Kim Berry, hmmm, can't say I put a lot of stock in the word of an individual who can't keep her dates straight & auctions his socks. Not to mention is another one rinsing a % of the fanbase.

This is the second of the four seminal (read great) articles from the 80's on Prince. Spin.

bonatoc said:

Now here's what I consider a fine article on the subject.
It was posted by Lovejunky in 2017.
The title is impeccable (oh, hello D').

He may have the mulatto thing wrong, but it doesn't matter.
Prince becale indeed butterscotch, maybe by sleep deprivation,
but that's a fact: it is one of the possible reasons for Prince to feel rejected.
But he also found an identity of his own: the curse turned out to be a blessing.

[Edited 11/11/18 14:34pm]

[Edited 11/11/18 14:48pm]

rdhull, u gonna leave me hanging? Lol what's the other 2 bruh?

[Edited 11/11/18 20:46pm]

ABro said:

rdhull, u gonna leave me hanging? Lol what's the other 2 bruh?

[Edited 11/11/18 20:46pm]

Its actually 5 total

3. The Robert Hilburn 1982 Los Angeles times interview

4. The Rolling Stone 1999 review

5. The Kurt Loder SOTT review.

rdhull said:

ABro said:

rdhull, u gonna leave me hanging? Lol what's the other 2 bruh?

[Edited 11/11/18 20:46pm]

Its actually 5 total

3. The Robert Hilburn 1982 Los Angeles times interview

4. The Rolling Stone 1999 review

5. The Kurt Loder SOTT review.

Nice one

rdhull said:

ABro said:

rdhull, u gonna leave me hanging? Lol what's the other 2 bruh?

[Edited 11/11/18 20:46pm]

Its actually 5 total

3. The Robert Hilburn 1982 Los Angeles times interview

4. The Rolling Stone 1999 review

5. The Kurt Loder SOTT review.

Essential choices.

the Musician cover story from the fall of 1988 was a good one too.

Prince was just making it clear rock is black too.

rdhull said:

tab32792 said:

they do/did the same thing to michael jackson with that transcend race nonsense. what the hell does that even mean? yes we know he has/had fans of all races but that's not the point most of the time.

When MJ was bleached was he still black?

RicoN said:

tab32792 said:

they do/did the same thing to michael jackson with that transcend race nonsense. what the hell does that even mean? yes we know he has/had fans of all races but that's not the point most of the time.

When MJ was bleached was he still black?

Of course. The man got Soul until the very end.
Vitiligo has been discussed over and over.
There are pics circa 1982 where you can clearly see patches in the neck.
His skin condition was deteriorating.

And it's not the outer shell the issue here.

Do universal artists, or rather artists with universal ambitions — because such was their ambitiion,
otherwise they would have chosen the Public Enemy or N.W.A. path —consider they belong to a specific community?
That would negate the universality. Seeing the crowds getting whiter, can you imagine that?
Prince and Michael really must have felt like Nietzsche's Übermensch.

But you can't erase your childhood, can you? They were lucky to be born
in post riots times, but it still had an impact on the previous generation, their fathers'.
Violence, when you can't expulse it on way or the other, turns into self-hatred.
And what's easier than to hate yourself? Your family, in times where man still reigns supreme in his house.

It's Joe's obsession with getting it back socially, but it's also Mattie and her longing for freedom,
which will obsess SKipper all his life. They can say what you want about you, as long as you're free it doesn't truly matter.
Some like that. You can see that this is not a gimmick: Prince put his career upside down because restraining him was out of the question.
But define career; that's for another topic. I consider the whole of his career fantastic. He didn't betray himself. He chose to start from scratch.
To go back into the pit - and it never was such a drag. Clubs witnessed lots of fun — and cash burning. He just thought he had to give (spend) it all,
in order to get back, a typical christian trauma. What would have your life be if you were called "Prince" and born in middle-class, not too good, not too bad?
Would you go "I have to live up to this name all my life"?

There is also a specific "never give up" kind of Gospel motto that originated
in the first chants down in some boat or later in some cotton field.
Soul (in the largest sense, ignore the styles) Music was born from suffering.
The drive born from it may not be your usual drive.

Michael and Prince were both fascinated by the concept of the "chosen one".
Once you've attained a Coke Ad (note: a white aryan starts the song) audience,
it's easy to think of yourself as God's hand, finally(!) stirring the Melting Pot (you have to keep stirring, always stir, otherwise Society makes sticky clogs).

But there is also something worth noting about Prince. His name, which is pretty heavy.
There never were a Prince in the US. (Modern) royalty is a European concept. So from the start, Prince is an alien.
The only american King is Elvis. So of course Prince is taking back all the heritage from a pink's ass.

Prince and Michael would have never happened in the land of the blond squares,
if Presley or Lewis didn't sneak into a black church. This is an accident.

But Prince and Michael would have never happened
if a white himself didn't twist and shout (another slang term for F)
before a whole tight-ass white racist country.
Presley's presence shouts that black rhythm is the best.
In a few seconds he's all about primal trance, and letting go.
Just like in african spiritual gatherings.
Not seen in white men since pagan times.
This is no accident: this is intention.
Elvis never shied away from his adoptive roots: from boycotting segregated concerts or singing "In The Ghetto",
Presley dreamt naively of a South where black and whites would shake their hips together.
And then fame, money and junk food (all White Educated Men Society byproducts) ruined the Dream.

