MoodyBlumes said:

JudasLChrist said:

It's a good book. You don't have to like it.

You claim that Neal has done a service by telling the truth -- he has not told the truth.

That's just org shit. Many people here freak the fuck out when former bandmembers or whomever makes any kind of claim that goes against the narrative tha is personally important to them. Some people need to believe that Prince never had collaborators, for instance, and they freak if any former bandmember claims a songwriting credit.

I believe Neil told the truth as he saw it, and went through pains to do so.

JudasLChrist said:

MoodyBlumes said:

You claim that Neal has done a service by telling the truth -- he has not told the truth.

That's just org shit. Many people here freak the fuck out when former bandmembers or whomever makes any kind of claim that goes against the narrative tha is personally important to them. Some people need to believe that Prince never had collaborators, for instance, and they freak if any former bandmember claims a songwriting credit.

I believe Neil told the truth as he saw it, and went through pains to do so.

Yet he makes up what Judith told police. Not taking many pains at all.

MoodyBlumes said:

JudasLChrist said:

That's just org shit. Many people here freak the fuck out when former bandmembers or whomever makes any kind of claim that goes against the narrative tha is personally important to them. Some people need to believe that Prince never had collaborators, for instance, and they freak if any former bandmember claims a songwriting credit.

I believe Neil told the truth as he saw it, and went through pains to do so.

Yet he makes up what Judith told police. Not taking many pains at all.

Again: Org shit. read the book. Even if he didn't get the Judith Hill quote exactly correct, and I'm not certain that's the case, I am certain he believed it was correct. It defintely matches up with what else i read about her telling. Org folks will find a way to trash anyone that writes anthing but the most shallow praise of P. It's boring, ya'll.

JudasLChrist said:

JudasLChrist said:

MoodyBlumes said:

You claim that Neal has done a service by telling the truth -- he has not told the truth.

That's just org shit. Many people here freak the fuck out when former bandmembers or whomever makes any kind of claim that goes against the narrative tha is personally important to them. Some people need to believe that Prince never had collaborators, for instance, and they freak if any former bandmember claims a songwriting credit.

I believe Neil told the truth as he saw it, and went through pains to do so.

I think you´re being unfair toward most orgers who have a problem with what and how Neal Karlen writes. I for one have zero problems if a writer or former bandmember comes up with facts about Prince that may be unpleasant. On the contrary, I love reading biographies that show us the darker aspects of an artist, too, and I used to see Neal Karlen as someone whose opinion on Prince matters based on his Rolling Stone interviews, but those were decades ago. He used to be one of the more important Prince interviewers, right up there with Jon Bream and Hilburn and those other wellknown people who knew what they were writing about. My main gripe with him is that I don´t think his version of Prince, or rather, his armchair psychology attempts regarding Prince are based on facts but rather on hearsay, old impressions he gathered decades ago and snippets from other people´s interviews or interactions with Prince that he is reinterpreting to fit his narrative.

.

It´s not even about the money for me. If I knew that his book is based on facts and if he didn´t come across as a very creepy guy I´d gladly buy his book because we all spend money on much more superflous things, so spending 20 or 30 dollars on an interesting book is no big deal but I don´t want to support a guy like him if he´s not telling the truth. And so far I´ve noticed many things that are questionable, and many orgers have pointed these things out already so I won´t repeat them here.

I´ve read Kim Berry´s joke of a "book" and if Neal Karlen praises her book then that´s another reason for me to remain doubtful. I´d love to buy Karlen´s book and be proven wrong but the excerpts I´ve read so far were more about him than about Prince, and they reminded me of Kim Berry´s book in a very negative way, as if he took snippets of info here and there and kind of reconstructed those snippets and formed a new version just to support his narrative. I liked his writing style when he did the Prince interviews for Rolling Stone magazine but the excerpts that I´ve read so far just make me shake my head. Some orgers who´ve defended Karlen´s book here on this thread are people whose writing skills I love and admire, Genesia and Number 23 for example, or even Jon Bream, so I think there must be something good about Karlen´s book but so far the inaccuracies and negative impression by far outweigh my curiosity to buy his book, and that has very little to do with him mentioning unpleasant aspects of Prince´s personality.

.

I´m surprised to see so many old school orgers whose opinions I respect supporting Neal Karlen.

I remember a similar situation here on the org when Alex Hahn´s first book came out, and while Hahn´s book did also contain a few factual errors and was a bit biased due to the fact that he was also Uptown magazine´s lawyer against Prince´s camp, I never had the impression that Hahn´s research was sloppy. In fact, I enjoyed reading it despite disagreeing with the title and some of the contents, but I can´t say the same about Neal Karlen and what I´ve seen and read so far. I´d love to be proven wrong but the more I read about it, the less I want to find out for myself.

