Feel like a total dotard (learned a new vocabulary word this week) for thinking that back when Prince wrote slave on his face he was out of is mind and simply seeking a new means of grabbing attention. Maybe if I had been on the Prince fan sites at the time, I would not have been so quick to believe the media narrative. He was astute and ahead of the game; others are seeing the light. I found this post to be very enlightening.

(Sorry, unsure how to link this)

https://travishoward.com/...roubadours

I have to admit..I was very Bewildered about it too...

I just didnt get it...

NOW I look back and realise, as you mentioned, Just how ahead of his time he was and

HOW he SO Deserved to have ownership of his own ART...

and what a sacrifice he actually made at the time, he appeared to be a fool

and lost a lot of credibility at the time simply becasue no one got it...

Asenath0607 said:

Asenath0607 said:

He was astute and ahead of the game

.

No he wasn't. He was an insensitive prick who compared his luxurious job to slavery.

.

Moreover the likes of the Rolling Stones experienced much worse decades earlier. IIRC they still don't control all of their back catalogue.

.

Oh, and Prince signed that infamous $100 million contract of his own free will (and against the advice of his entourage) and was the first to release a press release, boasting that inflated number.

.

At the same time both REM and Metallica negotiated successfullywith WEA companies to gain the rights to their back catalogue. Meanwhile Prince behaved like a stubborn child instead of an adult, and sabotaged his own career by releasing substandard music.

He was ahead of the game. Prince worked hard and his job was not all fun and games.

EnDoRpHn said:

[...] AFAIK, rdhull is the only one still around. [...]

I'm still around also, although not as active. I remember quite a few people on AMP and the prince newsboard worrying he was losing his commercial appeal fast... but I equally remember quite a few of us "getting it", in the sense that his artistic integrity and aesthetic freedom were the things we did care about throughout the general media-fueled puzzlement.

BartVanHemelen said:

Asenath0607 said:

He was astute and ahead of the game

.

No he wasn't. He was an insensitive prick who compared his luxurious job to slavery.

Insensitive how? If he felt he was taken advantage of and forced to work excessively with very little to show for it, that was slavery to him.

.

Moreover the likes of the Rolling Stones experienced much worse decades earlier. IIRC they still don't control all of their back catalogue.

Whether the Rolling Stones experienced worse is not at all relevant. Prince attempted to right what he felt was enslavement to WB. It was public, but I certainly feel many subsequent entertainers have benefitted from the situation.

.

Oh, and Prince signed that infamous $100 million contract of his own free will (and against the advice of his entourage) and was the first to release a press release, boasting that inflated number.

Relevance?

.

At the same time both REM and Metallica negotiated successfullywith WEA companies to gain the rights to their back catalogue. Meanwhile Prince behaved like a stubborn child instead of an adult, and sabotaged his own career by releasing substandard music.

Sabotaged his career says you. He still seems to have a following many millions strong, including you. The methods REM and Metallica chose to oppose WEA companies is what they chose to do. A grown man (not a stubborn child) chooses the path he wants to take, and thats what Prince did. A stubborn child might constantly spew insults about an artist on their fansite for years, rather than just find something worthwhile to do.

I understood it very well.

Warners sabatoged the contract.

He signed the contract that was based on the numbers of units sold and then he was put into the R&B division which cut 50 to 60 percent of his potential base. In other words he got flammed. Prince had been getting the shaft after years of having Number 2 and 3 songs stall and having songs leapfrog on the charts he should have known the fix was in.

This exactly! Witness!!!!

muleFunk said:

I understood it very well.

Warners sabatoged the contract.

He signed the contract that was based on the numbers of units sold and then he was put into the R&B division which cut 50 to 60 percent of his potential base. In other words he got flammed. Prince had been getting the shaft after years of having Number 2 and 3 songs stall and having songs leapfrog on the charts he should have known the fix was in.

Asenath0607 said:

Feel like a total dotard (learned a new vocabulary word this week) for thinking that back when Prince wrote slave on his face he was out of is mind and simply seeking a new means of grabbing attention. Maybe if I had been on the Prince fan sites at the time, I would not have been so quick to believe the media narrative. He was astute and ahead of the game; others are seeing the light. I found this post to be very enlightening.

