independent and unofficial
Prince fan community site
Mon 11th Nov 2019 3:20pm
Welcome! Sign up or enter username and password to remember me
Forum jump
Forums > Prince: Music and More > Prince Classic, 1999, Reissues In Remastered 5 CD/DVD, 10 LP/DVD Boxes - Release: November 29 - Part 2
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Page 6 of 15 « First<2345678910>Last »
Reply   New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
Reply #150 posted 10/11/19 11:30pm

TrivialPursuit

avatar

Romeoblu said:

Has anyone actually officially addressed why Extraloveable and Lust U Always were left off?


It's been theorized that because of the MeToo culture in the U.S., that (at least) "Extraloveable" wasleft off because it contains rape reference. I don't know about the other.

This experience will cover courtship, sex, commitment, fetishes, loneliness, vindication, love, and hate.
http://bit.ly/1D3FG2U
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #151 posted 10/11/19 11:44pm

Strive

Lust U Always also has a rape reference.

The Estate will never officially mention or bring light to why those two songs are missing. Similar to how One In A Million was pulled off a Guns N Roses boxset. The record label and the band never mentioned it or gave comment to any of the news articles. They simply memoryholed it.

no yesterday or tomorrow, no better remedy for sorrow
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #152 posted 10/12/19 12:01am

BartVanHemelen

avatar

Marrk said:

But something filmed in 1982 on video and not film being put on a better format is a pointless waste of time for everyone.

.

https://en.wikipedia.org/...nbow_%2774

© Bart Van Hemelen
This posting is provided AS IS with no warranties, and confers no rights.
It is not authorized by Prince or the NPG Music Club. You assume all risk for
your use. All rights reserved.
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #153 posted 10/12/19 1:21am

Strive

BartVanHemelen said:



Marrk said:



But something filmed in 1982 on video and not film being put on a better format is a pointless waste of time for everyone.



.


https://en.wikipedia.org/...nbow_%2774



You keep mentioning that Queen release but the big improvement from putting it on Blu-Ray wasn't picture quality but the audio. The additional disc space meant they could include a higher bitrate PCM in 96 kHz (instead of 48) and upgrade the 5.1 mix from DTS (lossy) to DTS-HD Master Audio (lossless)

Now, does bumping the bitrate on the LPCM track from 1536 to 4606 do anything for the audio quality besides bloat up the filesize? Arguably no. Do the majority of buyers have the hardware to take advantage of the DTS-HD Master Audio track? Again no. Does quadrupling the video bitrate, when the source picture is old videotape, do anything to the picture quality? No.

But Eagle Rock decided to release a Blu-Ray so why not do all those things when you have the space?

The PDR disc had a high bitrate for video and a PCM (lossless) 2.0 audio track at 1536. Unless Warner was going to do a fake 5.1 mix, a Blu-Ray release would do literally nothing besides raise the cost of manufacturing.

We can assume that 1999 Houston will get the same high bitrate/lossless 2.0 treatment that Prince and the Revolution LIVE! recieved on PRD.
[Edited 10/12/19 1:26am]
no yesterday or tomorrow, no better remedy for sorrow
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #154 posted 10/12/19 5:06am

VaultCurator

avatar

Strive said:

You keep mentioning that Queen release but the big improvement from putting it on Blu-Ray wasn't picture quality but the audio. The additional disc space meant they could include a higher bitrate PCM in 96 kHz (instead of 48) and upgrade the 5.1 mix from DTS (lossy) to DTS-HD Master Audio (lossless) Now, does bumping the bitrate on the LPCM track from 1536 to 4606 do anything for the audio quality besides bloat up the filesize? Arguably no. Do the majority of buyers have the hardware to take advantage of the DTS-HD Master Audio track? Again no. Does quadrupling the video bitrate, when the source picture is old videotape, do anything to the picture quality? No. But Eagle Rock decided to release a Blu-Ray so why not do all those things when you have the space? The PDR disc had a high bitrate for video and a PCM (lossless) 2.0 audio track at 1536. Unless Warner was going to do a fake 5.1 mix, a Blu-Ray release would do literally nothing besides raise the cost of manufacturing. We can assume that 1999 Houston will get the same high bitrate/lossless 2.0 treatment that Prince and the Revolution LIVE! recieved on PRD. [Edited 10/12/19 1:26am]

.

