Strive said:

Let's be brutally honest. It isn't the right wing behind #metoo and cancel culture. That's the woke left. And leftists/liberals/whatever had no problem pointing the finger when it was the silent majority in the 70s, the religious right in the 80s and the neoconservatives in the mid 90s-early 2000s. Act like authoritarian moralists, be prepared to get called out as one. Regardless of what side of the partisan line you fall on.

Since when do women automatically belong to „the woke left“? #metoo is long overdue and it's neither situated on the left nor on the right fence of the political spectrum.

lavendardrummachine said:

I can't imagine anyone would have raised a fuss if they released a previously unreleased song that had questionable content. And it's Prince. He evolved. Nobody in 2019 is listenng to Prince's provocative lyrics and taking them that seriously. He's got the kind of status where he could get away with saying all kinds of offensive things here and there.

Anyone can take any lyric seriously. Now what does that do to the listener? It may trigger some thoughts and some emotion. But it would certainly not provoke the devil (and remember, there is no such creature!) to take posession of that person. In other words: A truly free society would neither fear nor repress any kind of articulation, beacuse it's just a thought, not a doctrine. Censorship on the other hand is a rather dcotrinary concept, being put into place by rather fearsome people. And of that there had been enough on either polticial side, the left and the right. If you want to get deeper into the toppic of censorship and music, I recommend Linda Martin's and Kerry Segrave's book „Anti-Rock - The Oppposition To Rock'n'Roll“. And anyone interested in the tactics of the truly loonie right, read Gerard Thomas Starubs „Salvation For Sale - An Insider's View Of Pat Robertson“.

Be good to yourself, so you may be able to be good to other people.

nonesuch said:

Anyone can take any lyric seriously.

I'm just of the opinion that at this point, Prince has achieved a rare kind of cultural context where few people could get that deeply triggered by his catalog. People would know they're listening to something offensive, but they also know it's someone who was going through a phase, and was attempting to be outrageous.

lavendardrummachine said:

nonesuch said:

Anyone can take any lyric seriously.

I'm just of the opinion that at this point, Prince has achieved a rare kind of cultural context where few people could get that deeply triggered by his catalog. People would know they're listening to something offensive, but they also know it's someone who was going through a phase, and was attempting to be outrageous.

You're right, but I would like to add that he probably didn't always attempt to be outrageous. It was just what he needed to articulate at any point of his career. Sometimes it hit home, sometimes it was utter rubbish to my ears. These days the vault-releases cater for/to a specialized market, and I doubt that anyone of us within that group of people will be offended by anthing Prince did articulate back in the day. But there you go, some people like to censor themselves. That's the result of having lived in psychotic surroundings for far too long. I wonder whether Tipper Gore twirls around while listening to "Darling Nikki“ these days... She could, as there is nothing more offensive than any of Trump's hate-speeches... Where are the moralists when it comes to that? PPMC - Parnets Political Resource Center... Sorry, I digress. Love!

Marrk said:

SquirrelMeat said:

I'm feeling a new Prince original compilation album called 'Warning: Parent Advisory' is the way to sort this.

-

Another great title would be :

"Good God! The Tipper Gore Collection"

-

udo said:

nonesuch said:

„Censorship is the first reaction of `leftist` people that cannot see any context with stuff.“

Really? I wonder where you are from.

.

Netherlands.

We see plenty of leftist shit trying to censor whatever.

Even history.

-

I'm from Belgium,

you mean 'rightist' shit,

Right ?

'Rightist' shit like what's happening in Poland, Hongaria, Montenegro,

& not to forget Brexit, & right winged parties in Holland, Belgium and basically everywhere (not only in Europe), right winged inspired extreme religious groups etc ...

Need I remember you some issues ?

-

GoldStandard said:

Personally, I’d prefer unrestricted access for my own listening. For the public, I’m happy to see a song like extralovable omitted because casual fans who only know a couple of the hits on 1999 might not understand or enjoy this side of his music at that stage of his life. It’s such a shame though, as it’s one of my favourite songs... perhaps they should release it for free directly to long-term fans instead of the general public?

Much appreciated point of view, but do you think that casual fans would actually purchase the "1999“-Deluxe-Box-Set?

djThunderfunk said:

What is this, P&R?

I don't care what your politics are, if you're for censorship, then I'm against you.

If you're on the "right" and motivated to censor based on your religious beliefs. I'm against you.
If you're on the "left" and motivated to censor because of social justice. I'm against you.

If you don't like it, be a grown-up and don't listen to it.