Maybe Prince also envisions himself as a race reconciliator: he inherits from a white who inherited from the black.
A lot of good critics, usually the best from what I've read,
never EVER fail to mention Prince as black. The Ohio Players and other obscure influences are regularly mentioned since 1985. Only in Europe?

In Europe, there are somewhat frequent national excuses about the way the colonies were treated.
It sends a message to the population that the nation knwos when to shits on herself or on her supposed grand past.
I was gonna say the US could take example, but went way ahead: Obama and Oprah are the final steps in the mountain climbing. Was it what it seemed?
So maybe the whole problem is the general american public perception, but why care about that?
Have you seen your country lately, ooh-ooh-oo-ooooh-yeah?
Culture knows how to take care of itself.
Truth usually stands the test of time.


Poor white guys who suddenly taste the social exclusion medecine themselves
are still kept in ignorance. Which is the best weapon, when you don't know squat about economics
it's easy to persuade you someone stole your money. Now pick your easiest target.
So if this is the human condition of the panicked american white (man, not woman), I wouldn't care about his culture yet.
There are priorities. First he has to reread the whole story. Ignorance is a hell of a weapon, but knowledge is The Redeemer.

[Edited 11/13/18 4:40am]

RicoN said:

tab32792 said:

they do/did the same thing to michael jackson with that transcend race nonsense. what the hell does that even mean? yes we know he has/had fans of all races but that's not the point most of the time.

When MJ was bleached was he still black?

Haha, funny. Ask his sperm.

bonatoc said:

RicoN said:

When MJ was bleached was he still black

In Europe, there are somewhat frequent national excuses about the way the colonies were treated.

It sends a message to the population that the nation knwos when to shits on herself or on her supposed grand past

[Edited 11/13/18 4:40am]

The second sentence is not clear.
Are you saying that Europe/the establishment/media/education system/public/etc, shits on her colonial "past" ??

If you could keep the reply short & sweet it would be appreciated.
I do not want to derail, just clarification.

[Edited 11/13/18 5:09am]

I started to respond to this thread, then I realized nine things. One, this is the one-millionth thread on this topic. Two, there are just people who hate the fact/truth that Prince was an African American. Three, there are some people, because they don't know American or African-American history, who don't know that one can make a socio-political impact, especially in regards to race, a variety of ways without only following the MLK or Malcolm X blueprint. Four, it's well documented in print, if anybody would bother to research, that during the Dirty Mind promotional tour that Prince's managers stated, in print, that white radio stations would not play him simply because he was black, and the white journalists writing the articles agreed. (Just go read some of the articles posted on the Prince in Print website.) And, five, in response to this, Prince began lying about his race. Yet, he was so bad at it that he could not keep the lie straight and changed the racial makeup of his parents in three consecutive articles from January to March 1980. Six, Prince, like most African Americans, had a moment in which he evaluated his integrationist/assimilationist path and decided that self-determination would be a better path for himself and the African-American community as evident in works, such as "We March," "What's Your Color?," "U Will B Moved," "Uncle Sam," "Paris 1798430," The Rainbow Children, "Avalanche," "Dear Mr. Man," "Baltimore," "Black Muse," and too many more to name. Seven, let's not forget that Prince donated "We March" directly to Minister Farrakhan for the Million Man March, which is twenty years before he states at the Freddie Gray concert, which is point eight, "The next time I stay here, I want to stay in a hotel owned by you. I want to play in a venue owned by you." If this isn't a promotion of black self-determinism, I don't know what is. And, nine, regardless of what anyone thinks of Jayz or Tidal, Prince allowed his work to be streamed on Tidal because he perceived it as artists being in control of their own work and as a way to support black businesses, especially black artist becoming owers rather than being underpaid labor. So, for folks saying that Prince never wanted to be perceived as black and that Prince's "socio-political" work does not rise to the level of more noted "black activists," I would respond, but, clearly, facts mean nothing to these people. Sometimes the haze of racism/white supremacy makes it difficult for people to see the truth right in front of their faces because, again, that truth will destroy their myth of Prince being their racially ambiguous erotic nymph child.

ABro said:

bonatoc said:

In Europe, there are somewhat frequent national excuses about the way the colonies were treated.

It sends a message to the population that the nation knwos when to shits on herself or on her supposed grand past

[Edited 11/13/18 4:40am]

The second sentence is not clear.
Are you saying that Europe/the establishment/media/education system/public/etc, shits on her colonial "past" ??

If you could keep the reply short & sweet it would be appreciated.
I do not want to derail, just clarification.

[Edited 11/13/18 5:09am]

Well, maybe not that blatantly, but yes,
there have been several acts of contrition in several countries.
One of the last in France was national excuses towards North Africans
enroled by force in the french army twice, in both WW.

Of course it's one thing to apologize, and another to act accordingly.
But given the friction and the inertia of mindsets, these national recognitions
of shitty behaviours of the past happened pretty quickly: they did not wait for everyone having experienced injustice to die.
In some cases there even has been some monetary compensation (less than 40 acres and a mule, but at least there's an official gesture).