I find information like this to be fascinating. Thanks for this post Strive. Very thorough.

RIP EXTRALOVEABLE!!! sad
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #155 posted 10/12/19 5:23am

udo

avatar

Strive said:

We can assume that 1999 Houston will get the same high bitrate/lossless 2.0 treatment that Prince and the Revolution LIVE! recieved on PRD. [Edited 10/12/19 1:26am]

.

2.0 tracks are not a default option in my experience, assumption is therefore not so certain to be true.

Pills and thrills and daffodils will kill... If you don't believe me or don't get it, I don't have time to try to convince you, sorry.
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #156 posted 10/12/19 5:28am

leadline

avatar

Strive said:

Lust U Always also has a rape reference.

The Estate will never officially mention or bring light to why those two songs are missing. Similar to how One In A Million was pulled off a Guns N Roses boxset. The record label and the band never mentioned it or gave comment to any of the news articles. They simply memoryholed it.


Let me ask you guys this, which option would you choose?

1. Don't add Extraloveable or Lust U Always because of rape line


2. Add both but edit out line or silence the specific word itself

3. Release them as is, if people want to get bent out of shape, let them.

For me, any 1999 set that is calling itself comprehensive falls short without these two tracks on there.


These tracks should have been on there, as is, with no edits, and although I don't agree with edits, I would accept the edits rather than not having the songs at all, it would be very simple to just remove one word.

Nobody would argue for rape, it is horrible, but we are all adults here, and these songs are snapshots in time, on top of that, nobody thinks Prince is a rapist, nor will they go out and rape someobody because they heard Prince speak the word.

The estate clearly caved to the hypersensitive, ultra pc culture we now find ourselves in.

Ultimately though, anything but option 3 sets a bad precedent going forward, where would it stop? Censorship in art is a slippery slope. With any form of art, the viewer/listener has the option to look away, not to listen, not to buy it, etc. It really is as simple as that. The responsibility should be on the individual, not a 3rd party deeming what is right or wrong for that individual.

[Edited 10/12/19 9:05am]

"You always get the dream that you deserve, from what you value the most" -Prince 2013
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #157 posted 10/12/19 5:52am

Marco81

Option number 2, remove the rape bits. If they are released as they are, you never know, someone could come up and ssy they were raped by him, to make money out of it. And there being lyrics where Prince mentions raping someone, could give these people credit.

But definitely don't leave them out of this box set, it's probably the 2 best outtakes of the 1999 era.
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #158 posted 10/12/19 5:58am

IstenSzek

avatar

Marco81 said:

Option number 2, remove the rape bits. If they are released as they are, you never know, someone could come up and ssy they were raped by him, to make money out of it. And there being lyrics where Prince mentions raping someone, could give these people credit. But definitely don't leave them out of this box set, it's probably the 2 best outtakes of the 1999 era.


i'm thinking the same thing. they could easily just drop those lyrics out of the tunes
and lie to us/the world about the why and how.

lord knows they lied to us about other stuff lol so why not just say 'look people, a
small group of die hard fans have these songs with the original lyrics but prince, in
his later days, distanced himself from the smut, we all know he became religious,
didn't cuss anymore etc. he went back into the vault and ersased these lyrics, simply
because he felt they didn't represent him in any way shape or form anymore'

voila, you'd be able to include these two brilliant tracks which are, i'm guessing,
indeed the best 2 outtakes from this era (until proven wrong by something stellar
on the boxset).


and true love lives on lollipops and crisps
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #159 posted 10/12/19 7:09am

VaultCurator

avatar

leadline said:

Let me ask you guys this, which option would you choose?


