jaypotton said:

Even the music changes at that part that says a lot.

.

.

[Edited 6/18/16 13:48pm]

jaypotton said:

djThunderfunk said:

- There are plenty of songs, books, movies, etc that have characters that commit mass murder or molesting children already, and yes that is okay to depict in art in a free society, whether deplorable or not. I will not opine on what if Prince did it as he did not.

- In a free society we do not restrict our speech or our art so as to not set off "nutters".

- Your last statement is correct, Prince did not release it. Therefore he has no responsibility at all to those that have listened to it through illicit means.

You are missing the point. Those books and movies rarely if ever depict those committing the crimes as the heroes. There are consequences for their actions. It doesn't glamourise the acts. AND you still didn't answer my question. If prince had sung about being a child molester would that be ok? [Edited 6/17/16 14:46pm]

You are missing my point. Prince never published the lyrics in question. They were released illegally. He should not be judged for them.

AND I did say that I would NOT answer the question. Prince did not sing about being a child molester so I refuse to entertain the fantasy of "what if he did".

[Edited 6/17/16 17:21pm]

EmmaMcG said:

djThunderfunk said:

As a straight but queer man who's been sexually abused by a woman as a child, and as a feminist, I certainly do not feel very excited about the notion of P apparently endorsing rape in some of his lyrics.

However:

1/ There is a lot of sexual violence in 1999 (Let's Pretend, Automatic, Lady Cab Driver...), and yes it is art, and Prince's work at the time was a lot about expressing the unbearable sexual frustrations of a young man, and his sentimental misery (Something in The Water, How Come, Computer Blue, Nikki, Beautiful Ones...). The young man may or may not be Prince: songs can be fiction and are often a gross exaggeration of reality. As Ufoclub once said, Prince's songs tend to make everything super-intense, from religion to love to sex to any topic he addressed.

2/ Prince has always been a feminist in more way than one, and lots of songs express his feminist views, so it's more like 2 songs that he wrote for himself, where he just snapped. After all both are unreleased and we were never supposed 2 hear them. He also wrote a horrible thing about overweight people with Work That Fat. When he wrote for Morris some lyrics were super macho. Artists are entitled to creating dark and extreme works that do not necessarily express their opinion. In the end Prince will mostly be remembered as a feminist artist.

3/ It seems Extraloveable was considered for V6: whether it was written for V6 or not, this is how P considered releasing it at the time. Then the reversal (a woman saying the rape line) would have made it a feminist provocation, a daring thing for a woman to say in 1982. I dig that!

4/ Prince evidently chose to suppress the rape line when he finally released the song.

5/ I believe for the sake of human heritage those 2 tacks deserve to be released eventually, as such. Censoring works of art is what fascists and communists do, I can't ever, ever consone that for any reason whatsoever. Extraloveable 82 and Lust U Always won't be #1 at the Top 40 u know, so it's not like every 13 year old boy will hear them. And if by any chance one ever does and think, as said above, that "if Prince said so it's cool", we can't possibly censor the song because there are idiots in the world. Once again songs are works of fiction, even if based on real feelings or experience. Fiction has a right to portray wrong ideas.

jaypotton said:

djThunderfunk said:

You are missing my point. Prince never published the lyrics in question. They were released illegally. He should not be judged for them.

AND I did say that I would NOT answer the question. Prince did not sing about being a child molester so I refuse to entertain the fantasy of "what if he did".

[Edited 6/17/16 17:21pm]