[Edited 11/13/18 12:55pm]

rogifan said:

ufoclub said:

Really? I think he was well aware of what the choice, of he of all people, wearing his hair unprocessed, could imply... just like when he chose to go onto an awards stage and say “records, like black lives, matter.” He was putting one foot onto rock n roll and one foot onto cultural politics and doing a star pose.

Kim Berry said he went natural because he was sick of having his hair done up all the time. He didn’t need a hairstyle change for us to know he cared about the black community.

people didn't like that answer lol

bonatoc said:

ABro said:

The second sentence is not clear.
Are you saying that Europe/the establishment/media/education system/public/etc, shits on her colonial "past" ??

If you could keep the reply short & sweet it would be appreciated.
I do not want to derail, just clarification.

[Edited 11/13/18 5:09am]

Well, maybe not that blatantly, but yes,
there have been several acts of contrition in several countries.
One of the last in France was national excuses towards North Africans
enroled by force in the french army twice, in both WW.

Of course it's one thing to apologize, and another to act accordingly.
But given the friction and the inertia of mindsets, these national recognitions
of shitty behaviours of the past happened pretty quickly: they did not wait for everyone having experienced injustice to die.
In some cases there even has been some monetary compensation (less than 40 acres and a mule, but at least there's an official gesture).

[Edited 11/13/18 12:55pm]

I see. Interesting.
All that so-called shitting seems to have missed the english public, as they voted Churchill number one briton, with runners up being Cromwell, Elizabeth 1, & Horatio Nelson..

..but that's another thread/convo.

[Edited 11/13/18 17:40pm]

1725topp said:

I started to respond to this thread, then I realized nine things. One, this is the one-millionth thread on this topic. Two, there are just people who hate the fact/truth that Prince was an African American. Three, there are some people, because they don't know American or African-American history, who don't know that one can make a socio-political impact, especially in regards to race, a variety of ways without only following the MLK or Malcolm X blueprint. Four, it's well documented in print, if anybody would bother to research, that during the Dirty Mind promotional tour that Prince's managers stated, in print, that white radio stations would not play him simply because he was black, and the white journalists writing the articles agreed. (Just go read some of the articles posted on the Prince in Print website.) And, five, in response to this, Prince began lying about his race. Yet, he was so bad at it that he could not keep the lie straight and changed the racial makeup of his parents in three consecutive articles from January to March 1980. Six, Prince, like most African Americans, had a moment in which he evaluated his integrationist/assimilationist path and decided that self-determination would be a better path for himself and the African-American community as evident in works, such as "We March," "What's Your Color?," "U Will B Moved," "Uncle Sam," "Paris 1798430," The Rainbow Children, "Avalanche," "Dear Mr. Man," "Baltimore," "Black Muse," and too many more to name. Seven, let's not forget that Prince donated "We March" directly to Minister Farrakhan for the Million Man March, which is twenty years before he states at the Freddie Gray concert, which is point eight, "The next time I stay here, I want to stay in a hotel owned by you. I want to play in a venue owned by you." If this isn't a promotion of black self-determinism, I don't know what is. And, nine, regardless of what anyone thinks of Jayz or Tidal, Prince allowed his work to be streamed on Tidal because he perceived it as artists being in control of their own work and as a way to support black businesses, especially black artist becoming owers rather than being underpaid labor. So, for folks saying that Prince never wanted to be perceived as black and that Prince's "socio-political" work does not rise to the level of more noted "black activists," I would respond, but, clearly, facts mean nothing to these people. Sometimes the haze of racism/white supremacy makes it difficult for people to see the truth right in front of their faces because, again, that truth will destroy their myth of Prince being their racially ambiguous erotic nymph child.

Couldn't agree more.

Krystalkisses said:

Rdhull, thank you very much for posting that Spin article. As a racially mixed person myself, the article really clarified why Prince is my hero.

Prince was not mulatto.

AVENUEMAN said:

Krystalkisses said:

Rdhull, thank you very much for posting that Spin article. As a racially mixed person myself, the article really clarified why Prince is my hero.

Prince was not mulatto.

by genetic and biology he would fall under that catagory. He is the visual and genetic result of European and African admixture. 1DropRuleAnotherRaceLie. His whole family on both sides were mixed folk marrying mixed folk. On his paternal side his great grandfather was of English ethnicity and the great grandmother was 'biracial'. It's also why he tended to date other mixed women.

and this has nothing to do with not being proud of his blackness. Just an embracing of his fullness

.

I see U at another party
Dancin' all over the place
Lookin' 4 the perfect body
2 go with the perfect face

Bushy head mulatto breakdown

CHORUS:
I used 2 have mad sex in the horny morning
I used 2 have mad sex in the afternoon
I used 2 have mad sex when me and this mulatto go down
2 dirty up another room

Bushy head mulatto breakdown
And your lips got wet 2day

Bushy head mulatto breakup

Prince was always about the dichotomy and embracing it, discecting it, playing with it, wearing and discarding it

He's all black, he's all white, everybody better jam 2night, Limousine

ABro said:

RicoN said:

When MJ was bleached was he still black?

Haha, funny. Ask his sperm.

his sperm was white, but did smell of bleach....

bonatoc said:

RicoN said:

When MJ was bleached was he still black?