Only fascists and hypocrites try to censor that which offends them.

-

Exactly !

The problem is, that not many are 'grown-up',

so there goes your splendid advice.

-

Vannormal said:

udo said:

.

Netherlands.

We see plenty of leftist shit trying to censor whatever.

Even history.

-

I'm from Belgium,

you mean 'rightist' shit,

Right ?

'Rightist' shit like what's happening in Poland, Hongaria, Montenegro,

& not to forget Brexit, & right winged parties in Holland, Belgium and basically everywhere (not only in Europe), right winged inspired extreme religious groups etc ...

Need I remember you some issues ?

-

If one studies the history of censorship, one can easily understand that it had always been used as a tool by extremists. Political, religious and ideologically driven extremists. Their greatest good had always been fear. And if one really gets to the core of it all, it becomes obvious that their biggest fear had always been the fear of themselves.

Now, these days people at large are being devided by the failed neoliberal ideology, which, at its arrived violent end, subdivides all of us into winners and losers. And as there naturally are more losers than winners, extremists are having many, many field days by spreading lies on how they want to turn poverty into the well-being of the poor. Brexit was and is the perfect example for that. In truth, they are using the fear that they had provoked with their swearing on the neoliberal ideology, to make the poor feel even more hung socially. That's the ground they are craving for, because people are more contolable once they feel they don't belong anymore.

The declared foe of all Brexiters is the EU. The foe of Germany's Neonazi-party AfD is the migrants. The list goes on and on... endlessly. Apart from people acting increasingly inhuman and cynical under those circumstances, another result of all that is an extremely polarized situation: you're either with us or against us. Extremists on the right and on the left are forcing this polarization.

And as neither of them want people to be smart in withstanding polarization by questioning their positions, they censor. Even ideas. The most powerful helping hand, which seemingly creeps into every persons house, all over the world is Facebook, Twitter, Whatsapp - the matrix of boloney.

One more time: a truly free society would neither fear nor repress ideas or individuals. We all want freedom all the time, freedom of speech, freedom of sexual exploration, freedom of choice. But we have forgotten that we have a price to pay for freedom, and that is tolerating a different point of view and not wishing anyone to go to hell, because she or he might not agree. Any word that anyone has ever said, written or sung, is not going to make ones life misreable. It's there to inform us of what we are. And maybe it'll help us to gain some selfunderstanding. If that is done, we can be more tolerant towards each other.

Vannormal said:

djThunderfunk said:

What is this, P&R?

I don't care what your politics are, if you're for censorship, then I'm against you.

If you're on the "right" and motivated to censor based on your religious beliefs. I'm against you.
If you're on the "left" and motivated to censor because of social justice. I'm against you.

If you don't like it, be a grown-up and don't listen to it.

Only fascists and hypocrites try to censor that which offends them.

-

Exactly !

The problem is, that not many are 'grown-up',

so there goes your splendid advice.

-

So? That's their problem. The rest of us shouldn't suffer fools.

djThunderfunk said:

Vannormal said:

-

Exactly !

The problem is, that not many are 'grown-up',

so there goes your splendid advice.

-

So? That's their problem. The rest of us shouldn't suffer fools.

-

Indeed. I fully agree with you.

-

nonesuch said:

Vannormal said:

-

I'm from Belgium,

you mean 'rightist' shit,

Right ?

'Rightist' shit like what's happening in Poland, Hongaria, Montenegro,

& not to forget Brexit, & right winged parties in Holland, Belgium and basically everywhere (not only in Europe), right winged inspired extreme religious groups etc ...

Need I remember you some issues ?

-

If one studies the history of censorship, one can easily understand that it had always been used as a tool by extremists. Political, religious and ideologically driven extremists. Their greatest good had always been fear. And if one really gets to the core of it all, it becomes obvious that their biggest fear had always been the fear of themselves.

Now, these days people at large are being devided by the failed neoliberal ideology, which, at its arrived violent end, subdivides all of us into winners and losers. And as there naturally are more losers than winners, extremists are having many, many field days by spreading lies on how they want to turn poverty into the well-being of the poor. Brexit was and is the perfect example for that. In truth, they are using the fear that they had provoked with their swearing on the neoliberal ideology, to make the poor feel even more hung socially. That's the ground they are craving for, because people are more contolable once they feel they don't belong anymore.

