databank said:

What can I say that I haven't said before, and that others haven't said here?

What we experience in the Metoo and diversity movements nowadays is what is called a moral crusade. These are, of course, based on just causes, and I'm glad people take a stand to say that our societies have tolerated sexual abuse for far too long, but moral crusades are, by nature, hysterical and the incredibly strong reactions of the "anti rape lyrics" posts I read here demonstrate it. So if the question is "did the Estate make the right decision", I'd simply say that Comerica is a company whose only purpose here is to generate income, not to make artistic statements or defend freedom of speech, and that avoiding a highly controversial release in the current climate was certainly a wise choice from their perspective. Going against Metoo is very dangerous in the world of entertainment today, and that's why we see actors and directors being blacklisted every day. In a few years or decades, the Metoo moral crusade will be long over and the estate can release these songs without such a fuss. So it's OK, all good things will come in due time.

.

Now I come from a generation (late X; early Y) that always stood for freedom of speech against old bigots who tried to tell us that sexual songs were evil, that role playing game led to suicide, that violent video games or films like Natural Born Killers led to crime or that rap lyrics about killing cops or drug use were to be banned. We spent our entire youth fighting for our right to enjoy works of art and entertainment that our parents and grandparents deemed malicious, our heroes were characters of movies such as Footloose or Dead Poet Society, characters who rebeled against bigotry and authority, kids who just wanted to be entrusted with their capacity to differentiate reality and fiction, freedom and the misuse of freedom. Hell, I'm from a generation that was for the most part disappointed by Prince becoming so "clean" and moralistic in his later lyrics. So it makes me sad to see kids today acting like Tipper Gore used to when we were kids, unable to make the difference between fiction and propaganda, between art and reality. It doesn't matter, this thing is just another fad and it'll be over before we know it. In the meantime there are people who ask that depiction of colonial racism be removed from museums, that books by fascist writers be removed from bookshelves and that Prince songs be locked in the vault forever or arbitrarily edited. They will never succeed on the long run. But we're lucky Bob George was released in P's lifetime because, today, releasing the Black Album would be a total no-go for Comerica.

.

It also breaks my heart to see Prince fans asking for posthumous edits, or in my words, the slaughter of works of art by one of the most important artists of our time for either comfort or moral reasons but, hell, many people don't care about arts or history, they just want to be entertained and the more innofensive the art, the better. As an artist and as a lover of arts, I see things differently than someone who just need to be relaxed after a hard, long day at work. I can respect that.

.

So as always reading some comments here first made me angry, then just made me sad, but I know these songs will be released, as such, eventually, so I don't care. In the meantime the Chinese must be really happy to see that in democratic countries the young, not the old, ask for "morally unacceptable" works of arts to be removed from public sight, because this is the project China has for the world if our political system was to ever fail. Hollywood studios already self-censor blockbusters in order to be able to access the Chinese market. Very sad, but in the end the same line of thoughts, because no matter the reason why you want to ban works of art for moral reasons, the results are always disastrous, and in this case it will do very little to prevent men from raping women. The root of all evil isn't arts. It never was.

.

PS: I've been sexually abused and I have many friends who have, so I don't take the subject lightly.

.

Peace y'all

I take your point, but aren’t you exaggerating the stakes in this instance? I mentioned the Marquis de Sade because his writings are widely regarded to be among the most offensive and deliberately vile in the history of literature, and he represents a litmus test for champions of free speech. The 4th part of “120 Days…” is among the most disturbing and degenerate things I’ve ever read. I don’t think in terms of Good and Evil, but it’s certainly an affront to all that is decent and it was intended to be precisely that. I don’t “like” Sade or that book, but I think that it’s an important work and would defend its right to exist and be read with my last breath.