(Sorry, unsure how to link this)

https://travishoward.com/...roubadours

He wasnt' ahead of his time, he just didn't pay attention to what other artists did before him. For example, the Bee Gees had already fought and won the rights to ownership of their masters in the early 80s, and this came after the Bee Gees sued their record label for $182 million in 1980.

kingricefan said:

This exactly! Witness!!!!

muleFunk said:

I understood it very well.

Warners sabatoged the contract.

He signed the contract that was based on the numbers of units sold and then he was put into the R&B division which cut 50 to 60 percent of his potential base. In other words he got flammed. Prince had been getting the shaft after years of having Number 2 and 3 songs stall and having songs leapfrog on the charts he should have known the fix was in.

Barry White said in an interview after his biggest hit Practice What You Preach, "If the record company didn't want you to have a number one hit you not going to have one. I don't CARE WHO YOU ARE." It was around the time Prince wrote Slave on his face that I started to understand what he was talking about.

Prince wrote some of the most memorable songs in the 1980's yet only had 5 total number one songs???

Rank, Title, Hot 100 Peak Year, Position (Weeks Spent at No. 1)
1, "When Doves Cry," 1984, No. 1 (5)*
2, "Kiss," 1986, No. 1 (2)*
3, "Let's Go Crazy," 1984, No. 1 (2)*
4, "Cream," 1991, No. 1 (2)**
5, "Batdance," 1989, No. 1 (1)
6, "Raspberry Beret," 1985, No. 2*
7, "U Got the Look," 1987, No. 2
8, "Purple Rain," 1984, No. 2*
9, "The Most Beautiful Girl in the World," 1994, No. 3
10, "Sign 'O' the Times," 1987, No. 3
11, "Little Red Corvette," 1983, No. 6
12, "Diamonds and Pearls," 1992, No. 3**
13, "Thieves in the Temple," 1990, No. 6
14, "Pop Life," 1985, No. 7*
15, "Delirious," 1983, No. 8
16, "I Would Die 4 U," 1985, No. 8*
17, "7," 1993, No. 7**
18, "Alphabet St.," 1988, No. 8
19, "I Could Never Take the Place of Your Man," 1988, No. 10
20, "1999," 1983, No. 12
21, "I Wanna Be Your Lover," 1980, No. 11
22, "Partyman," 1989, No. 18
23, "Gett Off," 1991, No. 21**
24, "Mountains," 1986, No. 23*
25, "Take Me With You," 1985, No. 25***
26, "The Arms of Orion," 1989, No. 36****
27, "Money Don't Matter 2 Night," 1992, No. 23**
28, "I Hate U," 1995, No. 12
29, "LetItGo," 1994, No. 31
30, "America," 1985, No. 46*
31. "The Morning Papers," 1993, No. 44**
32. "Anotherloverholenyohead," 1986, No. 63*
33. "Let's Pretend We're Married/Irresistible Bitch," 1984, No. 52*
34. "My Name Is Prince," 1992, No. 36**
35. "Hot Thing," 1988, No. 63
36. "Pink Cashmere," 1993, No. 50
37. "Controversy," 1981, No. 70
38. "Call My Name," 2004, No. 75
39. "The Greatest Romance Ever Sold," 2000, No. 63
40. "New Power Generation," 1990, No. 64

BartVanHemelen said:

Asenath0607 said:

He was astute and ahead of the game

.

No he wasn't. He was an insensitive prick who compared his luxurious job to slavery.

Perception is reality. And since you'll never be a recording artist under a contract, you have no real say in what he thought himself to be. He also cleared up exactly what he was going for with that, repeatedly, in interviews. Stop cherry picking, Bart, because you hate Prince.

.

Moreover the likes of the Rolling Stones experienced much worse decades earlier. IIRC they still don't control all of their back catalogue.

Whose fault is that?

.

Oh, and Prince signed that infamous $100 million contract of his own free will (and against the advice of his entourage) and was the first to release a press release, boasting that inflated number.

He also dismissed it and the terms of it in the Oprah interview. He never collected $100M, because he contract fell through, nor did his sales meet the perameters of the contract for advances and bonuses on the next album.

.

At the same time both REM and Metallica negotiated successfullywith WEA companies to gain the rights to their back catalogue. Meanwhile Prince behaved like a stubborn child instead of an adult, and sabotaged his own career by releasing substandard music.

His career continued on, he got the lion's share of sales from 1996 and forward, as well as eventually gained his back catalog. Prince certainly deserved the right to have his catalog back before REM or yesteryear Metallica were granted that right.