Well we clearly have different views on what is and isn't acceptable. I have not said and nor do I judge Prince. By refusing to answer my question you are swerving the issue at hand...that is where is the line that gets crossed? I am assuming you think rape is wrong ergo child molesting or murder is wrong? So what I don't understand is why in your opinion it is okay to sing about rape in a morally ambiguous way but you haven't said whether it would be alright to sing about child molesting? This isn't about a fantasy "what if" situation, this is about understanding where your moral compass is at? It is hard to have a debate when one of the parties involved refuses to be clear on the fundamental point being discussed. The OP asked how we felt about the rape lyrics and I gave my opinion. For my moral compass singing about rape in a morally ambiguous way is wrong (just as it would be for other hideous crimes). I am not saying Prince should not sing about rape, but in doing so his position on it should be clear. IMO artists do have a responsibility to make their position on a subject clear rather than ambiguous. Prince was responsible because the song was never officially released in that format and when he did release it he changed it. I think that is the nature of art, the best can stimulate debate on difficult subjects (clearly this is one). However, I think artists (and I am not talking specifically about Prince here) who hide behind moral ambiguity are actually being lazy and using a hackneyed conceit to get their work discussed rather than making a statement (which is actually far more brave because you are being definitive rather than saying..."oh it is up to you to interpret how you want" that just says to me that the artist doesn't have a voice and is being controversial for self promotion. I am totally NOT a supporter of censorship but I personally prefer an artist to be clear on where they stand. Extra loveable in it's original form would have been more palatable (to me) if Prince could have worked in some form of self reprimand or further lyric to show that he had shocked himself and wouldn't do it really. As a sane person nobody could argue that rape is ok. But not everyone in the world is sane! There are many many who are insane so why give gem ammunition! As a sane person I do not for one minute think Prince was advocating rape or saying he would do it...but what about the looney down the road? [Edited 6/18/16 0:03am] [Edited 6/18/16 0:05am] [Edited 6/18/16 0:08am]

Prince didn't release this so I agree with Thunder: he can't be held responsible for looneys hearing the song.

In the end if he had, sang by himself, then there would be cause for debate about it and he certainly would have been attacked on all fronts and would have had to explain himself, as every artist who release a work of art that appears to condone a criminal activity has (remember Oliver Stone and Natural Born Killers?).

But he didn't. he didn't want us to hear it. He didn't want it out. Therefore Prince can't be asked to make amends later in the song. When he released it in 2011 there was no rape line anymore. And if we found a song in the vault advocating fist-fucking toddlers I would say the same: it would be weird for sure, but Prince couldn't be accused of inciting people to do it because the song would have stayed in the vault.

databank said:

jaypotton said:

djThunderfunk said:

You are missing my point. Prince never published the lyrics in question. They were released illegally. He should not be judged for them.

AND I did say that I would NOT answer the question. Prince did not sing about being a child molester so I refuse to entertain the fantasy of "what if he did".

[Edited 6/17/16 17:21pm]

Well we clearly have different views on what is and isn't acceptable. I have not said and nor do I judge Prince. By refusing to answer my question you are swerving the issue at hand...that is where is the line that gets crossed? I am assuming you think rape is wrong ergo child molesting or murder is wrong? So what I don't understand is why in your opinion it is okay to sing about rape in a morally ambiguous way but you haven't said whether it would be alright to sing about child molesting? This isn't about a fantasy "what if" situation, this is about understanding where your moral compass is at? It is hard to have a debate when one of the parties involved refuses to be clear on the fundamental point being discussed. The OP asked how we felt about the rape lyrics and I gave my opinion. For my moral compass singing about rape in a morally ambiguous way is wrong (just as it would be for other hideous crimes). I am not saying Prince should not sing about rape, but in doing so his position on it should be clear. IMO artists do have a responsibility to make their position on a subject clear rather than ambiguous. Prince was responsible because the song was never officially released in that format and when he did release it he changed it. I think that is the nature of art, the best can stimulate debate on difficult subjects (clearly this is one). However, I think artists (and I am not talking specifically about Prince here) who hide behind moral ambiguity are actually being lazy and using a hackneyed conceit to get their work discussed rather than making a statement (which is actually far more brave because you are being definitive rather than saying..."oh it is up to you to interpret how you want" that just says to me that the artist doesn't have a voice and is being controversial for self promotion. I am totally NOT a supporter of censorship but I personally prefer an artist to be clear on where they stand. Extra loveable in it's original form would have been more palatable (to me) if Prince could have worked in some form of self reprimand or further lyric to show that he had shocked himself and wouldn't do it really. As a sane person nobody could argue that rape is ok. But not everyone in the world is sane! There are many many who are insane so why give gem ammunition! As a sane person I do not for one minute think Prince was advocating rape or saying he would do it...but what about the looney down the road? [Edited 6/18/16 0:03am] [Edited 6/18/16 0:05am] [Edited 6/18/16 0:08am]

- NO. I'm not entertaining that question because it is not on point. Prince did not write about those subjects, he did write Extraloveable. That is the discussion, not "what if he wrote something he didn't". As far as finding my moral compass, see post #116.