The declared foe of all Brexiters is the EU. The foe of Germany's Neonazi-party AfD is the migrants. The list goes on and on... endlessly. Apart from people acting increasingly inhuman and cynical under those circumstances, another result of all that is an extremely polarized situation: you're either with us or against us. Extremists on the right and on the left are forcing this polarization.

And as neither of them want people to be smart in withstanding polarization by questioning their positions, they censor. Even ideas. The most powerful helping hand, which seemingly creeps into every persons house, all over the world is Facebook, Twitter, Whatsapp - the matrix of boloney.

One more time: a truly free society would neither fear nor repress ideas or individuals. We all want freedom all the time, freedom of speech, freedom of sexual exploration, freedom of choice. But we have forgotten that we have a price to pay for freedom, and that is tolerating a different point of view and not wishing anyone to go to hell, because she or he might not agree. Any word that anyone has ever said, written or sung, is not going to make ones life misreable. It's there to inform us of what we are. And maybe it'll help us to gain some selfunderstanding. If that is done, we can be more tolerant towards each other.

-

I couldn't agree with you more !

This is also exactly my point of view.

-

And to return to so called censorship over Prince's songs dated 1982 etc,

they need to be understood in a timeframe, the young person that Prince was back then,

and most important of all, the art of it.

-

Though I completely don't agree (and I do understand from a busyness point of view and all going today with #metoo etc), it is understandably not an easy issue, because of people misunderstanding and misinterpreting the lyrics and projecting it on several other issues.

-

Caravagio was a muderer (and got away with it), but still his paintings are accepted and not censored (same goes for the artists Huybridge and Carl Andre).

-

when did the estate specifically mention about them censoring his lyrics??

jfenster said:

when did the estate specifically mention about them censoring his lyrics??

Howe confirmed the two tracks were omitted due to lyrics somewhere. I've already forgotten where.

djThunderfunk said:

jfenster said:

when did the estate specifically mention about them censoring his lyrics??

Howe confirmed the two tracks were omitted due to lyrics somewhere. I've already forgotten where.

so not only r they "touching up" tracks , they r deciding lyrical content..who died ans made them boss

jfenster said:

so not only r they "touching up" tracks , they r deciding lyrical content..who died ans made them boss

.

This is why censorship is evil.

This is also why even considering songs (`for them`) to be sensored is sick.

It shows your state of mind.

djThunderfunk said:

jfenster said:

when did the estate specifically mention about them censoring his lyrics??

Howe confirmed the two tracks were omitted due to lyrics somewhere. I've already forgotten where.

Hi DJ Thunderfunk,


It was ilikeyouroldstuff.com Details below...

https://www.ilikeyouroldstuff.com/news/interview-prince-archivist-michael-howe-on-prince-vault


Some of Prince’s attempts at humour from this period no longer translate, particularly in a post #MeToo environment. Howe explains that despite the wish to create an exhaustive overview of Prince’s 1999-era output, unreleased songs “Extraloveable” and “Lust U Always” were left off the package.


“Even though those two tracks are resolutely of the era, both tracks contain somewhat lamentable rape references. Given the egregiously insensitive candour of the lyrics and our lack of wanting to take creative license by editing or manipulating the tracks, we decided not to include them. Even though we want to shed light on the entire creative period, we certainly don’t want to be inflammatory or insensitive. We didn’t think it was right to include them.”

[Edited 12/13/19 5:35am]

VaultCurator said:

djThunderfunk said:

Howe confirmed the two tracks were omitted due to lyrics somewhere. I've already forgotten where.

Hi DJ Thunderfunk,


It was ilikeyouroldstuff.com Details below...

https://www.ilikeyouroldstuff.com/news/interview-prince-archivist-michael-howe-on-prince-vault


Some of Prince’s attempts at humour from this period no longer translate, particularly in a post #MeToo environment. Howe explains that despite the wish to create an exhaustive overview of Prince’s 1999-era output, unreleased songs “Extraloveable” and “Lust U Always” were left off the package.


“Even though those two tracks are resolutely of the era, both tracks contain somewhat lamentable rape references. Given the egregiously insensitive candour of the lyrics and our lack of wanting to take creative license by editing or manipulating the tracks, we decided not to include them. Even though we want to shed light on the entire creative period, we certainly don’t want to be inflammatory or insensitive. We didn’t think it was right to include them.”

[Edited 12/13/19 5:35am]

Thank you, that's the one! Memory is slipping.... LOL!

how come they dont censore rap music.....

