I was just reading some of toure...Always a mistake...LOL. Anyhow, he stated that Prince was a republican. No great sin there I guess. (I can handle a moderate republican...even being a lib myself as long as they are not too staunch..In other words, I forgive Frank Sinatra, Clint Eastwood, Bruce Willis and Dez dickerson.. Ted Nugent can kiss my arse..).

However, a label like that on prince makes no sense to me. His sources apparently were Susan Rogers and Eric Leeds. Toure stated that Prince was hawkish where the communists were concerned and was in favor or lower taxes. Also, briefly he alluded to P's religious beliefs.

here's my theory...about Susan and Eric. Susan worked with P during the 80's. In some ways, P was more liberal back then, but it was also the 80's and P was writing songs like "america" and "free" which even seem to imply that military action might be needed to insure American freedom against commies. He was religious back then as well. So, he probably expressed some conservative ideas back then connected with his faith and his naivete. So I get how she would think he had some conservative leanings.

Eric Leed's last time working with P was during the Rainbrow Children...Prince's most conservative period in his professional career. So, I can see Leeds point there.

But then again, I just watched P's interview in 2001 with Jay Leno and P stated that he was a fan of Bill Maher and P seemed to agree with the Iraq war being unnecessary. NOt really a republican stance there (or war-hawkish for that matter). Prince in my mind (at his most conservative) was more of a libertarian with strong religious beliefs, but I do think there might have been a shift more to the left after around 2011 when he decided to expand his religious teachings by hooking up with Van JOnes and learning about the political process.

P's stereotypically-conservative leanings...

--mixed feelings about homosexuality and gay marriage (mostly stemming from faith based interpretations)

--distrust of big government

--issues with taxation

--some sexism in the Rainbrow children

--some double standards in his relationships with females

--dislike of curse words in popular media

--traditional biblical beliefs

--nostalgia for the past (musically and otherwise)

--disagreeing with evolution

--concern over the morality of the seperation of church and state

P's stereotypically liberal leanings

--renewing connections with lesbian musicans (W and L of course) , working with gay musicians (elton John) and photographers (Ruiz).

--distrust of corporations

--a belief in pacism later in life (anti-war opinions)

--environmentalist beliefs/practices

--charity to urban areas (conservatives tend to believe in self-sufficiency over charity)

--supporting female musicans (and not just as conquests and women to mold)

--being happy with a possible female president (in one of his last interviews)

--non-Puritanistic beliefs about sexuality [after 2009, he seemed to bring the sex back a bit more]

--support of Black LIves Matter

--respecting others' faiths (Islam, Hinduism--chakras) (american conservative seem to focus more on christianity overall)

--friendships with known lib's...Cornell West, van Jones, Tavis Smiley

--having no vocal opinion on abortion

--supporting reparations for slavery through the song "When will we be paid?"

--anti-gun statements in songs like "Baltimore".

I think there might have been a bit of a shift in Prince after 2011--hooking up with Van Jones, performing for a president for the first time in his life (which happened to be a democrat named Barrack Obama), publically respecting aspects of Hinduism, expanding his religious beliefs beyond Jehoviah Witnesses, giving more generously to charity, supporting the Black LIves matter movement rather publically, in interviews--talking about a female president as a good thing, even admitting to being a fan of more smutty music like Kendrick Lamar's To Pimp a Butterfly and beyonce's Lemonade...oh and loving the musical "Hamilton"..a play about the ultimate big government federalist.. I am not saying his conservative leanings completely disappeared. He still didnt curse (although occassionally he still slipped a bit), he still liked employing churchy employees (see the Weltons) but he seemed to be striking a balance.

Dez Dickerson, a known republican was asked about P's political leanings. He said Prince was idiosyncratic (conservative in some ways , liberal in others.). I think he was closer to the reality.

in prince's song Compassion, he says something like "to the left of us no sanctity" "to the right of us no righteousness". He seemed like a man torn a bit.

Also, prince didn't vote so therefore not registered as either party and he bitched about the two party system.