-

PS: Could it be that one reason for the uproar among the fans is that Karlen uses old info and old impressions in a non-linear, non-chronological way and uses these examples for his portrayal of Prince in his later stage of life? For example the alleged dislike for MJ, Miles Davis and Spike Lee? I could imagine Prince saying something negative in the mid to late 80s, or even up until the mid 90s when he was on speaking terms with Karlen but I have have zero reason to believe this was still valid for his later years based on what I´ve personally seen or witnessed or heard from people who knew Prince. It all comes across as the work of someone who´s trying to milk his former connection with Prince for whatever reasons, and I´m not even implying financial reasons because I know this book won´t make him rich.

JudasLChrist said:

bashraka said:

onlyforaminute said:

OperatingThetan said:

He's a con artist. I work in publishing and for example, know someone who alleged to have John Lennon's diaries in his possession, which were then destroyed and 'rewritten' by him from memory, with no evidence the original material ever existed. This book was published and sold well. The author's previous experience was working for Playboy... Need I say more?

You don't think he has or had recordings of Prince?

He has the recording of the Rollingstone interview. I do not believe he has or has ever had the other recordings that he claims were destroyed in the fire. He doesn't back a single revelation with recorded evidence. I actually don't think he had much contact with Prince after the 90s - he can't even pronounce Mani's name correctly.

JudasLChrist said:

dodger said:

Margot said: . But doesn’t he lose all credibility with the fiction/lies/‘peripheral stuff’ . Unless there’s a disclaimer telling the reader - some of this is completely made up

There's a discalaimer in an earlier chapter that none of it is fictional, actually. He takes great pains to communicate that he is telling an un-fictionalized account.

Honest people generally don't try so hard to convince you they aren't lying. As I said in an earlier review, it's a case of "the lady doth protest too much'

He's telling of the truth reminds me of the Coen borthers' opening to Fargo. 'This is a true story. The events depicted in this film took place in Minnesota in 1987. At the request of the survivors, the names have been changed. Out of respect for the dead, the rest has been told exactly as it occurred.'

It's a good book, but Neal reveals several times that he's making some shit up for a better story. He just does so in a very clever way that leaves the reader scratching their head.

simm0061 said:

CharismaDove said:

We’re supposed to believe Prince called this motherfucker up while watching The Sopranos and brought up his dead son? He is an excellent writer— too heavy handed though and little scattered — but how is anyone taking his word as truth? The dude contradicts himself every other page, he can’t even decide his own feelings on Prince so (as stated by others above) he dramatizes other narratives. The result is entertaining and there’s some deep sections that’ll elicit emotion in you. But I cannot imagine trusting this guy and his whole story, he says some laughable shit in here. Prince told this man more about “suicide”, his son and insecurities than anyone ever apparently. Another thing I disliked was his ignorance to the culture Prince was raised and lived in. Calling someone a motherfucker once (as many races do in a casual manner) behind their back doesn’t mean there’s a deep hatred, Karlen. Yeah I’m sure Prince called you a week before he died. Probably brought up his kid again too?

Exactly. I agree with everything you wrote.

And "motherfucker" can also be used as a term of endearment.

Keep in mind that Miles once called Prince into a room where he was standing butt-naked, so maybe Prince was a bit upset or irritated, hence his remark.

I´ve never heard of him badmouthing Miles seriously, and he´s often praised him and had nothing but kind words when he spoke of Miles Davis. He also mentioned him during the 2002 celebration a couple of times and mentioned a belt that Miles gave him as a gift. But he DID say that he found the belt ugly.

KoolEaze said:

CharismaDove said:

We’re supposed to believe Prince called this motherfucker up while watching The Sopranos and brought up his dead son? He is an excellent writer— too heavy handed though and little scattered — but how is anyone taking his word as truth? The dude contradicts himself every other page, he can’t even decide his own feelings on Prince so (as stated by others above) he dramatizes other narratives. The result is entertaining and there’s some deep sections that’ll elicit emotion in you. But I cannot imagine trusting this guy and his whole story, he says some laughable shit in here. Prince told this man more about “suicide”, his son and insecurities than anyone ever apparently. Another thing I disliked was his ignorance to the culture Prince was raised and lived in. Calling someone a motherfucker once (as many races do in a casual manner) behind their back doesn’t mean there’s a deep hatred, Karlen. Yeah I’m sure Prince called you a week before he died. Probably brought up his kid again too?

What books would you suggest for taking all the words as truth? For not questioning any words? I'm genuinely curious. In addition to this book, I also recently read Morris Day's book. I really enjoyed reading it, and my guess is that I probably really learned something about what it was like to know Prince.

Some here said that this idea was foolish (based not on Morris' portrayal of conversations real or what Morris said were imagined, but based on those Orgers believing that they somehow knew as straight-up, 100 percent fact that Prince could not have done some of the things Morris said he did).

Personally, I thought Morris showed a lot of affection for Prince in his book, and I'm very glad to have read it.

--------------

As far as what you said about "deciding feelings," I do find (as others here have noted) that relationships are messy. Not one consistent feeling, and sometimes a bit of a roller coaster. I've got a teenager, so am reminded of that many days. I can go from cool-beloved-mom to bain-of-existence in no time flat.

All this variation in feelings about family and friends may often be cartoonishly large in teenage years. But in my experience a good deal of variation is the rule and not the exception with human relationships of much strength and intensity...from young childhood to mature old age.

simm0061 said:

I can tell by the way some of you are freaking out that a nerve has been touched.

Most feel Neal took liberties, Jon Bream and myself included, but there is an underlying thread of truth in this book that registered immediately with me (and others)

Most authors have shied away from really discussing Prince for fear of his or his fan's wrath.

"Thou shalt not...ever go there"

Like it or not, a door has been opened.

I'd like to place a bet...I bet at least 75% of you groaners have not read the book.

• It was the Office, not the Sopranos

MoodyBlumes said:

Margot said:

You seem so angry about this. I am allowed to have my perspective and talked about my reasoning.

I'm a Prince fan and agree with Jon Bream.

I'm going out to dinner, have a nice weekend.

You should be angry too if you are a Prince fan. Claiming that Prince loathed Miles Davis and Spike Lee ain't cool. Not Prince's words, or Eric's, Miles' or Spike's. And then there is the rest of the book.

[Edited 10/10/20 21:37pm]

RE: relationship with Miles Davis and Spike Lee: I personally would take the idea that Prince didn't have some very positive feelings toward, and great admiration for, Spike Lee and Miles Davis, with a grain of salt.

What is your reaction to the various passages in this book when Neal wrote about Prince's mom, her challenges and strength, and Prince's relationship with her? What do you think of the words that Neal wrote about that?

3rdeyedude said:

So far this is one of the best books I have read about Prince. Very well written and interesting.

I totally agree. Btw, the recordings on this audiobook are recordings made with Prince well aware he was beign recorded.

I'd like to wager even one more bet. It seems to me that most of the "defenders" likely have not read the book AND are also the guys who discovered Prince at an impressionable/imprintable age.

I have noticed many of the overly'faithful' discovered him @13-18 (mostly guys) and Prince offered exciting stuff, something for everyone...sexiness, rule-breaking, gender fluidity etc. This was powerful. I've read about in the forums many times. Somehow, discussing Prince on a deeper level by anyone (not just Karlen) is OFF limits. Many orgers have been punished as well.

Bighead said:

3rdeyedude said:

So far this is one of the best books I have read about Prince. Very well written and interesting.

I totally agree. Btw, the recordings on this audiobook are recordings made with Prince well aware he was beign recorded.

No they weren't. Neal even said Prince didn't know he was being recorded.

PennyPurple said:

Bighead said:

I totally agree. Btw, the recordings on this audiobook are recordings made with Prince well aware he was beign recorded.

No they weren't. Neal even said Prince didn't know he was being recorded.

Every single audio clip presented in the audio version of the book were recorded in June of 1985 when Neal interviewed Prince for Rollingstone. He spent the better part of two days with Prince. Which clip are you referring to where Neal says that P doesn't know he was being recorded? I don't recall this.

Prince knew he was being recorded and it is actually the last interview where he allowed a recording.

THis is also why I don't believe Neal when he talks about later recordings or the recording of P belitting his dad in front of Neal. That incident might have happened but there is no way it happened during that 1985 interview and def not while being recorded.

Many of the stories presented are true, while at the same time, not true. That is what makes it so clever and intriguing.

One of the premises of the book is about looking into the persona, how it was structured and why. I'm afraid that many fans cannot handle this news.

The other is about sharing some of the 'real' Prince

• Perhaps, the last call happened or not; it is known that Prince did spend earlier time with Neal and did call him over the years and they did talk deeply.
• There is alot of focus here on the peripherals.

Though Prince was young, early mid-twenties, he was still about 10 years older than many of

his eventual hard-core fans. I'm certain he was sincere in many of his lyrics but he had a

strong marketing mind as well and was in the business of crossing over (with help from Howard Bloom) and speaking to some who were socially disenfranchised, others struggling with sexual identity, still others who related to the rule-breaking, strong sexuality etc. Some of this approach was to grow a following.

To this day, few really know who he was and therefore many can project what they need him to be

or what he sold.

As mature people we need to be able to look at him more objectively as he was an iconic artist who will be evaluated by writers. Just get ready.

[Edited 10/11/20 11:55am]

IMO, it's worthy of discussion as to what, if any, sound or video recordings of Prince are reasonable to release now that he is gone. Anna Fantastic said she wanted to give people a chance to experience a side of Prince with the recordings she released. Many people objected. She said she thought fans who loved Prince would value the experience of hearing the recordings and treat it with respect. Many differed and said that releasing such material was simply wrong.

------

Neal said Prince did know he was being recorded during the drives around Minneapolis that were recounted in Rolling Stone.

[Edited 10/11/20 11:40am]

Margot said:

dodger said:

Margot said:

I'd like to wager even one more bet. It seems to me that most of the "defenders" likely have not read the book AND are also the guys who discovered Prince at an impressionable/imprintable age.

I have noticed many of the overly'faithful' discovered him @13-18 (mostly guys) and Prince offered exciting stuff, something for everyone...sexiness, rule-breaking, gender fluidity etc. This was powerful. I've read about in the forums many times. Somehow, discussing Prince on a deeper level by anyone (not just Karlen) is OFF limits. Many orgers have been punished as well.

I love a bit of psychoanalysis. You got me...I'm male and discovered P at 15. . I can only speak for myself but the only issue I have with the book is what you call 'the peripherals' (lies or fiction to me). . No doubt he's a great writer and if he put a disclaimer in confirming what the Star Tribune stated; it was part fact part fiction it would be more accepted. . As it stands it looks like 'the last phone call' and the Sonny Liston stories are just 2 examples of complete fabrication. To me, that damages his credibility towards the rest of it. . Surely that skewers the reader then. Into questioning how much of this part or this story is actually true. Regardless of the content or depiction of the subject. [Edited 10/11/20 13:06pm]

Have you read the book? You may get a sense of the deeper message.

• I actually came away respecting Prince for what he was able to do, not only musically/lyrically, but his ability to pull off this persona.
• I get the sense that women fell in love with his sexiness but young men loved his super-powers.
• It's OK to look 'under the hood'.

simm0061 said:

Does anyone else find it "interesting" that Karlen's recordings (i.e. his receipts) of these confessions and revelations were all destroyed in the apt fire, and yet the recodings of things that were published years ago (e.g. old news), maraculously survived?

Yes...very interesting. Lol.

Regarding Kayfabe, I believe it was Mick Jagger, who said that Prince wasn't so much a person, but a persona.

PennyPurple said:

rednblue said:

You are asking to hear from dodger, so apologize for butting in if you don't want to hear someone else's recollection.

Don't know if there were multiple police interviews with Judith, but in the one I read, she said that in the Moline hospital, she expressed concern to Prince about the danger of that way of pill use, asking him to assure her "so definitely no more of these pills, right."

She said that Prince's reply was "something like well then that means I can't perform because my hands are hurting."

It seems perhaps Prince felt that it was getting harder for him to be able to play music without subjecting himself to the dangers Judith was speaking about.

From Dan Piepenbring's description, maybe Prince sometimes thought to make his immediate future lighter on playing instruments, and heavier on writing:

"He said he was finished with making music, making records. 'I’m sick of playing the guitar, at least for now. I like the piano, but I hate the thought of picking up the guitar.' What he really wanted to do was write. In fact, he had so many ideas for his book that he didn’t know where to begin. Maybe he wanted to focus on scenes from his early life, juxtaposed against moments set in the present day. Or maybe he wanted to do a whole book about the inner workings of the music industry. Or perhaps he should write about his mother—he’d been wanting to articulate her role in his life. He wondered what writing a book had in common with writing an album. He wanted to know the rules, so he could know when to flout them."


https://www.newyorker.com...-of-prince

Yes, you are correct Red&blue. He said his hands were hurting, I do not remember it being mentioned that his hands were numb, like some are saying.

[Edited 10/10/20 16:44pm]

Exactly...he died during a full time piano tour...not exactly easy on the hands.

jdcxc said:

simm0061 said:

Does anyone else find it "interesting" that Karlen's recordings (i.e. his receipts) of these confessions and revelations were all destroyed in the apt fire, and yet the recodings of things that were published years ago (e.g. old news), maraculously survived?

Yes...very interesting. Lol.

I'm missing the logic. What good would having later recording receipts do?

If you share them with the public you're a jerk, a horrible friend.

If you don't release them, you're a liar.

Same options with regard to the earlier recordings...

and regarding people who in years past claimed the quotes from those articles were just another instance of forever lying on Prince.

[Edited 10/12/20 7:29am]