By contrast, for me that brief lyric in Extraloveable is simply a moment of youthful stupidity on Prince’s part, one that he himself was probably embarrassed by in later life. I wrote things in my teens that I wouldn’t want to be associated with now – it’s part of the course for young artists to play with light and dark and test boundaries as they develop their creative and moral compass. Thankfully, I had the opportunity to learn my lessons and self-censor outside of the public domain. I think that the lyrics in question are very poorly judged, but I wouldn’t have a profound moral objection to the full version being released. For me it’s a simple question of whether a pristine truncated version is preferable to it reamining in the vault, given the estate’s apparent unease (which may or may not be related to judgments about Prince’s own wishes). Prince edited down his tracks all the time, and everything that makes Extralovable great would be retained. Casting it as some profound debate about freedom of speech strikes me as a little exaggerated in this case, given that the track isn't really addressing these issues in a thoughful, deliberate manner at all.

[Edited 1/5/20 11:37am]

fen said:

databank said:

What can I say that I haven't said before, and that others haven't said here?

What we experience in the Metoo and diversity movements nowadays is what is called a moral crusade. These are, of course, based on just causes, and I'm glad people take a stand to say that our societies have tolerated sexual abuse for far too long, but moral crusades are, by nature, hysterical and the incredibly strong reactions of the "anti rape lyrics" posts I read here demonstrate it. So if the question is "did the Estate make the right decision", I'd simply say that Comerica is a company whose only purpose here is to generate income, not to make artistic statements or defend freedom of speech, and that avoiding a highly controversial release in the current climate was certainly a wise choice from their perspective. Going against Metoo is very dangerous in the world of entertainment today, and that's why we see actors and directors being blacklisted every day. In a few years or decades, the Metoo moral crusade will be long over and the estate can release these songs without such a fuss. So it's OK, all good things will come in due time.

.

Now I come from a generation (late X; early Y) that always stood for freedom of speech against old bigots who tried to tell us that sexual songs were evil, that role playing game led to suicide, that violent video games or films like Natural Born Killers led to crime or that rap lyrics about killing cops or drug use were to be banned. We spent our entire youth fighting for our right to enjoy works of art and entertainment that our parents and grandparents deemed malicious, our heroes were characters of movies such as Footloose or Dead Poet Society, characters who rebeled against bigotry and authority, kids who just wanted to be entrusted with their capacity to differentiate reality and fiction, freedom and the misuse of freedom. Hell, I'm from a generation that was for the most part disappointed by Prince becoming so "clean" and moralistic in his later lyrics. So it makes me sad to see kids today acting like Tipper Gore used to when we were kids, unable to make the difference between fiction and propaganda, between art and reality. It doesn't matter, this thing is just another fad and it'll be over before we know it. In the meantime there are people who ask that depiction of colonial racism be removed from museums, that books by fascist writers be removed from bookshelves and that Prince songs be locked in the vault forever or arbitrarily edited. They will never succeed on the long run. But we're lucky Bob George was released in P's lifetime because, today, releasing the Black Album would be a total no-go for Comerica.

.

It also breaks my heart to see Prince fans asking for posthumous edits, or in my words, the slaughter of works of art by one of the most important artists of our time for either comfort or moral reasons but, hell, many people don't care about arts or history, they just want to be entertained and the more innofensive the art, the better. As an artist and as a lover of arts, I see things differently than someone who just need to be relaxed after a hard, long day at work. I can respect that.

.

So as always reading some comments here first made me angry, then just made me sad, but I know these songs will be released, as such, eventually, so I don't care. In the meantime the Chinese must be really happy to see that in democratic countries the young, not the old, ask for "morally unacceptable" works of arts to be removed from public sight, because this is the project China has for the world if our political system was to ever fail. Hollywood studios already self-censor blockbusters in order to be able to access the Chinese market. Very sad, but in the end the same line of thoughts, because no matter the reason why you want to ban works of art for moral reasons, the results are always disastrous, and in this case it will do very little to prevent men from raping women. The root of all evil isn't arts. It never was.

.

PS: I've been sexually abused and I have many friends who have, so I don't take the subject lightly.

.

Peace y'all

I take your point, but aren’t you exaggerating the stakes in this instance? I mentioned the Marquis de Sade because his writings are widely regarded to be among the most offensive and deliberately vile in the history of literature, and he represents a litmus test for champions of free speech. The 4th part of “120 Days…” is among the most disturbing and degenerate things I’ve ever read. I don’t think in terms of Good and Evil, but it’s certainly an affront to all that is decent and it was intended to be precisely that. I don’t “like” Sade or that book, but I think that it’s an important work and would defend its right to exist and be read with my last breath.

