's a musician and one of the greatest. I really like this response and explanation. Ardent/bigoted/"purist" fans of genres? Compartmentilization of music. Prince fusing music of all styles and influences. Is Prince therefore like a musical nexus? The music industry dominating so forcefully people's minds, generating, sustaining and feeding this compartmentalization? So when someone like Prince comes along-the nexus- he's a paradox. They don't know what to do with him so he's dismissed. They don't get his music. They can't seem to or won't try to enjoy it for what it is. | |
- E-mail - orgNote -  Report post to moderator |
Anji said: mistermaxx said: He showed Respect but unlike back in the day when He would Manipulate His Influences He was all out right with the Stylings&whatnot.for instance back in the day He would drive up on His Influences but wouldn't out right step directly into it fully.He was more Creative in the Past at using different stuff early on&During His Peak. I agree, Prince had different creative desires and instincts during his commercial peak and trough eras.
As I alluded to on another thread: what many 'fans' usually fail to recognise, and as a result, tend to become overly critical with what they consider to be his 'purely commercial' 90's efforts, is that Prince has always made a habit of recording hit singles on every mainstream album he's released. Whether they chart or not, is another matter entirely. The undeniable facts are that the 80's Prince was a hit, and the 90's Prince wasn't. However, I don't think that's solely due to innovation or creative differences in his approach to musical influences / interests. There are significant other factors involved. I find it very interesting to note how it's usually the albums that don't make a significant impact on the charts, which tend to receive alot of criticism from his so called 'true fans.' What do you think, maxxx? mistermaxxx | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
mistermaxxx said: Anji said: mistermaxx said: He showed Respect but unlike back in the day when He would Manipulate His Influences He was all out right with the Stylings&whatnot.for instance back in the day He would drive up on His Influences but wouldn't out right step directly into it fully.He was more Creative in the Past at using different stuff early on&During His Peak. I agree, Prince had different creative desires and instincts during his commercial peak and trough eras.
As I alluded to on another thread: what many 'fans' usually fail to recognise, and as a result, tend to become overly critical with what they consider to be his 'purely commercial' 90's efforts, is that Prince has always made a habit of recording hit singles on every mainstream album he's released. Whether they chart or not, is another matter entirely. The undeniable facts are that the 80's Prince was a hit, and the 90's Prince wasn't. However, I don't think that's solely due to innovation or creative differences in his approach to musical influences / interests. There are significant other factors involved. I find it very interesting to note how it's usually the albums that don't make a significant impact on the charts, which tend to receive alot of criticism from his so called 'true fans.' What do you think, maxxx? . [This message was edited Mon Mar 24 18:48:12 PST 2003 by Anji] | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Anji said: mistermaxxx said: Anji said: mistermaxx said: He showed Respect but unlike back in the day when He would Manipulate His Influences He was all out right with the Stylings&whatnot.for instance back in the day He would drive up on His Influences but wouldn't out right step directly into it fully.He was more Creative in the Past at using different stuff early on&During His Peak. I agree, Prince had different creative desires and instincts during his commercial peak and trough eras.
As I alluded to on another thread: what many 'fans' usually fail to recognise, and as a result, tend to become overly critical with what they consider to be his 'purely commercial' 90's efforts, is that Prince has always made a habit of recording hit singles on every mainstream album he's released. Whether they chart or not, is another matter entirely. The undeniable facts are that the 80's Prince was a hit, and the 90's Prince wasn't. However, I don't think that's solely due to innovation or creative differences in his approach to musical influences / interests. There are significant other factors involved. I find it very interesting to note how it's usually the albums that don't make a significant impact on the charts, which tend to receive alot of criticism from his so called 'true fans.' What do you think, maxxx? . [This message was edited Mon Mar 24 18:48:12 PST 2003 by Anji] mistermaxxx | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
mistermaxxx said: Anji said: mistermaxxx said: Anji said: mistermaxx said: He showed Respect but unlike back in the day when He would Manipulate His Influences He was all out right with the Stylings&whatnot.for instance back in the day He would drive up on His Influences but wouldn't out right step directly into it fully.He was more Creative in the Past at using different stuff early on&During His Peak. I agree, Prince had different creative desires and instincts during his commercial peak and trough eras.