Of course. The man got Soul until the very end.
Vitiligo has been discussed over and over.
There are pics circa 1982 where you can clearly see patches in the neck.
His skin condition was deteriorating.

And it's not the outer shell the issue here.

Do universal artists, or rather artists with universal ambitions — because such was their ambitiion,
otherwise they would have chosen the Public Enemy or N.W.A. path —consider they belong to a specific community?
That would negate the universality. Seeing the crowds getting whiter, can you imagine that?
Prince and Michael really must have felt like Nietzsche's Übermensch.

But you can't erase your childhood, can you? They were lucky to be born
in post riots times, but it still had an impact on the previous generation, their fathers'.
Violence, when you can't expulse it on way or the other, turns into self-hatred.
And what's easier than to hate yourself? Your family, in times where man still reigns supreme in his house.

It's Joe's obsession with getting it back socially, but it's also Mattie and her longing for freedom,
which will obsess SKipper all his life. They can say what you want about you, as long as you're free it doesn't truly matter.
Some like that. You can see that this is not a gimmick: Prince put his career upside down because restraining him was out of the question.
But define career; that's for another topic. I consider the whole of his career fantastic. He didn't betray himself. He chose to start from scratch.
To go back into the pit - and it never was such a drag. Clubs witnessed lots of fun — and cash burning. He just thought he had to give (spend) it all,
in order to get back, a typical christian trauma. What would have your life be if you were called "Prince" and born in middle-class, not too good, not too bad?
Would you go "I have to live up to this name all my life"?

There is also a specific "never give up" kind of Gospel motto that originated
in the first chants down in some boat or later in some cotton field.
Soul (in the largest sense, ignore the styles) Music was born from suffering.
The drive born from it may not be your usual drive.

Michael and Prince were both fascinated by the concept of the "chosen one".
Once you've attained a Coke Ad (note: a white aryan starts the song) audience,
it's easy to think of yourself as God's hand, finally(!) stirring the Melting Pot (you have to keep stirring, always stir, otherwise Society makes sticky clogs).

But there is also something worth noting about Prince. His name, which is pretty heavy.
There never were a Prince in the US. (Modern) royalty is a European concept. So from the start, Prince is an alien.
The only american King is Elvis. So of course Prince is taking back all the heritage from a pink's ass.

Prince and Michael would have never happened in the land of the blond squares,
if Presley or Lewis didn't sneak into a black church. This is an accident.

But Prince and Michael would have never happened
if a white himself didn't twist and shout (another slang term for F)
before a whole tight-ass white racist country.
Presley's presence shouts that black rhythm is the best.
In a few seconds he's all about primal trance, and letting go.
Just like in african spiritual gatherings.
Not seen in white men since pagan times.
This is no accident: this is intention.
Elvis never shied away from his adoptive roots: from boycotting segregated concerts or singing "In The Ghetto",
Presley dreamt naively of a South where black and whites would shake their hips together.
And then fame, money and junk food (all White Educated Men Society byproducts) ruined the Dream.

Maybe Prince also envisions himself as a race reconciliator: he inherits from a white who inherited from the black.
A lot of good critics, usually the best from what I've read,
never EVER fail to mention Prince as black. The Ohio Players and other obscure influences are regularly mentioned since 1985. Only in Europe?

In Europe, there are somewhat frequent national excuses about the way the colonies were treated.
It sends a message to the population that the nation knwos when to shits on herself or on her supposed grand past.
I was gonna say the US could take example, but went way ahead: Obama and Oprah are the final steps in the mountain climbing. Was it what it seemed?
So maybe the whole problem is the general american public perception, but why care about that?
Have you seen your country lately, ooh-ooh-oo-ooooh-yeah?
Culture knows how to take care of itself.
Truth usually stands the test of time.


Poor white guys who suddenly taste the social exclusion medecine themselves
are still kept in ignorance. Which is the best weapon, when you don't know squat about economics
it's easy to persuade you someone stole your money. Now pick your easiest target.
So if this is the human condition of the panicked american white (man, not woman), I wouldn't care about his culture yet.
There are priorities. First he has to reread the whole story. Ignorance is a hell of a weapon, but knowledge is The Redeemer.

[Edited 11/13/18 4:40am]

I must admit that's a bit TLDR (and mumbo jumbo) but the vitiligo thing is pure BS - what are the chances of the only Jackson obsessed with being white developing a condition that made him white eh?

AVENUEMAN said:

Krystalkisses said:

Rdhull, thank you very much for posting that Spin article. As a racially mixed person myself, the article really clarified why Prince is my hero.

Prince was not mulatto.

We know that. It doesn't change the butterscotch/chocolate scene in UTCM.
It was a statement. Prince knew he could embody a utopian race fusion. Cavallo, Ruffalo and Fargnoli
spread the doubt over Prince's origins with the consent of Prince himself: "Don't make me black"n he told Waronker. Everyone obliged.
With time, Prince felt the need to bring it all back home, especially after feeling betrayed by the young MBA WASPs that were slowly tooking over the music business.
Majors forgot they were record companies. Records did not matter anymore.