Rosario Dawson and Van Jones called him Purple rather than red or blue. I think they nailed it. I know Prince knew JOnes not as long as Susan but seeing as he was a compartmentalized man, I imagine the conservations with Jones were more about politics and the conversations with Susan and Eric were more about music.

[Edited 2/25/17 19:37pm]

[Edited 2/25/17 19:38pm]

[Edited 2/25/17 19:41pm]

[Edited 2/25/17 19:53pm]

[Edited 2/25/17 21:39pm]

I agree that Prince was a libertarian and was primarily right-leaning. Him being somewhat of a hypocrite blurs things sometimes. I disagree on some of the things you throw in the liberal vs. conservative pools - there's some blatant bias in your interpretation of what makes someone right or left.

I don't think he was primarily right-leaning. I think he was about half and half. I did say "stereotypically" conservative views (and I am talking more socially conservative views than governmental). I don't believe conservatives (for example) are inherently sexist..i am saying the stereotype is that conservative are most likely to have old fashioned ideas about women's place in society. The republican party in the past were not supporters of Black Lives Matter, Gun control, pacism where Iraq was concerned, environmentalism, Hillary's presidency, and slavery reparations. Prince seemed to be.

His being a hypocrite is hard to determine.

I am not sure how libertarian he was at the end of his life. But he certainly seemed that way around 2009.

AnonymousFan said:

I agree that Prince was a libertarian and was primarily right-leaning. Him being somewhat of a hypocrite blurs things sometimes. I disagree on some of the things you throw in the liberal vs. conservative pools - there's some blatant bias in your interpretation of what makes someone right or left.

[Edited 2/25/17 20:37pm]

[Edited 2/25/17 20:58pm]

[Edited 2/25/17 20:59pm]

I think that your first notion of beginning with Toure as being a mistake is a correct notion. New generation African Americans like Toure who are more secular humanists either have forgotten or don't want to understand/accept that historically African Americans have mostly been socially conservative and politically liberal because (1) religion is a major aspect/institution that reaches far into African history and (2) white supremacy/oppression has continued to force the same historically conservative people to embrace radical or liberal actions and allies as a tactic in their own liberation movement. Even though most African Americans identified as Christians, slavery, Jim Crow, and segregation forced them to create alliances with Jews, Atheists, Communists, and members of the LGBT community as part of their own liberation struggle. (Take Martin Luther King’s alliance with Bayard Rustin for example or how African Americans who were raised in Christian backgrounds, such as Paul Robeson and Richard Wright, who embraced Communism because they perceived it as a better tool to liberate African Americans from white supremacy.) Accordingly, many of the organizations that have been perceived by mainstream institutions as radical and liberal, such as the Black Panther Party for Self-Defense and the Nation of Islam, held very "conservative" notions about gender relationships as well as one's public presentation of oneself. As such, I would say that Prince's socio-political ideas are pretty much “par for the course” of most African Americans who believe in the existence of a God and desire to live a life pleasing to that God while finding a way to navigate and survive what they view as racist oppression. An album, such as The Rainbow Children, seems to best exemplify that attempted navigation of trying to live what one perceives as a "righteous" life while working to emancipate oneself from white oppression. So, while I understand Dickerson's use of "idiosyncratic," I think that Dickerson, himself, even being an African American, is minimizing, if not altogether ignoring, the history of African Americans being socially conservative and politically liberal.

*

And, yet, even as I make this statement, I must also acknowledge that the increased number of African Americans that voted for Trump over the amount that voted for Romney did so because they wanted to vote their "religious" convictions because I know a great deal of African Americans who expressed disapproval of President Obama's LBGT policies. In this case, then, it isn't just that Prince is "idiosyncratic" but that African Americans, in general, have always had to navigate what they believe to be a "righteous" way of living with deciding to vote for candidates that may not share their "religious" views but would create policy that worked to end legal racial discrimination. For instance, even when polled in 2015, the vast majority of African Americans are pro-life, but they mostly vote democrat because the democrats present themselves as the party against racial discrimination. However, just like with the LGBT issue, there is also a growing number of African Americans who are voting republican because religion, especially ending legal abortion, has become more important for them than ending racial discrimination. (Of course, I must add that many of these African Americans voting their religious convictions also don’t perceive racial discrimination to be as major an issue today as it was seventy years ago. While I strongly disagree with them, I understand that they see religious convictions as being more pressing or essential than convictions about racial discrimination.)