I'm relieved, that most of us agree that censorship (no matter who censors), is bad. As painful as the omission of the two songs may be, it seems that none of the as-yet unreleased outtakes (that we know of) are candidates for future censorship - thank you all for participating in this thread! You have all added valuable insight into a very important topic - I hope that the powers in control of Prince's work will give the issue more thought.

jfenster said:

how come they dont censore rap music.....

Actually, even on rap albums the word rape has been censored in recent years. In 2015 Dr. Dre released the soundtrack album 'Compton', which featured Eminem as a guest on one of the tracks. During his verse he sings the line “Ain’t no one safe from, non-believers there ain’t none, I even make the bitches I rape come.”. The word rape was censored on all versions of the album, both clean and explicit. Despite the audio edit, the controversial lyric still made headlines. Time's sure have changed. Not even rap can be hardcore anymore.

Eminem criticised for disturbing rape lyrics on Dr Dre's new album Compton

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/eminem-criticised-for-disturbing-rape-lyrics-on-dr-dres-new-album-compton-10445785.html

VaultCurator said:

jfenster said:

how come they dont censore rap music.....

Actually, even on rap albums the word rape has been censored in recent years. In 2015 Dr. Dre released the soundtrack album 'Compton', which featured Eminem as a guest on one of the tracks. During his verse he sings the line “Ain’t no one safe from, non-believers there ain’t none, I even make the bitches I rape come.”. The word rape was censored on all versions of the album, both clean and explicit. Despite the audio edit, the controversial lyric still made headlines. Time's sure have changed. Not even rap can be hardcore anymore.

Eminem criticised for disturbing rape lyrics on Dr Dre's new album Compton

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/eminem-criticised-for-disturbing-rape-lyrics-on-dr-dres-new-album-compton-10445785.html

Of course, context is so very crucial to this topic. I'd say Em's lyrics (in 2015) are guilty of being a bit over the top. Would I censor them? Probably not - I'd let his career live and die by his artistic choices. Naturally, nothing has happened to him in the aftermath of those lyrics and he remains a legend in his community who makes tons of money. In fact, his mentor (Dr Dre) was well-known for beating the shit out of women and yet became the first billionaire in rap. Chris Brown beat the shit out of Rihanna so bad her face opened up like a bloomin' onion and nobody even cares (not even her).

.

Not saying any of that is right or correct. But when we're talking about whether or not this era would hurt Prince's image... Well. Much ado about nothing, really. Especially when we consider that 1999 SDE is no blockbuster on the charts. "Lust U Always" will not be ringing through the halls in every church and classroom, inspiring young kids to rape each other. I doubt the 15,000 people who bought the SDE would listen to the song (for the 500th time, but now in crystal clear quality) and feel... Hmm, a tad bit more rape-inclined.

.

The two songs are just two songs. But they're also the vital missing piece in the artistic progression. Set aside the controversy for one moment and imagine both of those discs now have 13 songs because the 2 are re-added and you see a much more fluid transition from the punkabilly and lo-fi to the purple funk rock that would go on to shape his most famous records.

.

Oh well. Maybe another decade.

Only, you support that stuff so shush.

it doesnt make sense....they HAVE to rerelease Dirty Mind....so there goes thier theory

Leave his music alone. You didn't create it, so you (the censors) don't get to edit it. In the end, censorship crippples art in all forms. If you don't like it... don't listen to it!

I think Prince summed up some of his feelings and instincts about cancel culture, censorship and “pc” sensibilities in “P Control.”

Simply depicting “life” in art isn't an endorsement; sometimes/often it's simply brining “stuff” to light for further scrutiny which is far better than pretending “stuff” doesn’t exist. It was brave for Prince to create such a diverse catalogue.

Luke 12:2
There is nothing concealed that will not be disclosed, and nothing hidden that will not be made known.

leadline said:

None should be censored, what are we 6 years old? Last I checked I have the ability to not watch or listen to anything I don't like. This society we are living in where people can't handle words is just crazy, and no, I am not condoning rape nor belittling anyone who has gone through this traumatic experience.

The hypocricy is crazy, these two songs get axed because of the rape line, but the torture line gets to stay in Automatic? Does this mean torture is ok? One of many examples.

This music is a snapshot in time, a historical document, and should be represented as such. None of Prince's music should be changed, it should be released as is. Releasing edited versions of Prince music, or not releasing the music at all due to 'words deemed 'scary', is a slap in the face to everyone here, as it strips all of us of our decision to choose what our own personal thresholds are when it comes to explicit or suggestive themes in music. These people that feel they have the right to choose for us, it is arrogance at its best.

[Edited 12/2/19 8:30am]