As I alluded to on another thread: what many 'fans' usually fail to recognise, and as a result, tend to become overly critical with what they consider to be his 'purely commercial' 90's efforts, is that Prince has always made a habit of recording hit singles on every mainstream album he's released. Whether they chart or not, is another matter entirely. The undeniable facts are that the 80's Prince was a hit, and the 90's Prince wasn't. However, I don't think that's solely due to innovation or creative differences in his approach to musical influences / interests. There are significant other factors involved. I find it very interesting to note how it's usually the albums that don't make a significant impact on the charts, which tend to receive alot of criticism from his so called 'true fans.' What do you think, maxxx? . [This message was edited Mon Mar 24 18:48:12 PST 2003 by Anji]  [This message was edited Mon Mar 24 23:47:42 PST 2003 by Anji] | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Once again Brendan rocked this discussion and ended it with his posts as far as I'm concerned. Much props to you B  "That...magic, the start of something revolutionary-the Minneapolis Sound, we should cherish it and not punish prince for not being able to replicate it."-Dreamshaman32 | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
jazzy328is said: Anji said: Could it not be argued that Prince has always used his diversity of musical influences, whether it be rock-a-billy, funk, soul, rap or R'n'B, to appeal to as many people as possible?
Anji, I really dig your discussions, You consider all angles and you don't seem to judge any of them, Which is very unique and rare. Your views makes people think or at least consider something else, I wish more people here could be as open as you. Keep it up, I always go to bed with a smile after reading all the crap here and then read your comments, your comments makes me feel good to be apart of the org, thanks. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
I've never met anyone that can open a closed mind, so I won’t even go down that road.  Only the closed minded person can perform that miracle. Some of the arguments on this thread remind me of many of Prince’s harshest critics during his 80's heyday. They didn’t hear influences, only copies. Well, everyone copies, it's just that the greatest do it better and will as a result be copied more themselves.
Most agree that Prince’s 80s work on the whole is far more focused and original, but I just don't think it's nearly the simplified portrait that gets painted here and elsewhere so often: 80s = great. 90s = bad. Just in terms of songwriting -- not great, cohesive albums -- I'd say the 90s stack up really well. The easiest thing to grab onto as a critic is that something isn't original. And, since there is some truth in that argument no matter what song and what artist you are referencing, it's a pretty safe way to debate. But it’s also pretty uninspired. What I've noticed about some of the people who cling to this type of debate, though, is that they often seem to deify certain artists or certain periods of certain artist’s careers to the point that they can barely see anything but a black-and-white world anymore. When their artist was a god and after he or she fell from grace. Just try and go into a group that has hundreds, preferably thousands of knowledgeable people on the subject matter at hand and try to argue that any particular piece of art of your choosing is wholly original and/or invented by its maker. If you have a knowledgeable enough base the argument will in no time flat be back in the cave. 
And when is the last time that stiff Bob Dylan did something innovative? I mean how dare he only create one of his greatest works, “Love and Theft” in the 40th year of his career. That ain’t enough, Mr. Dylan, we need you to be young again, and more importantly, we need you to make us feel that way too. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Brendan said: Most agree that Prince’s 80s work on the whole is far more focused and original, but I just don't think it's nearly the simplified portrait that gets painted here and elsewhere so often: 80s = great. 90s = bad. Just in terms of songwriting -- not great, cohesive albums -- I'd say the 90s stack up really well.
A-men... And when is the last time that stiff Bob Dylan did something innovative? I mean how dare he only create one of his greatest works, “Love and Theft” in the 40th year of his career. That ain’t enough, Mr. Dylan, we need you to be young again, and more importantly, we need you to make us feel that way too.
LoL!...Again, amen...beautifully said...  | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
NuPwrSoul said: Once again Brendan rocked this discussion and ended it with his posts as far as I'm concerned. Much props to you B
lol I know..makes you not want to post anything after he's done with it cause there isn't anything left "Climb in my fur." | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Brendan said: I've never met anyone that can open a closed mind, so I won’t even go down that road. Excellent post, Brendan (thanks for including it!) What do you think, maxxx? Only the closed minded person can perform that miracle. Some of the arguments on this thread remind me of many of Prince’s harshest critics during his 80's heyday. They didn’t hear influences, only copies. Well, everyone copies, it's just that the greatest do it better and will as a result be copied more themselves.