*

So, again, I don't know if Prince was any more “idiosyncratic” than anyone else, especially African Americans, regarding how he balanced his socio-political concerns. I think that like most people, especially African Americans, he worked daily to find a way to articulate and execute his complex and complicated beliefs and notions of living a good/righteous life while struggling against perceived institutionalized evils, even when the purveyors of those evils were people who professed to serving the same God as the people they oppressed.

Valid point. I do know African American co-workers/friends who are socially conservative especially where homosexuality is concerned and avid outspoken church goers.. I taught with a African american lady who I liked a great deal but she used to tell a lesbian 8th grader (who was also African American) that her life style was wrong...(I kept telling her that she could be fired for saying stuff like that. ) This lady voted democrat however. One of my most well-liked students was African American and a sweet natured kid but he once told me that he couldn't tolerate homosexuality (it even seemed to bother him that he felt that way).

However, tolerance of others who don't share the same faith, concerns, or political leanings is something to strive for IMO. What about forward-thinking African Americans like Langston Hughes (who was supposedly homosexual himself). And, Frederick Douglass was a supporter of women's rights (not just African American rights)> ' What about Jewish African Americans? There is a huge congregration of African American Jews in Chicago. One of my other co-teachers was from a black Jewish congregration. she even had a Hebrew first name. Her parents raised her in that faith, not a conservative christian one.

What about Prince's unorthodox view that sexual climax was an expression of God's love? Or his anti-war statements during the Iraq war or his anti-gun statements in the Baltimore song? Or his environmenal concerns? Those aren't necessarily connected to his race's oppression (indirectly maybe they are.. but certainly not directly.) Prince wasn't conservative about every issue other than black rights. I think he was idiosyncratic.

The toughest part of religion is knowing how to balance one's faith with one's secular views, how to honor the "good book" and still interpret it in such a way that is fair to everyone. Homosexuality can be a tricky topic because the Bible has nothing good to say about it. I am not religious so it doesn't bother me. But Prince was obviously.

HOwever, reading the Bible within the context of its times and with a knowledge of the social attitudes surrounding it might have been helpful. Prince having in his possession the New Oxford Annotated Bible (which supposedly he had) might have facilitated a less literal interpretation of the Bible where homosexuality was concerned. FOr example, the broader lesson of Sodom and Gommorah being the sin of extreme hedonism (rather than sexual orientation). I had a priest who once told me that the word of God was not a bird that whispered into the apostles' ears God's message but rather God's message filtered through human experience. We can't ignore the history of the times when interpreting the bible. I am not religious but I did go through adult confirmation classes about 10 years ago. I don't know if Prince was a fundamentalist or not (or something in between) . But if he did read the New Oxford annotated Bible, he was searching for context.

1725topp said:

I think that your first notion of beginning with Toure as being a mistake is a correct notion. New generation African Americans like Toure who are more secular humanists either have forgotten or don't want to understand/accept that historically African Americans have mostly been socially conservative and politically liberal because (1) religion is a major aspect/institution that reaches far into African history and (2) white supremacy/oppression has continued to force the same historically conservative people to embrace radical or liberal actions and allies as a tactic in their own liberation movement. Even though most African Americans identified as Christians, slavery, Jim Crow, and segregation forced them to create alliances with Jews, Atheists, Communists, and members of the LGBT community as part of their own liberation struggle. (Take Martin Luther King’s alliance with Bayard Rustin for example or how African Americans who were raised in Christian backgrounds, such as Paul Robeson and Richard Wright, who embraced Communism because they perceived it as a better tool to liberate African Americans from white supremacy.) Accordingly, many of the organizations that have been perceived by mainstream institutions as radical and liberal, such as the Black Panther Party for Self-Defense and the Nation of Islam, held very "conservative" notions about gender relationships as well as one's public presentation of oneself. As such, I would say that Prince's socio-political ideas are pretty much “par for the course” of most African Americans who believe in the existence of a God and desire to live a life pleasing to that God while finding a way to navigate and survive what they view as racist oppression. An album, such as The Rainbow Children, seems to best exemplify that attempted navigation of trying to live what one perceives as a "righteous" life while working to emancipate oneself from white oppression. So, while I understand Dickerson's use of "idiosyncratic," I think that Dickerson, himself, even being an African American, is minimizing, if not altogether ignoring, the history of African Americans being socially conservative and politically liberal.