Please let's not try to put aside the media game Prince himself played, probably out of deep beliefs ("Don't make me black" does not mean "I'm not black").
Like Michael, he believed in the Übermensch. Music unite us all, some like that. And indeed it did.
They could have been "Black Panthers" in their artistic (and therefore socio-political) expression, they chose not to.
Michael just Screamed with a little help from his sister, while Prince retreated to home (and his homies) when they both got disgusted
with the sour soup the Melting Pot was now full of. Someone stopped stirring.

OldFriends4Sale said:

AVENUEMAN said:

Prince was not mulatto.

by genetic and biology he would fall under that catagory. He is the visual and genetic result of European and African admixture. 1DropRuleAnotherRaceLie. His whole family on both sides were mixed folk marrying mixed folk. On his paternal side his great grandfather was of English ethnicity and the great grandmother was 'biracial'. It's also why he tended to date other mixed women.

and this has nothing to do with not being proud of his blackness. Just an embracing of his fullness

.

I see U at another party
Dancin' all over the place
Lookin' 4 the perfect body
2 go with the perfect face

Bushy head mulatto breakdown

CHORUS:
I used 2 have mad sex in the horny morning
I used 2 have mad sex in the afternoon
I used 2 have mad sex when me and this mulatto go down
2 dirty up another room

Bushy head mulatto breakdown
And your lips got wet 2day

Bushy head mulatto breakup

Prince was always about the dichotomy and embracing it, discecting it, playing with it, wearing and discarding it

He's all black, he's all white, everybody better jam 2night, Limousine

That pretty sums it. What some interpret as Prince going back to black,
is just autobiography to Prince. His own identity was a mix. And he understood pretty quickly
he could be overcome, because he grew in a North State, some kind of haven when compared to Georgia.
Small black community, but not rejected or vilified (although Chris Moon and Husney got threats just by working with a black kid),
so Minnesota is no Smurfland®. But still, it ain't South Compton.

This is for me the big schism with Michael: he gave the keys to Quincy, but what made the white ears turn
was Toto playing the whole album, this washed, digestible, odorless funk. Black music bleached. God bless Michael forever, he's one of the best voices ever,
but he didn't cross over the way Prince did.

When you watch the "Baby I'm A Star" official video, when you consider
"Let's Go Crazy" as a derivative of "Everybody Needs Somebody" (an anti-racist song/movie if there is one, considering it's Soul Music sung/exalted by white dudes),
It's blatant no one can, music or social critic, deny that Prince crossed over to the white audience while remaining black to the core.
His first world wide hit single is a techno Gospel. His second one is a Stadium Gospel. The sweat, the grins, the faces, everything about Prince screams black in 1984.
Prince is not calling his music black or white, first because he achieves a fusion of both after years of hard work,
and second because he's too smart to ignore those labels have been stained through history.

That is why Michael sounds childish with "Black Or White". He's like a scholar that understood the subject of the composition,
and then he flunks it, starting with the poor choice of title. What does a "sheets scare" have to do with it?
On the rare occasions when Michael tried to be Prince, he simply couldn't.
It came out as yet another "give peace a chance". Michael was a baba cool.
A hippie ain't quite the same thing. He's streetwise.

"Purple" Music/Rain/Hippies was a much better idea, a fresh one,
that even red and yellows and greens could join: it's a the end/top of the rainbow.
The fact that it's the color of royalty is the cherry on top of reality.
Since it's not a color skin, it can only happen in the brain. Or the heart.
So what's outside is less what's inside.
Lawd, I'm feeling like ghostwriting on Love4OneAnother.com.

[Edited 11/15/18 3:27am]

RicoN said:

ABro said:

Haha, funny. Ask his sperm.

his sperm was white, but did smell of bleach....

bonatoc said:

"Purple" Music/Rain/Hippies was a much better idea, a fresh one,
that even red and yellows and greens could join: it's a the end/top of the rainbow.
The fact that it's the color of royalty is the cherry on top of reality.
Since it's not a color skin, it can only happen in the brain. Or the heart.
So what's outside is less what's inside.
Lawd, I'm feeling like ghostwriting on Love4OneAnother.com.

Nice.

And, it kind of is, if you know what it mean.

ROFL!

And some über-saturated seventies low budget films close shots
would certainly prove me wrong: skin can actually go purple, when under extreme conditions.

[Edited 11/15/18 6:42am]

bonatoc said:

AVENUEMAN said:

Prince was not mulatto.

We know that. It doesn't change the butterscotch/chocolate scene in UTCM.
It was a statement. Prince knew he could embody a utopian race fusion. Cavallo, Ruffalo and Fargnoli
spread the doubt over Prince's origins with the consent of Prince himself: "Don't make me black"n he told Waronker. Everyone obliged.
With time, Prince felt the need to bring it all back home, especially after feeling betrayed by the young MBA WASPs that were slowly tooking over the music business.
Majors forgot they were record companies. Records did not matter anymore.

Please let's not try to put aside the media game Prince himself played, probably out of deep beliefs ("Don't make me black" does not mean "I'm not black").
Like Michael, he believed in the Übermensch. Music unite us all, some like that. And indeed it did.
They could have been "Black Panthers" in their artistic (and therefore socio-political) expression, they chose not to.
Michael just Screamed with a little help from his sister, while Prince retreated to home (and his homies) when they both got disgusted
with the sour soup the Melting Pot was now full of. Someone stopped stirring.