Most agree that Prince’s 80s work on the whole is far more focused and original, but I just don't think it's nearly the simplified portrait that gets painted here and elsewhere so often: 80s = great. 90s = bad. Just in terms of songwriting -- not great, cohesive albums -- I'd say the 90s stack up really well. The easiest thing to grab onto as a critic is that something isn't original. And, since there is some truth in that argument no matter what song and what artist you are referencing, it's a pretty safe way to debate. But it’s also pretty uninspired. What I've noticed about some of the people who cling to this type of debate, though, is that they often seem to deify certain artists or certain periods of certain artist’s careers to the point that they can barely see anything but a black-and-white world anymore. When their artist was a god and after he or she fell from grace. Just try and go into a group that has hundreds, preferably thousands of knowledgeable people on the subject matter at hand and try to argue that any particular piece of art of your choosing is wholly original and/or invented by its maker. If you have a knowledgeable enough base the argument will in no time flat be back in the cave.
And when is the last time that stiff Bob Dylan did something innovative? I mean how dare he only create one of his greatest works, “Love and Theft” in the 40th year of his career. That ain’t enough, Mr. Dylan, we need you to be young again, and more importantly, we need you to make us feel that way too. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Anji said: Brendan said: I've never met anyone that can open a closed mind, so I won’t even go down that road. Excellent post, Brendan (thanks for including it!) What do you think, maxxx? Only the closed minded person can perform that miracle. Some of the arguments on this thread remind me of many of Prince’s harshest critics during his 80's heyday. They didn’t hear influences, only copies. Well, everyone copies, it's just that the greatest do it better and will as a result be copied more themselves.
Most agree that Prince’s 80s work on the whole is far more focused and original, but I just don't think it's nearly the simplified portrait that gets painted here and elsewhere so often: 80s = great. 90s = bad. Just in terms of songwriting -- not great, cohesive albums -- I'd say the 90s stack up really well. The easiest thing to grab onto as a critic is that something isn't original. And, since there is some truth in that argument no matter what song and what artist you are referencing, it's a pretty safe way to debate. But it’s also pretty uninspired. What I've noticed about some of the people who cling to this type of debate, though, is that they often seem to deify certain artists or certain periods of certain artist’s careers to the point that they can barely see anything but a black-and-white world anymore. When their artist was a god and after he or she fell from grace. Just try and go into a group that has hundreds, preferably thousands of knowledgeable people on the subject matter at hand and try to argue that any particular piece of art of your choosing is wholly original and/or invented by its maker. If you have a knowledgeable enough base the argument will in no time flat be back in the cave.
And when is the last time that stiff Bob Dylan did something innovative? I mean how dare he only create one of his greatest works, “Love and Theft” in the 40th year of his career. That ain’t enough, Mr. Dylan, we need you to be young again, and more importantly, we need you to make us feel that way too. mistermaxxx | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
I thought Prince's funked up cover of Elvis' Let Me Be Your Teddy Bear was cool and showed how he had both roots in rock and funk Personally . I think we are all Boring with No Lives cause all we do is talk about Prince,Criticize and Gossip. I need a Horny Man is what I Need and probably so do most of yas. We are Sexually Frustrated what we R... Amen..!!! - zelaire | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
|
can anyone clear up 4 me if Prince and D'angelo had any beef ? it seemed strange that after a tribute of How does it Feel that they would work together...instead he worked with Angie  |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
|
since Prince is so called Free from the Industry he does
have much to say The element that is missing is he talks at us not to us and he still stands because we love him and put up with him. |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
utopia7 said: can anyone clear up 4 me if Prince and D'angelo had any beef ? it seemed strange that after a tribute of How does it Feel that they would work together...instead he worked with Angie
My take on it: Prince was clearly miffed at the liner notes that D'angelo allowed in his Voodoo cd (written by Saul Williams)...he clowned D and 2uest for that and for 2uest being publicly critical of his recent output.Clowned them by inviting them to his private Xanadu to jam and Prince switched up the music etc leaving them feeling duped by their musical hero. Dangelo supposedly went outside to smoke lol.These two guys had been waiting to play with Princve for ages, their dream. D once ran out of a club to catch Prince to let him in after Prince was told a club performance was sold out. Later Prince recorded with Dangelo's ex-squeeze, Angie Stone. Dont talk bad about Prince and expect to be bestest buddies  
even though P should be thankin their ass for getting him out of his lackadaisical stupor imho. "Climb in my fur." | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
|
correction does not have much to say |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Geez, I think I'm getting old. I can't possibly read this long-ass thread! Anji, Prince really ought to put you on payroll! You get people revved over his career more than most fans I've met in years.