1. Don't add Extraloveable or Lust U Always because of rape line


2. Add both but edit out line or silence the specific word itself

3. Release them as is, if people want to get bent out of shape, let them.

.

If I was in charge of releasing Prince's music it would be option 3 all the way. I want to see all of Prince's studio songs released as intended, uncut and in the best sound quality possible. Furthermore, if I were to prioritise which songs I think need to be released first 'Extra Loveable' would be extremely high on the list, not for its notorious reputation or shock value, but because it's genuinely brilliant. Not to take anything away from 'Lust U Always' which is both funky and hilarious in equal measures, but 'Extra Loveable' is this little perfect piece of pop. I love how it oozes Prince with adlibs like "Purple politicians sing it" and "Would anybody care to get naked?". The track is an absolute dream and I'm genuinely devastated that I may never get hear it in crystal clear quality.
.
At this point I'm so scared that it'll be condemned to the back of the vault for all eternity, I'm willing to compromise on a sanitised version providing it's tastefully edited and doesn't compromise the total length of the track. I think this can achieved with Extra Loveable since the offending lyrics happen in the break down. It'll be harder to do this with Lust since the offending line is part of the verse.
.
Out of curiosity, can anybody tell me if there are any bootleg albums out there with better leaks of these tracks than the 'Blast From The Past' sets?
.
I see that PGA recently released a double CD of Purple Rain outtakes (Ultimate Purple Rain Collection III: Studio) which includes both these tracks and I was considering buying. The problem is I'm worried that the sound quality will be no better than what I already have and I don't want to waste my money.
.
Disclaimer: Rules read and acknowledged. I'm only interested in information regarding sound quality.
NO SOLICITING FOR BOOTLEGS! Discussion is fine, so long as the bootleg is not being promoted e.g. pre-release; requests/offers to share or copy, and links to download or bootleg sites are not.

RIP EXTRALOVEABLE!!! sad
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #160 posted 10/12/19 8:10am

AvocadosMax

leadline said:



Strive said:


Lust U Always also has a rape reference.




The Estate will never officially mention or bring light to why those two songs are missing. Similar to how One In A Million was pulled off a Guns N Roses boxset. The record label and the band never mentioned it or gave comment to any of the news articles. They simply memoryholed it.




Let me ask you guys this, which option would you choose?

1. Don't add Extraloveable or Lust U Always because of rape line



2. Add both but edit out line or silence the specific word itself

3. Release them as is, if people want to get bent out of shape, let them.

For me, any 1999 set that is calling itself comprehensive falls short without these two tracks on there.



These tracks should have been on there, as is, with no edits, and although I don't agree with edits, I would accept the edits rather than not having the songs at all, it would be very simple to just remove one word.

Nobody would argue for rape, it is horrible, but we are all adults here, and these songs are snapshots in time, on top of that, nobody thinks Prince is a rapist, nor will they go out and rape someobody because they heard Prince speak the word.

The estate clearly caved to the hypersensitive, ultra pc culture we now find ourselves in.

[Edited 10/12/19 6:01am]




The only sane option is 3. Let the babies cry about it.
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #161 posted 10/12/19 8:14am

AvocadosMax

Honestly the only people who would whine about it are 30 year old journalists that no one reads unless their article is just so ridiculous that it’s hysterical and comical. And maybe a few naive people who know nothing about anything online. But thats it. Are the Prince Estate or who the fuck ever REALLY scared of THAT?

If anything, that kind of attention from journalists (who have no business being journalists) would actually make people curious and thus bring in new fans.
[Edited 10/12/19 8:17am]
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #162 posted 10/12/19 8:32am

ladygirl99

The estate is doing the right thing not to release Lust U Always or Extralovable regardless how folks feel. We are living in a different climate. It is best to search underground for those songs. They are out there. Prince's fans are primary women too so its good call to the estate to keep them not release.