*

Please don't take what I'm about to say as an insult, but you seem to have a very limited understanding of African-American history, especially as it relates to the various ways and ideologies that have permeated the notion and manner of African Americans responding to and engaging white supremacy because you keep trying to create this singular or X or Y notion of how black people responded to white supremacy that they were either militant nationalist or they were not, which is not true. For instance, do you know that the Deacons for Defense, who believed in arm resistance, were regulars in many of the non-violent marches organized by King and other promoters of non-violence? Do you know that King, himself, authorized armed security even while preaching nonviolence until Bayard Rustin convinced him to remove his armed security? By not knowing this type of information, you continue to try to narrow or water-down who Prince was to fit some flat, one-dimensional utopian, multicultural notion because, again, you don't seem to understand the multitude of ways and ideas that African Americans have used to engage and refute white supremacy.

*

So, yes, it's well documented that Prince, himself, lied about his race. It wasn't his handlers lying; it was Prince. Prince was the one lying about his race. But, what you seem to be missing or not knowing is that Prince is not the first African American to play this game as the Harlem Renaissance was built on the construct of the "tragic mulatto" to attract white readers and publishers when the vast majority of the Harlem Renaissance writers were not mulatto. Thus, Prince lying about his race is not an issue of "music uniting us all," but more the understanding that blackness in America is seen as a limitation and often, unfortunately, many African Americans, especially those who could, Prince included, simply used the "tragic mulatto" backstory as entry into the white power structure. Yet, luckily, the Harlem Renaissance and the Civil Rights Movement also gave way to Black Power Movement and its cultural arm, the Black Arts Movement, which produced artists who stopped petitioning white America to see them as human and began creating art to celebrate the beauty and power of African Americans. As such, black people stopped begging white people to be nice to them and started focusing on ways to improve their own plight. And, moreover, this is a normal trend in the history of African-American culture. Even someone like W. E. B. DuBois who is considered the Father of Pan-Africanism began as an integrationist/assimilationist and evolved into a Black Nationalist, which is mostly seen in his later writings and his renouncing his American citizenship and moving to Ghana. Even King in his later years stated, "I think I have integrated my people into a burning house." And, while King was influenced by Malcolm X, to some degree, to realize this, it, again, shows that his narrative arc from integrationist/assimilationist to black self-determinism is normal for African Americans as most have some "come to Jesus" moment in which they wonder if it is ever possible for African Americans to obtain justice and equality in America. It just so happens that Prince's "come to Jesus" moment was his battle with Warner Bros, which many people attempt to minimize because few people want to hear a millionaire complain about being mistreated. Yet, whatever the issue was, it cannot be denied that Prince followed this traditional narrative arc of African-American history to question whether integration or self-determinism is best for himself, African Americans, and African people in general.

*

As such, the "butterscotch/chocolate" comment in Under the Cherry Moon by Prince, when placed in proper context, is a sign of Prince's recognition of the history of American miscegenation in the least or a reflection of self-hatred in the worst, even if it is funny. To be clear, it's a funny line, especially when coupled with "And when the police come to carry yo' ass to the joint, this is me. 'Oh no, officer, I don't know him. We definitely have different fathers.'" Yet, whenever I view this scene, I wonder if white people, whether American whites or European whites, truly get this joke from a socio-political/historical context of race in America. And for those who say, "But, the film is made in France," that just shows, again, how little they know about African-American history because, if they knew anything about African-American history, they would know that one of the themes of the Harlem Renaissance is that of fleeing America for Europe, which, of course, works well with "Paris 1798430" when the lyrics state, "Ain't no where else to run when it's from Uncle Sam/ Paris 1798430 that's where a brother be hiding 'til he get his due." So, Prince filming a movie in France in which he addresses the issue of color complex, even in a humorous manner, is both fitting and a socio-political commentary. But, again, most folks who don't understand the complex nuances and subtles of African-American history and the various ideologies that the complexity has spawned just wouldn't get it because most of these folks only know King or Malcolm but don't know the various organizations of the Civil Rights Movement, such as NAACP, SCLC, SNCC, Core, COFO, National of Islam, Urban League, and so many more. So, to say, as you have in the past, that Prince's socio-politcal commentary or actions should be minmized or ignored shows that you don't seem to understand the multitude of ways in which various African Americans have contributed to the struggle against white supremacy. Not every black person has been a Black Panther, but may black people have contributed in their own way to refute white supremacy. And, while Prince did begin by promoting the multicultural utopia, the reality that America is built on the foundation of white supremacy caused him to reevaluate that position and embrace black self-determinism, which, again, is a very traditional African-American narrative.

*

Allow me to end by saying that I often like reading your posts even if I don't always agree with them. But, in a lot of cases, you seem to address the various issue of Prince and race either by removing Prince's work from the context of America's racial history or not being able to connect what he was doing with the larger narrative of America's racial history. Yet, studying his early work (1978 - 1983), there is so much that indicates that Prince saw himself as a black (African American) man firmly rooted in the African-American community/culture who was also looking for a way to be more than what a system build on white supremacy wanted him to be. One only needs to remember aspects, such as Prince's great interview with noted music journalist Carol Cooper as well as the deleted stanza from "Jerk Out," to understand that Prince, again, saw himself as an African-American man struggling against a system rooted in white supremacy. Thus, the real questions are why are so many of Prince's white and mix-raced fans so bothered by this, and what does their issue with Prince being an African American say them? I guess Miles Davis was right. White people can only truly see/appreciate black art when they can see themselves in it or when that art reflects some stereotypical (negative) or safe notion of how whites view blacks.