George Clinton commented about it.
He said Warner Brothers gave/did more for Prince than any acts on their label Black or White

I said he didn't get it.

OldFriends4Sale said:

NorthC said:

OldFriends4Sale said:

George Clinton commented about it.
He said Warner Brothers gave/did more for Prince than any acts on their label Black or White

I said he didn't get it.

Writer Nelson George said the same:"He was less a slave than any black artist I know of!" On the other hand, George Clinton, Bootsy Collins and others have said that they admired Prince for going against the record companies. But apart from a few diehard fans on this site, I never heard anyone admire Prince for changing his name and writing "slave" on his face. That really made people go

yeah that 1993-1996 Period with Prince not speaking to interviewers but having Mayte translate what he said etc, and not really explaining until much later what he was trying to convey was hard to read.

Prince took a major stance about his work and how the industry treated artists.

Nelson George was and still is a tool.

This is an interesting subject that gets broached in my circles often. First, if this is to be discussed, we have to acknowlege that contracts signed or not, don't have to honored and often include clauses that void them or call for both sides to arbitration should either side become unsatisfied. Prince had every right to boast about what he signed and he had every right to be unsatisfied about it and desire to end it. That's how this game works, labels engage clauses without artists approval ALL the time. Labels take money from artists all the time, Labels can delay accounting of royalties and not release album budgets. Labels do this as ploys to starve artists and force them into doing business their way, deliberately breaching said contract.

Knowing the business end a little bit, here are a couple things I question in regards to the Prince and Warner relationship.

1. The establishment of Paisley Park Records.

One of the tactics used to mask money and payments owed to the artist, is to open up new budgets and start running the tab on it to mask what you should really be paying an artist for a breakout album such as Purple Rain.

2. Everything is on 'Us'

This is another tactic used to mask funds owed to artists by giving the artist the labels credit to buy lavish gifts for themselves. Jerome Benton told a story that Prince would walk around LA shopping with Warners line of credit and buy things with that, not with his own money or his own credit. Your management team should never allow this to happen. Take out a personal loan on your own or through management, never take a tab from the label.

3. The guise of creative freedom.

After Purple Rain Prince was signed to Warner's Pictures and given a great deal of creative control. Do you really believe that any company would willingly put millions of dollars in the hands of a novice film maker because they 'believe' in him? I'm sure they believed in Prince but agreeing to let him direct a B/W movie in France is suspect to say the least. The dailies had to reveal how bad the film was and they knew it was bad and asked to make changes and Prince stood on his creative control. But instead of shelving the movie and taking over like they've done millions of times before, Warner's puts out a movie they are sure will flop. Why? To teach Prince a lesson and keep that open account racking up money Prince needs to pay back so the label keeps deducting from owed royalties.

Now this is all my opinion and speculative but in my experience in the music business that's the way it works. It's all an illusion, smoke and mirrors and pure robbery. Every time an artist thinks they're stepping up and meeting the objectives set out by the label and have freedom, creatively and financially, there is a new tactic at play to keep the label paid off of that artist. There certainly is a cycle that labels put artists through that can make one feel like a slave because the artist isn't actually profiting from the work like they should.

[Edited 9/24/17 15:10pm]

[Edited 9/24/17 15:10pm]

[Edited 9/24/17 15:13pm]

NorthC said:

OldFriends4Sale said:

George Clinton commented about it.
He said Warner Brothers gave/did more for Prince than any acts on their label Black or White

I said he didn't get it.

Writer Nelson George said the same:"He was less a slave than any black artist I know of!" On the other hand, George Clinton, Bootsy Collins and others have said that they admired Prince for going against the record companies. But apart from a few diehard fans on this site, I never heard anyone admire Prince for changing his name and writing "slave" on his face. That really made people go

Less a slave? Let's think about that for a moment...

pdiddy2011 said:

NorthC said:

Writer Nelson George said the same:"He was less a slave than any black artist I know of!" On the other hand, George Clinton, Bootsy Collins and others have said that they admired Prince for going against the record companies. But apart from a few diehard fans on this site, I never heard anyone admire Prince for changing his name and writing "slave" on his face. That really made people go

Less a slave? Let's think about that for a moment...

yeah..you know...