By contrast, for me that brief lyric in Extraloveable is simply a moment of youthful stupidity on Prince’s part, one that he himself was probably embarrassed by in later life. I wrote things in my teens that I wouldn’t want to be associated with now – it’s part of the course for young artists to play with light and dark and test boundaries as they develop their creative and moral compass. Thankfully, I had the opportunity to learn my lessons and self-censor outside of the public domain. I think that the lyrics in question are very poorly judged, but I wouldn’t have a profound moral objection to the full version being released. For me it’s a simple question of whether a pristine truncated version is preferable to it reamining in the vault, given the estate’s apparent unease (which may or may not be related to judgments about Prince’s own wishes). Prince edited down his tracks all the time, and everything that makes Extralovable great would be retained. Casting it as some profound debate about freedom of speech strikes me as a little exaggerated in this case, given that the track isn't really addressing these issues in a thoughful, deliberate manner at all.

[Edited 1/5/20 11:37am]

I feel ya, and obviously the historical importance of Sade's book isn't the same as that of an obscure Prince track, and I don't even care much for these 2 particular songs, let alone these dubious lines about rape that I didn't think were very dignified when I first heard them (as a feminist, I always loved the feminist aspects of P's work, and these 2 aren't his most feminist moments), but it's a matter of principle. The argument of quality or historical importance was sometimes used to say that where Sade and the likes could be tolerated because they were higher forms of art, "junk" forms of arts such as rock n roll didn't deserve the same treatment. But who will decide which is good and bad arts? Many cheap horror films are as bad as they are transgressive. For example, Jorg Buttgereit's Nekromantik is poorly written, poorly acted and poorly directed, it could be accused of being little more than porn for necrophiles, but is that an argument to ban it but allow the (equally transgressive) Pasolini film Salo or the 120 days of Sodom, because Pasolini is recognized as a great director while Buttgereit isn't? I would fight for both films with a similar passion. Giving the power to some to decide which art is good or important enough to deserve being transgressive is, in the end, the same as giving someone the power to decide which works of art are morally acceptable or not.

.

As for what Prince would want, it's an argument I personally find irrelevant because Prince is dead and doesn't own his work anymore. Legally, the Estate owns it. More fundamentally, everything he left behind him is owned by the human race, it's now part of our collective cultural heritage. IDK if I'm right or wrong with that one, but it's what I believe. These songs are out anyway, Prince had "lost" them to the world before he was even gone.

.

In the end, as I said earlier, I don't think releasing these songs will be a problem forever. It's not just the right time and yes, I prefer them to stay in the vault for now than being truncated because I see value in them as a historical document, not something that should be toyed with for commercial or moral purposes. The Estate has done enought in that regard, I'm glad they have been receptive to the controversies surrounding Originals and that they now wish to release the material as such or not at all, save maybe for the obligation of recreating mixes that exist only on old cassettes as faithfully as possible (and I'd still love to have the cassette versions too, as a reference, if they had an NPGMC style site where they could release such material for the most purist Prince fans). Very clearly, the aura of scandal these songs have today will not last forever, and I prefer waiting for another decade or so to have them as such, than to give my blessing towards a move that I would see as an act of artistic vandalism for commercial reasons, that would on top of it encourage those who want to alter any work of art, past or present, that could hurt the sensibilities of the day. In a way, as you say, these songs aren't so important, they do not promote rape as a philosophy from beginning to end, they are not destined to become the most well known Prince songs, so why all the fuss?

.

There are few topics over which I'm radical like this when it comes to matters of principle. But this is something I consider important, something I'm not willing to compromise with. And while my little opinion does not weigh much in the balance on things, since I'm not an important or very influential person, I still wanna take a stand at every given opportunity.

databank said:

.

It also breaks my heart to see Prince fans asking for posthumous edits, or in my words, the slaughter of works of art by one of the most important artists of our time for either comfort or moral reasons but, hell, many people don't care about arts or history, they just want to be entertained and the more innofensive the art, the better.