I am giving side eyes right now of some people (mainly male posters) are mad that the estate refused to release Prince's pro-rape songs. Anyone who is mad about the estate's decision then something is wrong with them.

[Edited 10/12/19 8:42am]

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #163 posted 10/12/19 8:39am

ladygirl99

tab32792 said:

Prince was NOT gay. the end

Haha if that makes you sleep better at night. He might not been gay but the streets/underground are saying he wasn't straight either, and they mentioned details of why There are grey areas when it comes to sexuality and gender. That is why imo Prince was probably bisexual or femsexual (that he might been attractive to Mayte/Vanity/Susannah type as well as Billy Porter or Boy George type and the cast of Pose too like Janet Moss type lol) but he knew to get those crossover dollars he wanted the public knew he prefer the cisgender crop like Vanity or Susannah or Nona Gaye type why else he didn't officially release Vagina?

The streets are the first one to know. Mainstream are last one to know. I think the estate is testing waters through Vagina because they want to attract new fans and they know younger fans tend to tolerate those lyrics more than Prince's gramp fans.

That is all I am going to say due to the fact the org gotten so conservative over the years. That is why I am not shock at Vagina lyrics

That is why Prince associates said over and over again on social media and over the years that Prince often fooled his fans and portrayed one way for those mainstream dollars.

[Edited 10/12/19 8:41am]

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #164 posted 10/12/19 9:03am

VaultCurator

avatar

Prince. Engaged many times. Married twice. Fathered a child (RIP). Wrote hundreds, if not thousands of songs about making love exclusively to women. Spent his entire professional career ploughing through glamorous women like a fucking train.

Prince was the shitest gay bloke ever!

RIP EXTRALOVEABLE!!! sad
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #165 posted 10/12/19 9:04am

Romeoblu

leadline said:

Strive said:

Lust U Always also has a rape reference.

The Estate will never officially mention or bring light to why those two songs are missing. Similar to how One In A Million was pulled off a Guns N Roses boxset. The record label and the band never mentioned it or gave comment to any of the news articles. They simply memoryholed it.


Let me ask you guys this, which option would you choose?

1. Don't add Extraloveable or Lust U Always because of rape line


2. Add both but edit out line or silence the specific word itself

3. Release them as is, if people want to get bent out of shape, let them.

For me, any 1999 set that is calling itself comprehensive falls short without these two tracks on there.


These tracks should have been on there, as is, with no edits, and although I don't agree with edits, I would accept the edits rather than not having the songs at all, it would be very simple to just remove one word.

Nobody would argue for rape, it is horrible, but we are all adults here, and these songs are snapshots in time, on top of that, nobody thinks Prince is a rapist, nor will they go out and rape someobody because they heard Prince speak the word.

The estate clearly caved to the hypersensitive, ultra pc culture we now find ourselves in.

Ultimately though, anything but option 3 sets a bad precedent going forward, where would it stop? Censorship in art is a slippery slope. With any for of art, the viewer/listener has the option to look away, not to listen, not to buy it, etc. It really is as simple as that. The responsibility should be on the individual, not a 3rd party deeming what is right or wrong for that individual.

[Edited 10/12/19 8:55am]

3 for sure. It's not as if you can't hear them anyway.

[Edited 10/12/19 9:09am]

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #166 posted 10/12/19 10:16am

SoulAlive

I would choose option #3.If people get offended,they can just simply not purchase this set.Those songs were written a long time ago,in a different time.No need to edit the lyrics.

leadline said:

Let me ask you guys this, which option would you choose?

1. Don't add Extraloveable or Lust U Always because of rape line


2. Add both but edit out line or silence the specific word itself

3. Release them as is, if people want to get bent out of shape, let them.

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #167 posted 10/12/19 10:25am

Shockadelica9

Sigh I knew this thread was going to turn into a “what was princes sexuality debate”. Prince already told us what his sexual orientation was in songs “uptown” and in interviews all the way back in 1981.
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #168 posted 10/12/19 10:50am

SoulAlive

Shockadelica9 said:

Sigh I knew this thread was going to turn into a “what was princes sexuality debate”. Prince already told us what his sexual orientation was in songs “uptown” and in interviews all the way back in 1981.