*

And, yet, even as I make this statement, I must also acknowledge that the increased number of African Americans that voted for Trump over the amount that voted for Romney did so because they wanted to vote their "religious" convictions because I know a great deal of African Americans who expressed disapproval of President Obama's LBGT policies. In this case, then, it isn't just that Prince is "idiosyncratic" but that African Americans, in general, have always had to navigate what they believe to be a "righteous" way of living with deciding to vote for candidates that may not share their "religious" views but would create policy that worked to end legal racial discrimination. For instance, even when polled in 2015, the vast majority of African Americans are pro-life, but they mostly vote democrat because the democrats present themselves as the party against racial discrimination. However, just like with the LGBT issue, there is also a growing number of African Americans who are voting republican because religion, especially ending legal abortion, has become more important for them than ending racial discrimination. (Of course, I must add that many of these African Americans voting their religious convictions also don’t perceive racial discrimination to be as major an issue today as it was seventy years ago. While I strongly disagree with them, I understand that they see religious convictions as being more pressing or essential than convictions about racial discrimination.)

*

So, again, I don't know if Prince was any more “idiosyncratic” than anyone else, especially African Americans, regarding how he balanced his socio-political concerns. I think that like most people, especially African Americans, he worked daily to find a way to articulate and execute his complex and complicated beliefs and notions of living a good/righteous life while struggling against perceived institutionalized evils, even when the purveyors of those evils were people who professed to serving the same God as the people they oppressed.

purplerabbithole said:

Valid point. I do know African American co-workers/friends who are socially conservative especially where homosexuality is concerned and avid outspoken church goers.. I taught with a African american lady who I liked a great deal but she used to tell a lesbian 8th grader (who was also African American) that her life style was wrong...(I kept telling her that she could be fired for saying stuff like that. ) This lady voted democrat however. One of my most well-liked students was African American and a sweet natured kid but he once told me that he couldn't tolerate homosexuality (it even seemed to bother him that he felt that way).

However, tolerance of others who don't share the same faith, concerns, or political leanings is something to strive for IMO. What about forward-thinking African Americans like Langston Hughes (who was supposedly homosexual himself). And, Frederick Douglass was a supporter of women's rights (not just African American rights)> ' What about Jewish African Americans? There is a huge congregration of African American Jews in Chicago. One of my other co-teachers was from a black Jewish congregration. she even had a Hebrew first name. Her parents raised her in that faith, not a conservative christian one.

What about Prince's unorthodox view that sexual climax was an expression of God's love? Or his anti-war statements during the Iraq war or his anti-gun statements in the Baltimore song? Or his environmenal concerns? Those aren't necessarily connected to his race's oppression (indirectly maybe they are.. but certainly not directly.) Prince wasn't conservative about every issue other than black rights. I think he was idiosyncratic.

The toughest part of religion is knowing how to balance one's faith with one's secular views, how to honor the "good book" and still interpret it in such a way that is fair to everyone. Homosexuality can be a tricky topic because the Bible has nothing good to say about it. I am not religious so it doesn't bother me. But Prince was obviously.