2freaky4church1 said:

Prince was just making it clear rock is black too first.

1725topp said:

bonatoc said:

We know that. It doesn't change the butterscotch/chocolate scene in UTCM.
It was a statement. Prince knew he could embody a utopian race fusion. Cavallo, Ruffalo and Fargnoli
spread the doubt over Prince's origins with the consent of Prince himself: "Don't make me black"n he told Waronker. Everyone obliged.
With time, Prince felt the need to bring it all back home, especially after feeling betrayed by the young MBA WASPs that were slowly tooking over the music business.
Majors forgot they were record companies. Records did not matter anymore.

Please let's not try to put aside the media game Prince himself played, probably out of deep beliefs ("Don't make me black" does not mean "I'm not black").
Like Michael, he believed in the Übermensch. Music unite us all, some like that. And indeed it did.
They could have been "Black Panthers" in their artistic (and therefore socio-political) expression, they chose not to.
Michael just Screamed with a little help from his sister, while Prince retreated to home (and his homies) when they both got disgusted
with the sour soup the Melting Pot was now full of. Someone stopped stirring.

*

Please don't take what I'm about to say as an insult, but you seem to have a very limited understanding of African-American history, especially as it relates to the various ways and ideologies that have permeated the notion and manner of African Americans responding to and engaging white supremacy because you keep trying to create this singular or X or Y notion of how black people responded to white supremacy that they were either militant nationalist or they were not, which is not true. For instance, do you know that the Deacons for Defense, who believed in arm resistance, were regulars in many of the non-violent marches organized by King and other promoters of non-violence? Do you know that King, himself, authorized armed security even while preaching nonviolence until Bayard Rustin convinced him to remove his armed security? By not knowing this type of information, you continue to try to narrow or water-down who Prince was to fit some flat, one-dimensional utopian, multicultural notion because, again, you don't seem to understand the multitude of ways and ideas that African Americans have used to engage and refute white supremacy.

*

So, yes, it's well documented that Prince, himself, lied about his race. It wasn't his handlers lying; it was Prince. Prince was the one lying about his race. But, what you seem to be missing or not knowing is that Prince is not the first African American to play this game as the Harlem Renaissance was built on the construct of the "tragic mulatto" to attract white readers and publishers when the vast majority of the Harlem Renaissance writers were not mulatto. Thus, Prince lying about his race is not an issue of "music uniting us all," but more the understanding that blackness in America is seen as a limitation and often, unfortunately, many African Americans, especially those who could, Prince included, simply used the "tragic mulatto" backstory as entry into the white power structure. Yet, luckily, the Harlem Renaissance and the Civil Rights Movement also gave way to Black Power Movement and its cultural arm, the Black Arts Movement, which produced artists who stopped petitioning white America to see them as human and began creating art to celebrate the beauty and power of African Americans. As such, black people stopped begging white people to be nice to them and started focusing on ways to improve their own plight. And, moreover, this is a normal trend in the history of African-American culture. Even someone like W. E. B. DuBois who is considered the Father of Pan-Africanism began as an integrationist/assimilationist and evolved into a Black Nationalist, which is mostly seen in his later writings and his renouncing his American citizenship and moving to Ghana. Even King in his later years stated, "I think I have integrated my people into a burning house." And, while King was influenced by Malcolm X, to some degree, to realize this, it, again, shows that his narrative arc from integrationist/assimilationist to black self-determinism is normal for African Americans as most have some "come to Jesus" moment in which they wonder if it is ever possible for African Americans to obtain justice and equality in America. It just so happens that Prince's "come to Jesus" moment was his battle with Warner Bros, which many people attempt to minimize because few people want to hear a millionaire complain about being mistreated. Yet, whatever the issue was, it cannot be denied that Prince followed this traditional narrative arc of African-American history to question whether integration or self-determinism is best for himself, African Americans, and African people in general.

*

As such, the "butterscotch/chocolate" comment in Under the Cherry Moon by Prince, when placed in proper context, is a sign of Prince's recognition of the history of American miscegenation in the least or a reflection of self-hatred in the worst, even if it is funny. To be clear, it's a funny line, especially when coupled with "And when the police come to carry yo' ass to the joint, this is me. 'Oh no, officer, I don't know him. We definitely have different fathers.'" Yet, whenever I view this scene, I wonder if white people, whether American whites or European whites, truly get this joke from a socio-political/historical context of race in America. And for those who say, "But, the film is made in France," that just shows, again, how little they know about African-American history because, if they knew anything about African-American history, they would know that one of the themes of the Harlem Renaissance is that of fleeing America for Europe, which, of course, works well with "Paris 1798430" when the lyrics state, "Ain't no where else to run when it's from Uncle Sam/ Paris 1798430 that's where a brother be hiding 'til he get his due." So, Prince filming a movie in France in which he addresses the issue of color complex, even in a humorous manner, is both fitting and a socio-political commentary. But, again, most folks who don't understand the complex nuances and subtles of African-American history and the various ideologies that the complexity has spawned just wouldn't get it because most of these folks only know King or Malcolm but don't know the various organizations of the Civil Rights Movement, such as NAACP, SCLC, SNCC, Core, COFO, National of Islam, Urban League, and so many more. So, to say, as you have in the past, that Prince's socio-politcal commentary or actions should be minmized or ignored shows that you don't seem to understand the multitude of ways in which various African Americans have contributed to the struggle against white supremacy. Not every black person has been a Black Panther, but may black people have contributed in their own way to refute white supremacy. And, while Prince did begin by promoting the multicultural utopia, the reality that America is built on the foundation of white supremacy caused him to reevaluate that position and embrace black self-determinism, which, again, is a very traditional African-American narrative.