It's funny how some fans can look at a song's lyrics (in this case,"Vagina") and automatically assume that Prince is singing about a personal experience biggrin nuts

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #169 posted 10/12/19 11:14am

Shockadelica9

SoulAlive said:



Shockadelica9 said:


Sigh I knew this thread was going to turn into a “what was princes sexuality debate”. Prince already told us what his sexual orientation was in songs “uptown” and in interviews all the way back in 1981.


It's funny how some fans can look at a song's lyrics (in this case,"Vagina") and automatically assume that Prince is singing about a personal experience biggrin nuts


Exactly it’s obnoxious! I’m bi-sexual /Queer myself but I find it annoying how people read into lyrics. I guess “Head” is a real story than lol
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #170 posted 10/12/19 11:31am

Strive

ladygirl99 said:

The estate is doing the right thing not to release Lust U Always or Extralovable regardless how folks feel. We are living in a different climate. It is best to search underground for those songs. They are out there. Prince's fans are primary women too so its good call to the estate to keep them not release.

I am giving side eyes right now of some people (mainly male posters) are mad that the estate refused to release Prince's pro-rape songs. Anyone who is mad about the estate's decision then something is wrong with them.

They aren't underground. You can punch it into YouTube and find them with hundreds of thousands of views each. Which makes this whole thing even more retarded. There's no putting the genie back in the bottle.


And the songs aren't pro-rape. He literally explains it in Lust U Always.


"But now how does that relate to why I lust u always? / It doesn't / But that's what purple music's all about / Mean, it ain't rude, if you're in the mood"


In the context of the early 80s when consent was more blurry, it makes sense that he would play with risque topics like that. And how far do you want to take it to sanitize the past for today's different climate? Do you want to edit the Lisa's scream for help off of the end of DMSR? It's clear what he was implying with that. Are we only deleting explicit references? Should we also delete all the songs where he sings about taking the long way home? Shy seems way worse than Extraloveable. Where's the controversy for that song?




tl;dr:

"Every subject, any key
Purple music can't be judged, it happens naturally
It's alright"

[Edited 10/12/19 11:34am]

no yesterday or tomorrow, no better remedy for sorrow
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #171 posted 10/12/19 12:01pm

Rimshottbob

ladygirl99 said:

The estate is doing the right thing not to release Lust U Always or Extralovable regardless how folks feel. We are living in a different climate. It is best to search underground for those songs. They are out there. Prince's fans are primary women too so its good call to the estate to keep them not release.

I am giving side eyes right now of some people (mainly male posters) are mad that the estate refused to release Prince's pro-rape songs. Anyone who is mad about the estate's decision then something is wrong with them.

[Edited 10/12/19 8:42am]

This is idiotic.

So if I like a film where violence takes place, where someone is violent to someone else, then there's something wrong with me too? Or if I play a videogame with violence, or watch a film that contains a rape scene, or a film in which there is a robbery or any crime commtted? In that case there's something wrong with EVERYONE IN THE ENTIRE WORLD.

This is nonsense... OF COURSE these tracks should be released as they are. It's not even a question, I don't give a motherfucking goddamn about all the wussies and pussies who might cry about it.

There are worse things in the world, fucking deal with it. People need to take responsibility for themeselves.

If someone is offended by those lyrics, then ban every rap record ever made. Those people who are offended are perfectly entitled to be, and I'm perfectly entitled to not care. They can stand over there being offended and shut the fuck up about it.

There are FAR more offensive things in the world than a pop musician being a bit racy - and a bit dumb - with his lyrics. He was all about pushing boundaries at that point in his career, seeing how far he could push it. The rape references were a step too far. Everyone knew it. He knew it, hence he didn't release them at the time. That was a long time ago. These are no longer mainstream, commcerial 'hit' songs, they are legacy recordings. We all know that... the fact that this conversation is even still ongoing is pathetic.

