4 ms·
Spoiler: he likely took ‘why’ to his grave. All this article does is tell stories that suggest guesses, while also taking care to reiterate how every single ane
by mock-possum 3y ago
Spoiler: he likely took ‘why’ to his grave. All this article does is tell stories that suggest guesses, while also taking care to reiterate how every single anecdote was likely the artist creating art, and not a genuine or complete explanation.
- jsbisviewtiful 3y agoCan't help but wonder if the primary reason was simply a marketing opportunity.
- Projectiboga 3y agoNo it was part of his dispute with his record label, he wanted to leave them the Prince name and be something new. It was of course marketing but it was intended to create a separate listing in the old Flying Fish record catalog. Record stores used to have a huge loose leaf book with most recordings listed, it was a way to see if you could get older records. Sometimes you had to just look around, I had to buy the first two Yes albums from a flea market seller who also carried those old vinyl bootlegs. I'm dating my self as an early Gen-Xer with all this obsolete arcane 'knowledge'.
- jsbisviewtiful 3y agoI appreciate the insight and that's a much more fun backstory than expected. I was born a few years after Purple Rain so Prince's era is mostly unknown music history for me.
- Beldin 3y agoYou forgot to mention (or left a deliberate opening for other "millenials" like yourself ;) that at one point, he had "slave" tattooed on his cheek - for the same reason.
- monooso 3y agoIf memory serves, the "tattoo" was nothing more permanent than a Sharpie.
- rikthevik 3y agoOnce in a while we are blessed with these people who are completely authentic to themselves, incredibly talented, and willing to share with us. Let's be thankful. Why does Prince (or Björk or Bowie) do anything? Only they know.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- krapp 3y agoI mean, in Bowie's case at least, probably loads and loads of cocaine.
- InCityDreams 3y agoAs opposed to Zappa, who did not.
- brazzy 3y agoI really don't think "completely authentic to themselve" is an accurate description at least for David Bowie, who had to come up with "personas" to embody so he could feel comfortable on stage.
- bsder 3y agoGo back to the article. Prince signed expecting to release music at a faster cadence so he would have been out of his contract in about 4-5 years with stuff that was kind of sub-par even for Prince. Warner told him that wasn't going to happen as they needed to do marketing and that meant he wasn't going to get out of his contract until 10 years or so. This was the disconnect--Warner thought they locked Prince up for 10 years and Prince thought he was getting out in 5. Prince, for all his brilliance, was really the one who screwed this one up--likely because of ego wanting "The Biggest(tm) Deal". He had a huge amount of leverage after "Diamonds and Pearls" and just negotiated poorly. It's not like Prince didn't understand the music business by 1991--he had been in it and complaining about it since the 1970s.
- bananaboy 3y ago> and complaining about it Do you have any links to articles about this? I’m interested in learning more.
- bsder 3y agoI remember some interview (probably from YouTube) from something like the late 70s/early 80s where Prince is excoriating his contract because the album cost more than the advance. Sorry I can't be more specific.
- yterdy 3y agoCharacterizing it as him having negotiated poorly conjures a vision of That One Scene in The Social Network ("You're gonna blame me because you were the business head of the company and you made a bad business deal with your own company?"), or perhaps Nelson Muntze ("Stop hitting yourself.")