HOwever, reading the Bible within the context of its times and with a knowledge of the social attitudes surrounding it might have been helpful. Prince having in his possession the New Oxford Annotated Bible (which supposedly he had) might have facilitated a less literal interpretation of the Bible where homosexuality was concerned. FOr example, the broader lesson of Sodom and Gommorah being the sin of extreme hedonism (rather than sexual orientation). I had a priest who once told me that the word of God was not a bird that whispered into the apostles' ears God's message but rather God's message filtered through human experience. We can't ignore the history of the times when interpreting the bible. I am not religious but I did go through adult confirmation classes about 10 years ago. I don't know if Prince was a fundamentalist or not (or something in between) . But if he did read the New Oxford annotated Bible, he was searching for context.

*

I agree with what you are saying, but you kinda lost me because you seemed to be implying that I stated some things that I didn't. I mentioned a lot of forward-thinking African Americans who were socially conservative who also worked with people who had different social ideals but similar political ideals. And, as for Langston Hughes, he is the best example supporting my position. Hughes was homosexual, but he and James Baldwin had a major "falling out," as it were, because Hughes felt that Baldwin was too open about his homosexuality as Hughes felt that African Americans need a "male" champion and not a "gay male" champion. Of course, Baldwin disagreed with Hughes because he felt that he couldn't be the champion that African Americans needed if he couldn't first be true to himself. So, again, the African Americans that I mention were forward thinking because they did work with folks who had differing social and political views so this does not make Prince any different. So folks like Frederick Douglass and others support my point. As the poet Gil Scott-Heron stated in a poem, “Black folks got free and then the whole world tried to get free.” While Scott-Heron was being purposefully hyperbolic, his point was that the Abolitionist and Civil Rights Movements lead to many other American movements, and many African Americans who participated in the Abolitionist and CRM also participated in those other movements, and the same is true today.

*

Even sexually, folks like Aretha Franklin and others who came from a very strict religious background found various ways to engage and discuss sexuality from creative and insightful ways. Prince may have been more fluid, but folks like Marvin Gaye from the African American community had always seen and discussed freely the spiritual aspect of sex and sexuality so, again, Prince is not really idiosyncratic in that manner either.

*

Finally, the notion of "reading the Bible within the context of its times and with a knowledge of the social attitudes" is the entire thrust of how African Americans used Christianity as a tool of the Civil Rights Movement. People from Nat Turner to King to the Staples Singers to just about every Civil Rights icon and activist one can name used the Bible's message of love and liberation as the mantra of their movement. As such, Prince, again, was complicated in his use a biblical messaging like most others. On the one hand, he could use the Bible to fuel his messages of liberation with songs, such as "You Will Be Moved" and "The Exodus Has Begun" as well as fuel his messages of love with songs, such as "The Ladder," "Still Would Stand All Time," and "Love, Thy Will Be Done." And, yet, other than his personal statements on homosexuality, there isn't much evidence of Prince using his religious beliefs or scriptures to discuss or even attack homosexuality in song. Songs, such as "Bambi" and "Da Bourgeoisie," are anti-homosexuality, but they never appear to be Prince saying, "You people are sinners who shouldn't be allowed to exist." Of course, any reasonable person can say that he's making the statements in those songs because of his religious convictions. However, given the fact that most people put more weight in what Prince sang than what he said in interviews, one could make the argument that Prince used his art moreso to show the loving and liberating aspect of Christianity rather than the oppressive/discriminating aspect of Christianity. Yet, again, this does not make him any more idiosyncratic than anyone else, especially since, again, African Americans and many other folks had been doing this for years.

Valid points once again. But something just occurred to me. Most of the folks we have been talking about are from our nation's history from at least 50 years ago or before. Prince was a modern man.

That being said, I don't take Bambi or La Bourgouisie (SIC) too seriously in terms of his views on homosexuality. In Bambi, he admits that maybe he is just 'naive'. Really the songs just a naive 20 year old dude from the late 70's trying to get laid by a cute lesbian.

As for Le Bourgousie, he is referring to a girl who is fickle about her sexual orientation, kicking it in a club (cabaret as he calls it), and has just cheated on him. He is being ornery, dirty, and bitter because she dumped him and screwed a random chick at a club. Prince online proactively dismissed the idea that that song was intended to be discriminatory. And the bearded lady line is actually a dirty expression rather than one intended to emasculate lesbians--it turns out that P's references to Ray Charles in the song also refer to a song of Charles (lady with a beard or something like that) and the first word in that song is actually the word "Beaver".