Also - labeling these songs as 'pro-rape' is unfairly and WILDLY skewing their tone and approach.

When are we going to grow the fuck up?

[Edited 10/12/19 12:25pm]

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #172 posted 10/12/19 12:42pm

leecaldon

Marco81 said:

Option number 2, remove the rape bits. If they are released as they are, you never know, someone could come up and ssy they were raped by him, to make money out of it. And there being lyrics where Prince mentions raping someone, could give these people credit. But definitely don't leave them out of this box set, it's probably the 2 best outtakes of the 1999 era.

As these songs have been heavily bootlegged for many years, I don't see how releasing them officially would have any impact on someone claiming against him.

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #173 posted 10/12/19 3:26pm

leadline

avatar

Shockadelica9 said:

SoulAlive said:

It's funny how some fans can look at a song's lyrics (in this case,"Vagina") and automatically assume that Prince is singing about a personal experience biggrin nuts

Exactly it’s obnoxious! I’m bi-sexual /Queer myself but I find it annoying how people read into lyrics. I guess “Head” is a real story than lol


Folks (folks in general, not the two here in this thread), are you all not aware that Vagina is about Vanity? He was going to name her Vagina, but she adamantly refused, and I don't blame her. This song has NOTHING to do with Prince's sexuality.

And guess what? Head is about going down on a woman, and Jack U Off is about pleasuring a woman with his hand, mouth, or both. These are gender neutral terms that folks have recently made male exlusive for some reason.

At any rate, I could care less if Prince was gay, but guess what, there is zero evidence to support it, and a mountain of evidence to confirm he was not. Making up fiction in ones mind doesn't magically make something true.

[Edited 10/12/19 15:52pm]

"You always get the dream that you deserve, from what you value the most" -Prince 2013
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #174 posted 10/12/19 3:35pm

ladygirl99

Rimshottbob said:

ladygirl99 said:

The estate is doing the right thing not to release Lust U Always or Extralovable regardless how folks feel. We are living in a different climate. It is best to search underground for those songs. They are out there. Prince's fans are primary women too so its good call to the estate to keep them not release.

I am giving side eyes right now of some people (mainly male posters) are mad that the estate refused to release Prince's pro-rape songs. Anyone who is mad about the estate's decision then something is wrong with them.

[Edited 10/12/19 8:42am]

This is idiotic.

So if I like a film where violence takes place, where someone is violent to someone else, then there's something wrong with me too? Or if I play a videogame with violence, or watch a film that contains a rape scene, or a film in which there is a robbery or any crime commtted? In that case there's something wrong with EVERYONE IN THE ENTIRE WORLD.

This is nonsense... OF COURSE these tracks should be released as they are. It's not even a question, I don't give a motherfucking goddamn about all the wussies and pussies who might cry about it.

There are worse things in the world, fucking deal with it. People need to take responsibility for themeselves.

If someone is offended by those lyrics, then ban every rap record ever made. Those people who are offended are perfectly entitled to be, and I'm perfectly entitled to not care. They can stand over there being offended and shut the fuck up about it.

There are FAR more offensive things in the world than a pop musician being a bit racy - and a bit dumb - with his lyrics. He was all about pushing boundaries at that point in his career, seeing how far he could push it. The rape references were a step too far. Everyone knew it. He knew it, hence he didn't release them at the time. That was a long time ago. These are no longer mainstream, commcerial 'hit' songs, they are legacy recordings. We all know that... the fact that this conversation is even still ongoing is pathetic.

Also - labeling these songs as 'pro-rape' is unfairly and WILDLY skewing their tone and approach.

When are we going to grow the fuck up?

[Edited 10/12/19 12:25pm]

No something is wrong of how angry some (especially male posters) are of the estate refusing to release those songs and you wonder why the public has low opinion about men and male identified people. The estate decision is final and people just had to deal.