*

Allow me to end by saying that I often like reading your posts even if I don't always agree with them. But, in a lot of cases, you seem to address the various issue of Prince and race either by removing Prince's work from the context of America's racial history or not being able to connect what he was doing with the larger narrative of America's racial history. Yet, studying his early work (1978 - 1983), there is so much that indicates that Prince saw himself as a black (African American) man firmly rooted in the African-American community/culture who was also looking for a way to be more than what a system build on white supremacy wanted him to be. One only needs to remember aspects, such as Prince's great interview with noted music journalist Carol Cooper as well as the deleted stanza from "Jerk Out," to understand that Prince, again, saw himself as an African-American man struggling against a system rooted in white supremacy. Thus, the real questions are why are so many of Prince's white and mix-raced fans so bothered by this, and what does their issue with Prince being an African American say them? I guess Miles Davis was right. White people can only truly see/appreciate black art when they can see themselves in it or when that art reflects some stereotypical (negative) or safe notion of how whites view blacks.

Fascinating thoughts, thanks.

It only goes to show the differences in perceptions about Africa around here and the US.
Africans have always been in Paris, and I mean at the very heart of the city, not the suburbs.
It's a totally different universe. But there's a slight contradiction in your "fleeing for your Europe" paragraph,
it looks like you're speaking only about this Mecca-like trip to France in terms of the ritual step to be taken by afro-american artists.
When you wonder if europeans "know about it"... Heck, we're the guests!

We know that Miles Davis loved us too: don't go misquote some Tutu ol'fart ranting about diluting Africa.
When he played in Paris in 1960, it wasn't some fucking cringy "Time After Time". It was a critical triumph. Now who's the fool, Miles?
Bitches Brew is considered as a total milestone in France. I've seen Bob Marley posters in rooms all my childhood.
I'm sorry I'm coming up with the most blatant, I can't reference Alpha Blondy or Mori Kanté or Angélique Kidjo, Amadou et Mariam,
100% genuine african folks that had number ones in the charts without the need of the separate billboards, for crying out loud.

A song sung in Arab made the top 10. Salman Rushdie is a household name. We also have the Middle East not far away.
American bombers take off from Italy to go bomb the arab men, women and children.
For France, Africa is ALSO butterscotch: in the "north states" (Algeria, Morocco, Tunisia...).
Prince in UTCM joke tells us: 1. Cops are dumb. 2. Racism never ends. It can be intracommunataurian.
Prince probably had some childhood jokes to get revenge against. And a peace message for the kids.

So of course I can only get 1% of the situation in the US, let alone understand it. But it seems to me that Prince shied away from race
and that what is mistaken as discovering his "final" identity (like being black would be the final state of humankind) is just Prince disgusted at his Homeland.
It's very possible Prince, after just entertaining, got sensible about the most blatant injustice in the US, the way black people are treated: of course, he's black!
It's only natural for the black community to claim his work, especially after "Baltimore" (by far not his only gesture/action, but a definitive one: no one else showed up that fast),
but the black community should be careful not to kill its best Trojan Horses. To declare we whities just stand on the surface of things
by doing a history course that is very insular in culture does not help. Or rather, it does, but bridges across cultures need both pillars to carry people.
Yeah, I'm going abstract again, I can't help it. But communication is what it is. Communatarism is what it is.
I get it's the only sane response in the real world. But isn't art supposed to elevate it, and us?

But you can say mentioning about the "multitudes of ways afro-american have fought white supremacy" can also being intepreted as an alibi
to make every action taken by an afro-american as an indisputable, inseparable part of the indispensable fight against the white supremacy.
"Many indications"... I don't think there's an award to be won for the first who gets it. I don't get the Agatha Christie posture, there's no big negationism at hand.
At least not in Europe. "You're gonna have to fight your own damn war?". I vote for Peace.
Maybe we're more of a Coke Ad from afar, but nothing's so simple.

Europe is the bastard (argggh, the mulatto ghost is back!) child of different countries, speaking different languages with totally different cultures,
that had to get along otherwise it was just war all over again, and we've been through that, so maybe we got something White America still has to catch on, if it ever will.
Whatever happened has to be put behind to move on. And memory serves as a warning, and should never be erased or falsified.

Maybe the L.A. riots should have gone to the extremes when there was still time, but the first black POTUS did not come from violence.
I'm the kind of guy who puts this stuff at 11 and sometimes daydreams about a violent revolution, because, why always curb the chin, right?

Thanks for the long read, lots of interesting stuff and names that I'm going to check.