I was one who suggested an edit version alongside the full version so people could chose...not exactly who you're addressing but I'll answer anyway.

Let's not lose perspective that we are talking about an unreleased song.


Prince did edits on his own work, all the time. Wouldn't be shocked if one existed in the Vault, that he did around the time of the re-recorded version.


It's also one of this greatest unreleased songs we know of, but I wouldn't compare it to like discovering an artists unknown masterwork. Either way, it's a shame a segment of fans won't get to hear it.

The offending words aren't what makes the track. It sounds like one of his more completed songs, but he never used it even when the lyric wouldn't have been the reason why.

So now in 2020, if it's a choice between full censorship and never releasing the track, masterwork or not, or releasing it with an edit that would not effect the integrity of the song, why not consider the choice?

Personally, I think it should have gone on full, with an edit alternative version to cover their asses, give people truly bothered by it a way to enjoy the package and basically acknowledge it at the same time. Then let adults chose.

[Edited 1/5/20 13:09pm]

[Edited 1/5/20 13:10pm]

homesquid said:

I hate the idea of censorship when it comes to music,but if removing a few words from a song is the only way that it can be released,I'll take it.

.

lavendardrummachine said:

databank said:

.

It also breaks my heart to see Prince fans asking for posthumous edits, or in my words, the slaughter of works of art by one of the most important artists of our time for either comfort or moral reasons but, hell, many people don't care about arts or history, they just want to be entertained and the more innofensive the art, the better.

I was one who suggested an edit version alongside the full version so people could chose...not exactly who you're addressing but I'll answer anyway.

Let's not lose perspective that we are talking about an unreleased song.


Prince did edits on his own work, all the time. Wouldn't be shocked if one existed in the Vault, that he did around the time of the re-recorded version.


It's also one of this greatest unreleased songs we know of, but I wouldn't compare it to like discovering an artists unknown masterwork. Either way, it's a shame a segment of fans won't get to hear it.

The offending words aren't what makes the track. It sounds like one of his more completed songs, but he never used it even when the lyric wouldn't have been the reason why.

So now in 2020, if it's a choice between full censorship and never releasing the track, masterwork or not, or releasing it with an edit that would not effect the integrity of the song, why not consider the choice?

Personally, I think it should have gone on full, with an edit alternative version to cover their asses, give people truly bothered by it a way to enjoy the package and basically acknowledge it at the same time. Then let adults chose.

[Edited 1/5/20 14:52pm]

I will ask everyone here just one simple question.........

Who here has watched or is a fan of the MULTI award winning TV show Game of Thrones?

callimnate said:

databank said:

callimnate said:

I will ask everyone here just one simple question.........

Who here has watched or is a fan of the MULTI award winning TV show Game of Thrones?

Not yet, but I want to.

There's a few rapes there.

LoveGalore said:

rednblue said:

rednblue said:

udo said:

Fans asking for edits are not 'full' fans. They want to leave out some of the stuff, i.e. they do not like things.

Is this a thing because of people getting older?

20 years ago one did not hear these edit requests...

But not liking things is a separate issue from edits. A person can dislike (or feel even more strongly about) a thing and also be against removing anything when songs are released. I mean, I absolutely love the entirety of many, many P songs from many eras. But even fans like me are extremely unlikely to “like” every single part of every single song. So doesn’t this definition of “full fan” make a full fan a very rare thing? [Edited 1/5/20 10:38am]

.

Not liking `Purple & Gold` is different from this issue.

It is a Politicially Correctness endeavor on lyrics versus musical (not lyrical) taste.

homesquid said:

Neversin said:

Genesia said: Sure, try to derail the topic into some man-hating cliché whine fest... You want to cry about your man-hating dramedy then start a topic somewhere else and let fans discuss the topic at hand... Neversin. [Edited 1/3/20 15:01pm]

Genesa asked a question and you are the one who whined about a non-existent "man-hating cliche whine fest". Replace your tampon, Neversin.