There is a reason why entertainment rated system exist. Whether you like it or not lyrics are influencial and moving to people, maybe you are more stoic toward controversal entertainment. And also the system is needed not because they don't want to hear bad lyrics it is to make it family friendly. Are you okay with children listening to Head or Extralovable? That is why we have the rated system from editing songs and entertainment that is not suitable to children and other audiences.

The estate made the right called of not releasing those two songs.

Prince will be back in the news within the next few weeks with his memoir and 1999 deluxe album. Do you want the media to spend all that time talking about two pro-rape songs or do you want the media to gush about 1999 deluxe and memoir with those songs remain unreleased and that might help his sales and his revelency? With Sinead O Conner and plus if the estate had released those songs onto deluxe, that would take away from discussing about the rest of the memoir and 1999. The estate is very protective of his legacy and if leaving two controversal songs off the release so be it. It is what it is.

I don't know about you, I want to do my part to fight for his legacy and it remains as untarnish so far.

I am aware that some orgers are not from US and they might not be as trigger about the lyrics but here in the US, the public doesn't take it too well of songs with artists talked about raping someone. Heck Rick Ross the rapper nearly lost his career over drugged and rape a chick lyrics and don't get me started outcry about Eminem and his lyrics. Those two rappers got away with it because hip hop fans tolerate those lyrics. Like I said again Prince's key current audience are primary older women and queers and some of them were victims of assault, and I am sure some of them won't take it to well hearing those lyrics from the same person who wrote romantic songs. The estate did the right thing.

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #175 posted 10/12/19 3:57pm

ladygirl99

Strive said:

ladygirl99 said:

The estate is doing the right thing not to release Lust U Always or Extralovable regardless how folks feel. We are living in a different climate. It is best to search underground for those songs. They are out there. Prince's fans are primary women too so its good call to the estate to keep them not release.

I am giving side eyes right now of some people (mainly male posters) are mad that the estate refused to release Prince's pro-rape songs. Anyone who is mad about the estate's decision then something is wrong with them.

They aren't underground. You can punch it into YouTube and find them with hundreds of thousands of views each. Which makes this whole thing even more retarded. There's no putting the genie back in the bottle.


And the songs aren't pro-rape. He literally explains it in Lust U Always.


"But now how does that relate to why I lust u always? / It doesn't / But that's what purple music's all about / Mean, it ain't rude, if you're in the mood"


In the context of the early 80s when consent was more blurry, it makes sense that he would play with risque topics like that. And how far do you want to take it to sanitize the past for today's different climate? Do you want to edit the Lisa's scream for help off of the end of DMSR? It's clear what he was implying with that. Are we only deleting explicit references? Should we also delete all the songs where he sings about taking the long way home? Shy seems way worse than Extraloveable. Where's the controversy for that song?




tl;dr:

"Every subject, any key
Purple music can't be judged, it happens naturally
It's alright"

[Edited 10/12/19 11:34am]

When I am talking about 'underground' I meant unofficial releases. Only small diehard fans knows about those songs so far (heck I didn't even knew those songs until after he died and people consider me a diehard fan) and I think the estate wants to keep it that way.

The estate don't want the responsible for those releases or unwanted attention for those two songs. We don't need that distraction.

Lisa's scream? I listened to same song DMSR and even checked the lyrics there was no rape reference. You mentioned he implying but still there is no evidence that is why DMSR will expected to be part of the Deluxe release. But the lyrics were obvious on Extralovable and Lust 2 always.

There is no controversal about Shy because people aren't talking about that and Shy wasn't made around 1999 era . If the estate release the Gold Experience deluxe then you might hear people discuss about it. lol

And also that was the 80s but its 2020 nearly and this is metoo era and the estate are being cautious.