.

1725topp said:

purplerabbithole said:

Valid point. I do know African American co-workers/friends who are socially conservative especially where homosexuality is concerned and avid outspoken church goers.. I taught with a African american lady who I liked a great deal but she used to tell a lesbian 8th grader (who was also African American) that her life style was wrong...(I kept telling her that she could be fired for saying stuff like that. ) This lady voted democrat however. One of my most well-liked students was African American and a sweet natured kid but he once told me that he couldn't tolerate homosexuality (it even seemed to bother him that he felt that way).

However, tolerance of others who don't share the same faith, concerns, or political leanings is something to strive for IMO. What about forward-thinking African Americans like Langston Hughes (who was supposedly homosexual himself). And, Frederick Douglass was a supporter of women's rights (not just African American rights)> ' What about Jewish African Americans? There is a huge congregration of African American Jews in Chicago. One of my other co-teachers was from a black Jewish congregration. she even had a Hebrew first name. Her parents raised her in that faith, not a conservative christian one.

What about Prince's unorthodox view that sexual climax was an expression of God's love? Or his anti-war statements during the Iraq war or his anti-gun statements in the Baltimore song? Or his environmenal concerns? Those aren't necessarily connected to his race's oppression (indirectly maybe they are.. but certainly not directly.) Prince wasn't conservative about every issue other than black rights. I think he was idiosyncratic.

The toughest part of religion is knowing how to balance one's faith with one's secular views, how to honor the "good book" and still interpret it in such a way that is fair to everyone. Homosexuality can be a tricky topic because the Bible has nothing good to say about it. I am not religious so it doesn't bother me. But Prince was obviously.

HOwever, reading the Bible within the context of its times and with a knowledge of the social attitudes surrounding it might have been helpful. Prince having in his possession the New Oxford Annotated Bible (which supposedly he had) might have facilitated a less literal interpretation of the Bible where homosexuality was concerned. FOr example, the broader lesson of Sodom and Gommorah being the sin of extreme hedonism (rather than sexual orientation). I had a priest who once told me that the word of God was not a bird that whispered into the apostles' ears God's message but rather God's message filtered through human experience. We can't ignore the history of the times when interpreting the bible. I am not religious but I did go through adult confirmation classes about 10 years ago. I don't know if Prince was a fundamentalist or not (or something in between) . But if he did read the New Oxford annotated Bible, he was searching for context.

*

I agree with what you are saying, but you kinda lost me because you seemed to be implying that I stated some things that I didn't. I mentioned a lot of forward-thinking African Americans who were socially conservative who also worked with people who had different social ideals but similar political ideals. And, as for Langston Hughes, he is the best example supporting my position. Hughes was homosexual, but he and James Baldwin had a major "falling out," as it were, because Hughes felt that Baldwin was too open about his homosexuality as Hughes felt that African Americans need a "male" champion and not a "gay male" champion. Of course, Baldwin disagreed with Hughes because he felt that he couldn't be the champion that African Americans needed if he couldn't first be true to himself. So, again, the African Americans that I mention were forward thinking because they did work with folks who had differing social and political views so this does not make Prince any different. So folks like Frederick Douglass and others support my point. As the poet Gil Scott-Heron stated in a poem, “Black folks got free and then the whole world tried to get free.” While Scott-Heron was being purposefully hyperbolic, his point was that the Abolitionist and Civil Rights Movements lead to many other American movements, and many African Americans who participated in the Abolitionist and CRM also participated in those other movements, and the same is true today.

*

Even sexually, folks like Aretha Franklin and others who came from a very strict religious background found various ways to engage and discuss sexuality from creative and insightful ways. Prince may have been more fluid, but folks like Marvin Gaye from the African American community had always seen and discussed freely the spiritual aspect of sex and sexuality so, again, Prince is not really idiosyncratic in that manner either.