Part time SLaVe

Yeah it was very cringe-inducing and I had to distance myself from him at the time, calling himself 'slave' and all while on a $100 million contract did not resonate very well among working class fans. Looking back I can see his point of course, but there were other ways for him to go about it that were less abrasive. Then again, those were rock stars at the time for me: bold, rebellious and a little bit childish. I cringed at it but thought 'cool'.

I quite enjoyed 1993 – 1996 as it was contradictory on all fronts while being quite productive. On the one hand, Prince was mad about not controlling his music, yet from 1993 to 1996 we got a boatload of music. Maybe I shouldn't use the terms "boatload" and “slavery” together, but I digress. Also, Prince was saying that he wasn't going to promote anything for WB, but he was on tv and in the papers all the time and usually with new music. Next, I realized at the time that changing his name to an unpronounceable symbol and writing slave on his face was part real and part commercialism. On the one hand, he was pissed about not being able to force WB to release more music, pissed that they owned his masters, and pissed that he couldn’t escape his contract, and he had no real way to fight it. On the other hand, show business means to be as overly dramatic as possible when trying to make a point. As such, the only people who were pissed at Prince were the people who were mad that he was, once again, refusing to fit himself into their expectations. Also, whether you hated it or not, it was the most Prince move ever. To paraphrase Chris Rock, Prince didn't go crazy, he went Prince. And, to paraphrase a former org member, Spinlight, we all know that Prince is batshit crazy, and that's what we like/love about him. Only a batshit crazy mofo gon' come on stage in a raincoat and draws with legwarmers and heels. And, many years later, here comes that same fool with slave on his face, a name that can't nobody pronounce, wearing a scarf on his face, and whispering into his woman's ear like he's afraid that Big Brother is trying to steal his voice. It don't get no more Prince than that.

*

As far as him sabotaging his career, he wasn't going to be selling anymore records than he was. By then, the radio and video channels were filled with grunge and hip hop. I was glad when Prince went underground or to the internet so that I didn't have to worry about listening to the radio or watching video shows since I knew he wasn't going to get airtime. It was almost like being a Prince fan during the Dirty Mind/Controversy eras. Hell, the more I think about it, 1993 - 1996 was one of my favorite Prince eras because all the fake ass lame fans were gone. As Prince himself said, "That's not the type of audience you want. They only come around when you have a hit." Amen and Ashe. Fuck em! As a matter of fact, I think I'm going to write some crazy ass shit on my face, stand in my screen door, with my bathrobe wide open, and yell at young people walking by my house, "GET THE EFF OFF MY LAAAAWNNNNNN!!!

NorthC said:

OldFriends4Sale said:

George Clinton commented about it.
He said Warner Brothers gave/did more for Prince than any acts on their label Black or White

I said he didn't get it.

Writer Nelson George said the same:"He was less a slave than any black artist I know of!" On the other hand, George Clinton, Bootsy Collins and others have said that they admired Prince for going against the record companies. But apart from a few diehard fans on this site, I never heard anyone admire Prince for changing his name and writing "slave" on his face. That really made people go

I admired the h*ll out of Prince for doing this, I just didn't have a platform to say anything about it at the time. He got in their (record Companies) faces about their shady tactics and how they treated their artists. He laid it all out for people to make up their own minds about it. As for changing his name? What a brilliant PR move and I don't mean Purple Rain. It got everybody talking about him and I mean everybody. No other artist is known for a symbol or a color like Prince is. He nailed it!

BartVanHemelen said:

2020 said:

It was not cringeworthy at all if you truly understood what was up Prince wrote SLAVE on his face to stand up for artists rights Prince WAS ahead of his time and stood when most would not Prince educated a ton of well known and not well known artists to control their masters otheresise the master will own you Prince won!

SO well said...

in a nutshell..................

BartVanHemelen said:

Asenath0607 said:

He was astute and ahead of the game

.

No he wasn't. He was an insensitive prick who compared his luxurious job to slavery.

.

Moreover the likes of the Rolling Stones experienced much worse decades earlier. IIRC they still don't control all of their back catalogue.

.

Oh, and Prince signed that infamous $100 million contract of his own free will (and against the advice of his entourage) and was the first to release a press release, boasting that inflated number.

.

At the same time both REM and Metallica negotiated successfullywith WEA companies to gain the rights to their back catalogue. Meanwhile Prince behaved like a stubborn child instead of an adult, and sabotaged his own career by releasing substandard music.

What he said.