On the whole, though, from what I've seen, a lot of orgers already touched on many key points. I won't rehash them, but I will say in regards to the original topic, I think Prince's attempts at the "rock-a-billy" sound are seen as early as "Horny Toad." It's Stray Cats if ever anything was! And I believe it was wholly genuine and in keeping with his roots, not merely a commercial foray into some long-since-forgotten sub-genre. A lot of people forget: Prince might be some slick, erotic, urbane Black pop culture icon who's touched everyone from the Brooklyn hip hopper to the Haight/Ashbury lezbo neo-folk guitarist. But, at his core, he is a midwestern American child of the late 1950s/early 1960s. Though he is from a city, what makes up his artistic and personal interior is as much "heartland" as it is "urban hipster." And we all have benefitted from it. Ὅσον ζῇς φαίνου
μηδὲν ὅλως σὺ λυποῦ πρὸς ὀλίγον ἐστὶ τὸ ζῆν τὸ τέλος ὁ χρόνος ἀπαιτεῖ.” | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Lammastide said: Geez, I think I'm getting old. I can't possibly read this long-ass thread! Alphabet St. is country funk? Anji, Prince really ought to put you on payroll! You get people revved over his career more than most fans I've met in years.
On the whole, though, from what I've seen, a lot of orgers already touched on many key points. I won't rehash them, but I will say in regards to the original topic, I think Prince's attempts at the "rock-a-billy" sound are seen as early as "Horny Toad." It's Stray Cats if ever anything was! And I believe it was wholly genuine and in keeping with his roots, not merely a commercial foray into some long-since-forgotten sub-genre. A lot of people forget: Prince might be some slick, erotic, urbane Black pop culture icon who's touched everyone from the Brooklyn hip hopper to the Haight/Ashbury lezbo neo-folk guitarist. But, at his core, he is a midwestern American child of the late 1950s/early 1960s. Though he is from a city, what makes up his artistic and personal interior is as much "heartland" as it is "urban hipster." And we all have benefitted from it. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Anji said: Lammastide said: Geez, I think I'm getting old. I can't possibly read this long-ass thread! Alphabet St. is country funk? Anji, Prince really ought to put you on payroll! You get people revved over his career more than most fans I've met in years.
On the whole, though, from what I've seen, a lot of orgers already touched on many key points. I won't rehash them, but I will say in regards to the original topic, I think Prince's attempts at the "rock-a-billy" sound are seen as early as "Horny Toad." It's Stray Cats if ever anything was! And I believe it was wholly genuine and in keeping with his roots, not merely a commercial foray into some long-since-forgotten sub-genre. A lot of people forget: Prince might be some slick, erotic, urbane Black pop culture icon who's touched everyone from the Brooklyn hip hopper to the Haight/Ashbury lezbo neo-folk guitarist. But, at his core, he is a midwestern American child of the late 1950s/early 1960s. Though he is from a city, what makes up his artistic and personal interior is as much "heartland" as it is "urban hipster." And we all have benefitted from it. I suppose one could say that. Ὅσον ζῇς φαίνου
μηδὲν ὅλως σὺ λυποῦ πρὸς ὀλίγον ἐστὶ τὸ ζῆν τὸ τέλος ὁ χρόνος ἀπαιτεῖ.” | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |