Forget Live Aid -- Prince should have done Farm Aid. Yeeeeeee hawwwww!

bonatoc said:

Andy Warhol, not Keith Haring, you bozo.

Now go read the most evident bios and familiarize yourself with the subject, get some Prince culture before you ridicule yourself.

I already explained myself on the TIME cover.

I'd suggest you not be so mad but to quote another dead celebrity you probably hate...

Oh well

whatever

nevermind...

drfeld said:

Forget Live Aid -- Prince should have done Farm Aid. Yeeeeeee hawwwww!

Damn right!

bonatoc said:

drfeld said:

Forget Live Aid -- Prince should have done Farm Aid. Yeeeeeee hawwwww!

Damn right!

Well played, sir.

CynicKill said:

bonatoc said:

Andy Warhol, not Keith Haring, you bozo.

Now go read the most evident bios and familiarize yourself with the subject, get some Prince culture before you ridicule yourself.

I already explained myself on the TIME cover.

I'd suggest you not be so mad but to quote another dead celebrity you probably hate...

Oh well

whatever

nevermind...

.

The TIME cover is severly overrated since Greta appeared there, as is the Nobel piece of crap prize since Barry Soetero received it.

So what were you implying?

udo said:

CynicKill said:

I already explained myself on the TIME cover.

I'd suggest you not be so mad but to quote another dead celebrity you probably hate...

Oh well

whatever

nevermind...

.

The TIME cover is severly overrated since Greta appeared there, as is the Nobel piece of crap prize since Barry Soetero received it.

So what were you implying?

I said, "Back when it was a big deal for musicians to grace the cover of TIME magazine".

I know that it's lost its luster over the years. They've had Beyonce on thier like 20 times. And L'il Nas X got thier on one song.

But in the 80's it was a big deal. And it could've been a nice collectors item for fans.

That's all I was saying.

As for the Keith Haring thing I didn't make myself clear.

Michael had Warhol, so me trying to be cute , was thinking who was THE eighties artist that could do a "competing" cover. Knowing damn well it would never play out that way.

This whole thread is just for fun.

A whole what-if scenario.

BartVanHemelen said:

TrivialPursuit said:

Prince NEVER should?

Prince should nothing.

Prince did.

And Prince was fine.

A lot of artists didn't do Live Aid. I'm not sure Prince going on at 1pm instead of George Thorogood would have stopped Queen from going on next and killing.


Very few people remember who really played Live Aid. A lot of acts joined others on stage, and there weren't a lot of Black artists included. Run DMC was huge but they played like 10am and part of it was they woke people up after the Joan Baez and the Spandau Ballet.

Prince could have been huge, or he could have just done disco calls and "two times y'all" them to death in between pacing back and forth across the stage until Big Chik carried him off in the middle of I would Die 4 U.

I agree the Live Aid version of Purple Rain would have created flash floods across Africa....not sure he gets a Time cover over it though.

Could be also that P had no desire to play a show for a crowd that wasn't necessarily there to see him, specifically.

eyewishuheaven said:

Could be also that P had no desire to play a show for a crowd that wasn't necessarily there to see him, specifically.

That's it in a nutshell.

I know Prince's elusiveness was part of his appeal.

But sometimes things are just fun to do.

Or it's my old age talking.

bonatoc said:

Certain things are too obvious to be noticed.

As is the subject of this thread.

What the hell is this thread even about? Prince DID Live Aid - via the 4 The Tears In Your Eyes video. I know. I was watching.

https://www.youtube.com/w...rV3QNdGyAI

bonatoc said:

"Huge cultural movement" my ass.

You're politically incompetent.
You know nothing of the sad state Africa was left in for decades.
Oh no, I got news for you, it still is!

Man, despite Geldof and Quincy Jones!
Pinch me, I must be dreamin'.

There's more to the world than middle-class (the Africans spell it "rich") white kids auto-congratulating themselves while they attend concerts sponsored by Coca-Cola®.

Prince gave a lot to charities in his lifetime, and never made it public.
The only times he did was during the Purple Rain Tour.
Never heard of anyone else of his stature giving a concert for the deaf.

Certainly no one from the gang of arrivists
that ran to the studios right after the Awards to give
themselves some good conscience and free publicity.

Oh my God!
They sang for a few hours!
For free!
Let's praise their names for ever and ever.

And please spare us the suspected pedophile cover, thank you very much.

You're confusing culture with politics yourself here. It was one of the biggest, if not the biggest, thing to happen in western pop in the 80s, it was and is a massive cultural event. Its ineffectiveness at a political level should be acknowledged, the correct lessons should be learned and lies should not be told about it, but that doesn't take away from how big a cultural event it was, for better or for worse.

bonatoc said:

No he ain't.

Queen weren't huge at the time. At all.
Big maybe, but certainly not huge.
Fact.

Inexact phrases and wooly differentiation here hardly pass for "fact." What is the difference between "big" and "huge"?

The world began to suck Freddie's dick after he passed away.
Before that, it couldn't care less.

To an extent sure, he got sanctified just like many others do when they pass away - see Prince for example- but he was hardly long forgotten just before that.

[Edited 1/27/20 7:52am]

bonatoc said:

nextedition said:

Why shouldnt queen be the breakout performance? Whats wrong with queen?

Almost everything.

Namely being the poster child for the repressed homosexuality
present in all hypocrite homophobic stadium heterosexuals.
Sing "We Are The Champions" in choir at the Sunday game,
insult or beat up a faggot in dark alleys on Friday night.

On an artistic level, they suck.
Lame hard rock, vulgar Opera-like references.
That guitar sound is an abomination.
It buzzes like a giant malarial disease mosquito.

Freddie Mercury was indeed a sympathetic character, with tons of charisma.
He waved the homo flag with more balls than George Michael,
who was busy trying to fool teenage girls.

But their music is simply atrocious.
Like almost anything past the sixties that met global consensus.
It's only fun when you're drunk enough.
Which happens to lots of people in the Western World on a daily basis.
Cause and Effect.

[Edited 1/24/20 18:01pm]

wow...i couldnt disagree more

What can I say?

"Prince should never have turned down We Are The World", "Prince lost everything by changing his name to a symbol" (another recent thread)...

Every once in a while, for 2 decades, I've read these threads basically saying things that mean "Prince should have played ball and acted like everyone else", "Prince made me feel uneasy as a fan by not acting like everyone else", "Prince should have been consensual", 'Prince should have focused on sales not artistry", "I stopped loving Prince when he stopped being a Top 10 artist", etc.

Well, I don't know whether anything Prince ever did was right or wrong. All I can say is that some of us fans fell in love with Prince's music and attitude precisely because he was doing what other stars did not, and not doing what other stars did, because he was often challenging consensus, not following it. If nothing else, I'm grateful Prince was there to teach me, when I was a teenager, to be a free spirit and do what I felt was right, not what everybody felt was right.

Now there are many reasons to love Prince, and these were mine, and these may not be yours, but lord am I happy that he didn't do We Are The World and that he did change his name among other weird things!! And the lollipop provocation at the 1995 AMA were the coolest thing ever in my book

bonatoc said:

nextedition said:

Why shouldnt queen be the breakout performance? Whats wrong with queen?

On an artistic level, they suck.
Lame hard rock, vulgar Opera-like references.
That guitar sound is an abomination.
It buzzes like a giant malarial disease mosquito.

Freddie Mercury was indeed a sympathetic character, with tons of charisma.
He waved the homo flag with more balls than George Michael,
who was busy trying to fool teenage girls.

But their music is simply atrocious.
Like almost anything past the sixties that met global consensus.
It's only fun when you're drunk enough.
Which happens to lots of people in the Western World on a daily basis.
Cause and Effect.

[Edited 1/24/20 18:01pm]

I agree

Prince NEVER should have turned down hiding at my house, he could have been still alive at this time...

bonatoc said:

jaawwnn said:

You're confusing culture with politics yourself here.

It was one of the biggest, if not the biggest, thing to happen in western pop in the 80s, it was and is a massive cultural event. Its ineffectiveness at a political level should be acknowledged, the correct lessons should be learned and lies should not be told about it, but that doesn't take away from how big a cultural event it was, for better or for worse.

That was not culture.
But we probably have different definitons for it.
To me, pop culture hardly translates as culture.
A phenomenon really has to permeate,
to left a durable imprint on society to become culture.


Here we have a single, isolated episode, which is of course big ("if not the biggest"! Get outta here),
and who says big often means the reptile brain gets rubbed the right way,
and so we're trained to assume that anything that's as massively mediatic is worth of interest.
Of resonance does not mean of cultural importance.

All you have in the end is a mondovision broadcasted 24 hours advertising
for record companies pushing for more sales of their protégés
under the pretext of helping the Third World.

Now if hunger in the African continent had become a recurring discussion,
a permanent subject of interest in the Western World,
then I would agree to call it "culture".

Actually it ended being more political than cultural:
it gave a push to NGOs, UN aids, the kind of stuff the public at large,
and especially the pop culture public, really doesn't give a fuck about.

Leaving politics aside, this was nothing but a short,
rapidly faded awakening of the young masses,
which was short-lived and left very, very little heritage.

Lots of garage sales’ 45 rpm, that's for sure.
And also an annoying "record for" reflex everytime some catastrophy or ignominy would happen in the decade that followed ("Sun City", which is actually the only decent one, the "Concert for Mandela", etc.).
But with the extinction of the music industry, even this has disappeared.
Where's a Band Aid for Australia?
Who cares?


As for pop "cultural" significance, let us remember that Prince was the only megastar (his status at the time) to come up with a dedicated song, a humble sounding one, that was right on the subject at matter,
whereas almost all the rest pushed their latest single or album up front.
Nothing cultural whatsoever in this event.
There's a ton more eighties relevant culture in Jackson's Motown 25 performance
or Madonna's MTV virginal bride appearance.
Or Purple Rain.


Band Aid was just triumphant capitalism applied,
the apex of the Colonel Parker textbook,
proving to the whole wide world that popular music
would be definitely fucked up and raped from now on,
that it would become the glossy four-minute or thirty seconds bitch of the mass media,
an odorless soundtrack to sell sodas, sport shoes, and the American way of life.
Band Aid planted the last nail in the sixties innocence coffin,
the last decade when huge record sales could also mean enlightment of the masses,
not blind gullibility.


Woodstock was a cultural phenomenon, my friend.
But not Geldof, not his naiveness and his fake punk spirit
begging for corporations to display humanism
as if it was a vulgar product of consumption.

Not Jackson and Richie having a hard-on with their syrupy lead vocal orgy,
with a sound beyond lame as not to offend anyone (that fucking intro bell! These grandma horns!),
with lyrics so demagogue that egoism seems like a virtue in comparison.
Can you only picture the battle of the managers that went on
prior to the recording of this pile of shit?
How every single line must have been the subject of "who gets to sing it"?

OK, great ad libs.
But we didn't need Quincy full-of-himself Jones to remember
Stevie Wonder and Ray Charles are geniuses.
Even them were tricked into thinking that all of a sudden the Western World
would become aware of Africa, after decades of rapes, thefts and exploitation.

We are the oil, we are the diamonds.

The rapes, genocides, western-funded dictators went on. They go on as I write.
Van Cleef & Arpels, Cartier and all the others are just a magazine page away,
in every kiosk of every city, on every international airport billboard.
Ethiopia is not.

That's the culture we live in.

jaawwnn said:

Inexact phrases and wooly differentiation here hardly pass for "fact." What is the difference between "big" and "huge"?

Lots of online dictionaries out there.

jaawwnn said:

To an extent sure, he got sanctified just like many others do when they pass away - see Prince for example- but he was hardly long forgotten just before that.

Just before "that", his P.R. announced the world he had AIDS, and "The Show Must Go On" really is an abomination, more in its concept than its music.
Here's a man dying, and his swan song claims (more like yells) that artists have no choice but to continue on prostituting themselves in the name of Barnum.
The same old "Rock Star as Christ" refrain.
Coke and whores, such sacrifice.

Such a pathetic circus the earth has become.

Prince at least knew how to juggle,
tame the Lion, ride the Elephant and
seduce the Pretty Acrobat. All at once.

Same difference between "show" and "spectacle",
as in "big" and "huge".

Prince was in full bad boy mode back then, he didn't care much for charity stuff.

Anyone here old enough to remember the "We Are The World" lollipop sucking?

He always wanted to do things on HIS terms, not other people's. Can't say I blame him, I'm the same way.

Ok Bonatac we probably more agree than disagree about most of this.

[Edited 1/29/20 1:22am]

Nah.. We are the World was a saccarine Grammy Quincy Jones produced rip-off of "Do they know its Christmas". So glad he didnt do that. Only Cindy Lauper and MJ save that mess from being a total disaster.


Maybe he could have done Live Aid but for the Tears in Your Eyes was perfect. The US side of this was a mess. Wembley (like Do they know its Christmas) had the much better line up and earnestness.


BTW Queen was a "comeback" not a "breakout". U2 was the breakout. Bowie also did a great job.

emesem said:

BTW Queen was a "comeback" not a "breakout".

Yup, it was a big part of the Bohemian Rhapsody movie.