*

Finally, the notion of "reading the Bible within the context of its times and with a knowledge of the social attitudes" is the entire thrust of how African Americans used Christianity as a tool of the Civil Rights Movement. People from Nat Turner to King to the Staples Singers to just about every Civil Rights icon and activist one can name used the Bible's message of love and liberation as the mantra of their movement. As such, Prince, again, was complicated in his use a biblical messaging like most others. On the one hand, he could use the Bible to fuel his messages of liberation with songs, such as "You Will Be Moved" and "The Exodus Has Begun" as well as fuel his messages of love with songs, such as "The Ladder," "Still Would Stand All Time," and "Love, Thy Will Be Done." And, yet, other than his personal statements on homosexuality, there isn't much evidence of Prince using his religious beliefs or scriptures to discuss or even attack homosexuality in song. Songs, such as "Bambi" and "Da Bourgeoisie," are anti-homosexuality, but they never appear to be Prince saying, "You people are sinners who shouldn't be allowed to exist." Of course, any reasonable person can say that he's making the statements in those songs because of his religious convictions. However, given the fact that most people put more weight in what Prince sang than what he said in interviews, one could make the argument that Prince used his art moreso to show the loving and liberating aspect of Christianity rather than the oppressive/discriminating aspect of Christianity. Yet, again, this does not make him any more idiosyncratic than anyone else, especially since, again, African Americans and many other folks had been doing this for years.

[Edited 2/26/17 15:23pm]

purplerabbithole said:

Valid points once again. But something just occurred to me. Most of the folks we have been talking about are from our nation's history from at least 50 years ago or before. Prince was a modern man.

That being said, I don't take Bambi or La Bourgouisie (SIC) too seriously in terms of his views on homosexuality. In Bambi, he admits that maybe he is just 'naive'. Really the songs just a naive 20 year old dude from the late 70's trying to get laid by a cute lesbian.

As for Le Bourgousie, he is referring to a girl who is fickle about her sexual orientation, kicking it in a club (cabaret as he calls it), and has just cheated on him. He is being ornery, dirty, and bitter because she dumped him and screwed a random chick at a club. Prince online proactively dismissed the idea that that song was intended to be discriminatory. And the bearded lady line is actually a dirty expression rather than one intended to emasculate lesbians--it turns out that P's references to Ray Charles in the song also refer to a song of Charles (lady with a beard or something like that) and the first word in that song is actually the word "Beaver".

.

*

I agree with you that "Bambi" and "Da Bourgeoisie" are to be taken mostly as tongue in cheek, but I just wanted to acknowledge that those wanting to engage in a strict/rigid lyrical interpretation could cite those songs as possibly being homophobic. Again, I don’t perceive them that way, but others have.

*

Prince was born in 1958 so he would have come of age during the apex of the Civil Rights Movement, especially when the Civil Rights Movement split into two fractions with one becoming the Black Power Movement, which also greatly impacted him. So, I don't think we can minimize the notion that Prince was influenced by and working within the frameworks of pop, soul, gospel, funk, rock, and black revolutionary music, which to one degree or another included soul, funk, gospel, and funk. Even his early notion of a raceless and genderless utopia was Sly Stone inspired, and, yet, even Sly was clear that specific issues of white supremacy must be addressed before the utopian society can emerge. As such, this notion emerges in Prince's later work as he begins to embrace/address topics specific to the African American condition. So, yes, Prince was definitely a unique and creative genius, but the apex of his creative genius was in his ability to amalgamate what had come before him into a new thing.

*

So, yes, Prince was a modern man who was greatly impacted by his experience and knowledge of history, and he, of course, was able to refashion all of that into a new form of brilliance that had the foundation of the best of the past while pointing us to a new or refreshing perception. Prince’s politics were purple and complicated, but he never stopped thinking about the specific conditions of African Americans, even if his notions of what was best for the African-American community were not always popular within the African-American community. Again, that does not make him unique because everyone from King to X from Jesse Jackson to Louis Farrakhan to President Obama have been loved and questioned by the African-American community. For me, that’s the beauty of the African-American community because it shows that we have never been a monolith and have always produced brilliant and brilliantly complicated individuals like Prince.