- You say you're not judging Prince in one sentence and then you judge him in another: "singing about rape in a morally ambiguous way is wrong".

- I do not giving a flying fukkk about "the looney down the road". I do not believe that as a society we should dumb down art in fear that it might set off such people. That's a dangerous road to go down and will always lead to censorship. There used to be a group known as the PMRC. They were specifically worried about how lyrics affected children. In that case I felt the same, it is not the artist's responsibility to worry about the children, that is for the parents. Some people today believe that art should not offend Muslim extremists so as to no set them off. Art should never be restricted or stifled by such concerns.

- Bottom line: Prince did not publish the lyrics. Judging him for writing lyrics that he chose not to publish is unfair NO MATTER what the subject is (in this case rape). As he did not release the lyrics he is NOT responsible for providing a way for you or anyone else to find them morally acceptable. He already did the responsible thing by self censoring so if anything he should be commended.

[Edited 6/18/16 6:01am]

Blakbear said:

I can't in good conscience expect those ot offendee to just 'get over it'. They have a right to be offended by it; who am I to tell them they can't be because it's art? Rape is an uncomfortable subject, and a terrifying experience.

I agree that those that hear it have a right to be offended by it. That is absolutely true.

I still maintain, any judgement of Prince for writing it should be tempered by the fact that he did not publish it.

djThunderfunk said:

I have stated my position:

djThunderfunk said:

"Movies, books, songs, paintings, etc have long portrayed murderers, rapists, terrorists, whathaveyou. It is not the responsibility of the creator of the art to ensure that people of "lower intelligence or warped psychology" can tell the difference between fiction and condoning an evil act. If this were true bookstores, video stores & music stores (okay Netflix, Amazon & iTunes) would hardly have anything to sell. In our society we don't dumb everything down in fear of the setting such people off. It's art. It's fiction."

It is okay to portray ANY deplorable act in fiction. The more deplorable the smaller the audience, but, yes it's okay. Just as it is okay to find it offensive. The artist is the only one that can draw the line in it's creation. The audience is free to draw their own line as to what they will accept.

I have not avoided the point I merely avoided speculating on what if Prince did it.

Clearly you think the artist should make this judgement based on how the dumbest or most deranged of society might react. I take the position that the reactions those type of people may have should be irrelevant to the artist or the art.

Where does this type of thinking end? I'm sure there's some crazy out there that might see a horror movie and decide it's a good idea to put on a hockey mask, pick up a machete and head out to the woods to kill teenagers that are partying and having sex, but that should not be a reason to make such a movie.

You want to know what I think is deplorable enough to draw the line and say that it should not be portrayed because a crazy or stupid person may act on it. My answer is and always has been there is no line for society and that each artists should draw their own line for themselves.

Cool?

djThunderfunk said:

jaypotton said:

djThunderfunk said:

Cool?

Hey it is cool with me that you have a different view to me. That is what makes the world go round and life interesting. Peace!

Agreed!

If you look deep enough into any human soul there is some darkness and evil. Myself, I would admit that at one time I really would have liked to murder my ex. If you ever met me, at that time or in the present, you would doubt that I was capable of executing the deed, never mind considering it.

I have no problem acknowledging that Prince wrote these lyrics, but I don't agree that it should be released if that was not his wish.

jaypotton said:

databank said:

Prince didn't release this so I agree with Thunder: he can't be held responsible for looneys hearing the song.

In the end if he had, sang by himself, then there would be cause for debate about it and he certainly would have been attacked on all fronts and would have had to explain himself, as every artist who release a work of art that appears to condone a criminal activity has (remember Oliver Stone and Natural Born Killers?).

But he didn't. he didn't want us to hear it. He didn't want it out. Therefore Prince can't be asked to make amends later in the song. When he released it in 2011 there was no rape line anymore. And if we found a song in the vault advocating fist-fucking toddlers I would say the same: it would be weird for sure, but Prince couldn't be accused of inciting people to do it because the song would have stayed in the vault.