Oh please... This person was clearly trying to bait people... It's a troll post, not to mention your tampon comment... You sound like a misogynist cunt...
And all this fake outrage about Prince "glorifying" rape (or even torture on other released songs) but all these whiners are still supporting him smells like pure hypocrisy...
Now go burn some books with "rapey" content...

Oh and since the songs are readily available to scrutinize in bootleg form and even the content has been laid bare by an official spokesperson (Michael Howe) for all to read, there's still zero outrage and the average "woke" or "Pound Metoo" follower really doesn't give a shit about them or their content...
So all the drama about some hypothetical "panic" they could maybe cause or people trying to "Wacko Jacko" Prince is not going to happen... And even if it does people will still buy his records and I highly doubt Prince still gives a shit about his reputation because, you know, he's dead...

Neversin.

[Edited 1/6/20 3:12am]

Neversin said:

LoveGalore said:

"sanctimonious wankery"

Love it. That is a fantastic expression. "Virtue signalling" is dead. Long live "sanctimonious wankery". I can see me using it a lot more in the future.

sro100 said:

Rape is bad. Murder is bad. So let's get rid of every song about killing someone. "Hey Joe." Every gangsta rap song. There's probably a few others about killing...."Natural Born Killaz." Maybe a couple others.

Next we get rid of every movie and TV show that features rape and killing because killing is bad.

Give me a fuckin' break!!!

-

exactly !

-

why is it so difficult to NOT mix things up ?

singing about rape is NOT rape, it's a fantasy.

yes there are people who like that 'fantasy', but not necessary for real.

get it ? (probably not)

i'm not gong to explain that this is in the context of 'art'. either you get it or you simply don't.

-

why do people keep poppin' this issue up ?

my guess is lack of education, insight, THINKING, and being admissible for other opinions than your own.

-

should he stop singing about the theme sadmasochistic as well ?!

is he a sadist ? going to really badly hurt someone ?!

a masochist ? does he deliberately want to get injured ?!

come on people... THINK, and think again, consider and make fewer decisions, and get out of your conservative thinking, shell or environment.

try to be smarter then short-sighted.

-

#metoo has nothing, absolutely NOTHING to do with it.

just like 'rape' as a metaphore here has NOTHING to do with the actual executive act.

-

peace, always peace.

-

the fact of not releasing these possibly has a totally other reason. ($$?)

-

If these two songs were the ONLY ones in vault, I'll bet the Estate / Comerica would sho' be cashing in.

To those that don't want the songs released, or at least want them censored:

You already know about them. You've probably already heard them. If they bother you so much maybe you should stop supporting the artist('s estate) and stop listening to Prince. He was the one who was awful enough to write, sing and record those lyrics. If they're really so bad and he's so terrible for singing them, it would be the right thing to do. No?

You don't have to support someone who would sing such evil lyrics. Go listen to rap.

VaultCurator said:

LoveGalore said:

"sanctimonious wankery"

Love it. That is a fantastic expression. "Virtue signalling" is dead. Long live "sanctimonious wankery". I can see me using it a lot more in the future.

It is a favorite of mine. So many instances of it today and especially on this topic!

I wish they would just leak in full studio quality, already. Then I wouldn't care whether or not the powers that be issued them officially.

LoveGalore said:

databank said:

callimnate said: Not yet, but I want to.

There's a few rapes there.

A few!?

Not only that! Besides rape, there's brutal killings, incest, murder, adultery, orgies, you name it, its on there.
And yet it is one of the most popular shows of this past decade.

And I can GUARANTEE you that MOST of the people on here or FB, going on about Extralovable & Lust U Always, have watched episodes of Game of Thrones, or similar TV shows or movies, and yet they see nothing wrong with that form of entertainment.

The reason I know this, is because whenever I post this, it kills the threads/posts due to no responses.

callimnate said:

LoveGalore said:

There's a few rapes there.

A few!?

Not only that! Besides rape, there's brutal killings, incest, murder, adultery, orgies, you name it, its on there.
And yet it is one of the most popular shows of this past decade.

And I can GUARANTEE you that MOST of the people on here or FB, going on about Extralovable & Lust U Always, have watched episodes of Game of Thrones, or similar TV shows or movies, and yet they see nothing wrong with that form of entertainment.