I am not saying that everything should be edited with Prince or other forms of entertainment there always going to be naysayers. But at the same time record industry and TV/film industry is being cautious these days becase for too long women had been silent and they have the voice to speak out and to condenm entertainment that is careless about rape and not to mention women are primary carekaters and the majority don't want their kids listening to some of those songs, and the estate knows this and wants to attract as many people as possible with Prince. And also once again Prince's audience are primary women and they won't be as tolerate to those lyrics. I believed if Prince was part of hip hop culture or did heavy metal, I think the estate would test the waters by release those two songs.

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #176 posted 10/12/19 4:52pm

ladygirl99

It is kind of funny that people said songs like Little Red Corvette and Beautiful Ones and When Doves Cry and Strange Relationship and Pop Life and even Head were from personal experiences even though Prince never actually comfirm for some of them.

But when comes to Vagina people declared he is being fictional or on crack while he wrote it? lol Yeah Prince did tried to give the name Vagina to Denise but she declined and again Prince was known to give material to others that doesn't mean it is about that person while he wrote that song prior to offer it to that person. We still don't know if Vagina was actually Denise in that song (the person in the lyrics had very short hair). But what we know if Prince wrote songs of his personal experiences about cisgendered women (from Vanity to Susannah and Mayte, etc) and people aren't questioning it then that should applied toward Vagina and there some indication he think highly of trans/nonbinary women even though there is no evidence he was bisexual (other than the same streets told me years early about Ricky Martin and Charle Sheen and Neil Patrick Harris and Whitney Houston before it came officially also said Prince was bisexual and more but I am going to keep zip because the org freaks out about anything that perceived Prince as not being heterosexual and plus I hope the estate will eventually reveal publicly). Yup those songs are obviously by the same author. lol

People still acting like Prince was some immoral creature who people can't find relatable. And if you even mentioned that you have lot in common with Prince (which I do hehe), people would accused you of being 'high' or making things up or projecting your fantasies when the man spoken about some of his thoughts in music and interviews that I can relate to. That is why being a stan is not very healthy people loses logic and think Prince was some supernatural being who no one on this planet can connected to. Please he was a walking stereotype to some of us in many ways. lol

The estate please don't hold back what Vagina is all about. I know you released this to test the waters as you could had kept it quiet.

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #177 posted 10/12/19 6:54pm

toejam

avatar

Romeoblu said:

Has anyone actually officially addressed why Extraloveable and Lust U Always were left off?

.

The Estate will never "officially" state why, but it's surely not a coincidence that both these ignored tracks contain references to rape. The completist in me would love to hear these track in proper non-cassette-tape sourced format alongside the rest of the tracks on 1999 Deluxe, but at the same time, I can totally understand the Estate's reasoning for not putting them on there.

Toejam @ Peach & Black Podcast: http://peachandblack.podbean.com
Toejam's band "Cheap Fakes": http://cheapfakes.com.au, http://www.facebook.com/cheapfakes
Toejam the solo artist: http://www.youtube.com/scottbignell
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #178 posted 10/12/19 8:09pm

udo

avatar

toejam said:

I can totally understand the Estate's reasoning for not putting them on there.

.

I can't.

The whole action, if true, is an act of Politically Correctness.

The songs won't go away or change because of this.

People will not forget these songs.

Prince still wrote these.

Can't we see these songs in context?

This action is the same as the 'zwarte piet' (black pete) discussion debacle in the Netherlands, or the 'golden age' (gouden eeuw) thing that recently made the news.

It's acts of weakness.

Pills and thrills and daffodils will kill... If you don't believe me or don't get it, I don't have time to try to convince you, sorry.
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #179 posted 10/12/19 10:08pm

LoveGalore

No one gives a shit about the rape lyrics except overly sensitive and scaredy cat fans. Drumming up extra pointless controversy and scaring the estate with phantom drama.

People can accuse him of anything they want to now. If Sinead is any indication, they already do. So?
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Page 6 of 15 « First<2345678910>Last »
Reply   New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Forums > Prince: Music and More > Prince Classic, 1999, Reissues In Remastered 5 CD/DVD, 10 LP/DVD Boxes - Release: November 29 - Part 2