Yeah cool as I said I was not questioning Prince or his motives. Totally acknowledged several times he did not release it. However, the discussion was broader and ventured into art per se. I will stick to my position that an artist is being lazy and using a hackneyed cliche to say "it is up to you to interpret". Even though I would not agree I would have more respect for an artist who said "I think rape is ok" than someone who could be misconstrued as thinking it was ok. As an artist you still have responsibilities and do need to recognise the potential impact of what you say, show or do. And databank I am sorry but if there was a song in the vault about fist fucking toddlers (that was ambiguous as to whether Prince thought that was good or bad) then I hope it would make any sane human being question what kind of monster he was rather than just think "it was weird"!!!! [Edited 6/18/16 5:41am] [Edited 6/18/16 5:45am] [Edited 6/18/16 5:52am]

To put in another way I once wrote (and published, without a disclaimer) a 1st person narrative poem where a person explains that he murdered a newborn baby and that it was a good thing. Obviously it was fiction, I had an angle that justified me writing it and anyone in their right mind would understand it's a work of irony about an insane character. But if someone was to murder a baby and say it was because of my poem, I refuse, as an artist to be held responsible for what a maniac did, and because I wrote a text that endorses murdering babies doesn't mean I'm the character in the poem and that I endorse doing such a thing.

databank said:

jaypotton said:

databank said:

To put in another way I once wrote (and published, without a disclaimer) a 1st person narrative poem where a person explains that he murdered a newborn baby and that it was a good thing. Obviously it was fiction, I had an angle that justified me writing it and anyone in their right mind would understand it's a work of irony about an insane character. But if someone was to murder a baby and say it was because of my poem, I refuse, as an artist to be held responsible for what a maniac did, and because I wrote a text that endorses murdering babies doesn't mean I'm the character in the poem and that I endorse doing such a thing.

Fair enough but (there is always a but) if that did happen would you not feel at all bad or guilty that your work of art inspired a nutter regardless of what your intent was? I am sure if it happened the mother of that baby wouldn't even consider wishing you had not written that poem! She wouldn't and shouldn't blame you but she sure will wish you hadn't written it!

I would obviously feel bad and contemn the act with extreme virulence, and feel very sorry for the victims, but I certainly wouldn't allow myself to feel guilty or even regret for writing and publishing the text, for I wouldn't be responsible, and I would condemn anyone who says that I am. Now if I had written an article or an essay seriously saying that babies should be murdered yes, I would share responsability, but not in the context of a work of art, absolutely not.

I'm with you on this completely, databank!

databank said:

jaypotton said:

databank said:

I would obviously feel bad and contemn the act with extreme virulence, and feel very sorry for the victims, but I certainly wouldn't allow myself to feel guilty or even regret for writing and publishing the text, for I wouldn't be responsible, and I would condemn anyone who says that I am. Now if I had written an article or an essay seriously saying that babies should be murdered yes, I would share responsability, but not in the context of a work of art, absolutely not.

I hear you. Personally I do not think you (or the artist) would be responsible either. I was interested to know how you would feel for inspiring the act. It is clearly dangerous ground/topic for discussion. Personally I am uncomfortable with an artist being morally ambiguous but you and djthunderfunk are not. As I said to him, all cool as I have enjoyed the debate. Neither of us has persuaded the other about our argument and that's fine. Total respect for your opinion even if I do not share it (and I trust you respect mine). If we were face to face I would suggest grabbing a beer and talking about something else ... as I am British it would probably be the weather [Edited 6/20/16 0:17am] [Edited 6/20/16 0:20am]

The beer would be nice.

It's cool, neither of us is a fascist and I believe our disagreement is not so radical in the end, it's not like u advocated censorship by law. Obviously my stand is also influenced by my line of work beyond the mere philosophical stand.

.

[Edited 7/28/16 14:11pm]

its art - move on!!!

.

[Edited 7/28/16 14:12pm]

I'm really suprised a rag like the Enquirer hasn't discovered this outtake yet and used it as an "exclusive" to bash Prince.