The reason I know this, is because whenever I post this, it kills the threads/posts due to no responses.

I mean, most people who whinge about EL and LUA still readily buy Prince's other stuff, still readily listen to those two songs anyway, still readily consume every bit of him.

.

And yeah they're probably also watching GoT.

djThunderfunk said:

To those that don't want the songs released, or at least want them censored:

You already know about them. You've probably already heard them. If they bother you so much maybe you should stop supporting the artist('s estate) and stop listening to Prince. He was the one who was awful enough to write, sing and record those lyrics. If they're really so bad and he's so terrible for singing them, it would be the right thing to do. No?

You don't have to support someone who would sing such evil lyrics. Go listen to rap.

U can be a fan of an artist and also be critical of some of their work. It's not an either/or. They are not mutually exclusive (and I think U know that).

I like both songs but what is such a big deal about the ommision? They are both easily available on boots for us, to me it is a non-issue blown into something needlessly big. Mountains out of ant hills

PurpleSullivan said:

djThunderfunk said:

To those that don't want the songs released, or at least want them censored:

You already know about them. You've probably already heard them. If they bother you so much maybe you should stop supporting the artist('s estate) and stop listening to Prince. He was the one who was awful enough to write, sing and record those lyrics. If they're really so bad and he's so terrible for singing them, it would be the right thing to do. No?

You don't have to support someone who would sing such evil lyrics. Go listen to rap.

U can be a fan of an artist and also be critical of some of their work. It's not an either/or. They are not mutually exclusive (and I think U know that).

This.

Also, the same people who don't like Prince singing about rape probably aren't big on GOT's rape scenes either. I mean, people are making it pretty clear which aspect of the lyrics they have a problem with, and why I've never watched the show so I can't comment on how that subject was handled by their writers, but I imagine it was at least better contextualized within the story than whatever Prince was trying to do.

PurpleSullivan said:

LoveGalore said:

PurpleSullivan said:

U can be a fan of an artist and also be critical of some of their work. It's not an either/or. They are not mutually exclusive (and I think U know that).

Interesting. Then maybe it is possible that the music should still be released and those fans can remain critical much like others are critical of other songs. Maybe the end result shouldn't be suppression of stuff we don't like. This argument goes around and around and around. The existence of the songs doesn't interfere with anyone's life or change their fandom. Just textbook gatekeeping.

I agree that perhaps that shouldn't have been the end result. But it was and it's understandable why, so maybe we should all just move on for now? (and really, like others have said, it's not unlikely that these songs will be monetized ~Eventually~)

callimnate said:

homesquid said:

Galaxy said:

Extra Loveable & Lust u Always should have been Included on the 1999 Deulux Edition. On both songs its Prince showing humour and being playful. There is nothing evil about both of these songs Some people are too serious. Extra Loveable should have been released as a single.

Bullshit. Rape is evil and joking about rape isn't funny or playful. You aren't serious enough. Prince should have never sang those words. He would be mortified by the negative blowback his reputation would get. They should have just edited out the words so crybabies like you would have what you wanted. But you'd still complain that they made those edits.

Rape is vile and joking or being playful about it is vile UNLESS it's a consentual fantasy between two consenting adults. Ever seen 50 Shades of Gray? I hope not, but people are allowed to role play how they see fit. Knowing Prince likely wasn't a rapist, this is the ONLY way I've ever heard these lyrics and I'm 100% okay with that. If I was with a woman who said she like to do some rape role play I'd consider it. It's not even close to my thing and I likely wouldn't be able to, but there's noting wrong with it. Both of those songs are fine as far as I'm concerned. #METOO is a perfectly valid and needed moment, but when it doesn't apply it should fuck right off.

ForceofNature said:

I like both songs but what is such a big deal about the ommision? They are both easily available on boots for us, to me it is a non-issue blown into something needlessly big. Mountains out of ant hills

I have yet to find "Extralovable" in good quality on any bootleg release.

He was basically saying he was a horny, sex freak. If only he could have said "me so horny" instead of "on the verge of ____"