Macca / Prince thoughts...

[ahawk66]

A Prince song ("When You Were Mine") came on this morning as I was driving to work, and it got me thinking. I would say that his output and talents can be compared to Paul's over the last 25 years or so (they both are prolific writers, very melodic, can play any instrument you give them), but what made me think today is that I've never heard anyone take shots at Prince's lyrics the way they have at Macca's. I'm the first to admit that sometimes Paul's lyrics can be mediocre (although he's had some brilliant ones as well, and most hold up), but Prince never really went too many places (sex, love, sex, sex, love), so why hasn't he taken the crap, too? He arguably has some of the best melodies in the last 20-plus years, but I can only listen to the one-trick pony lyrics so much.

I'm just wondering if I'm off base in thinking of this. I like Prince, but I can't say I've ever really been totally into him because he never grew lyrically. I love some of his sexy imagery, and I'm amazed by his musical ability, but he never developed into any more of a lyricist than that. Yet, he gets heaps more credit than McCartney (again, this is the last 20 years or so, more of a solo versus solo thing) on the legitimacy scale. Just defending our guy here - not really intending to swat at Prince, though it seems like I am. I think I'm taking a jab at the critics or those who pigeonholed Paul in 1976 or something like that. Thoughts anyone? I'm interested to hear what anyone has to say. It was a good morning discourse...

[chris]

i've never really paid that much attention to prince. he was huge when i was in high school (when purple rain was all the rage). and if i had to pick, i would have picked prince over michael jackson any day of the week...if for no other reason that he was rock-ier than michael ever was. and that...is the answer to your question.

i can't speak for everyone. but i'd suggest that those who listened to paul, those that either (or both) enjoyed and criticized his work had no interest in prince. different generation. different genres. and those younger who groved on what prince had to say musically, never really thought much about paul (and maybe even the beatles). just a different audience, probably.

i don't mean to put myself (or my generation) above anyone else, god knows it is far from perfect, but maybe the older generation expected more from their musical art. we had our crap that became popular, of course. every generation does. but i've never heard madonna's, michael jackson's or lady gaga's lyrics examined the way the stones. the beatles, dylan's or springsteen's lyrics have been. now... if a song has a nice beat, and you can dance to it, it's awesome.

and to tell you the truth (at least the way i see it) the very best lyrisist out there today (lucinda williams) could go to times square and no one would even know who she was. the critics love her. but she barely sells any of her own albums. like i said earlier...different generation. and different expectations from our performers.

[efghijiloveyou]

I would say the reason critics generally don't take shots a Prince's lyrics are because they're no expectations of great lyrics from him. I don't claim to know any of his songs (I couldn't care less about them, nor could I even hum one on a bet) but don't they carry a lot less cashe than Paul's? I mean, critics expect great artists to live up to their previous works and then surpass them, fairly or unfairly. Despite whatever success Prince has enjoyed, he's no Paul McCartney. I don't mean to denegrate Prince, it's just that he's had a lot less impact on the world than Paul. In other words Prince gets praise for jumping through the same old hoop with the same skill every time, never daring to go beyond. Take a chance and you're judged more harshly.

[bonovox66]

Great discussion. I must first confess to being a HUGE Prince fan. I would easily rate him in my top 5 favorite musicians. He is more of my generation, but I never got into him until much later after his popularity was already far in decline. I own everything the man has ever done (yes even his 2000's work) and have seen him in concert (an amazing spectacle words cannot describe). With that out of the way, I think people are too easily dismissing Prince's lyrics. You've only talked about his popular stuff. He has written several songs that I would deem socially conscious as well as several songs about faith and spirituality. But maybe you're onto something. People only know the popular Prince stuff (sex, love, sex, love) and take it for that. But I urge anyone that wants to give Prince a fair shake to delve deeper than his 80's and early 90s work. There is some great lyrical content in there. Not all winners, but still amazing.

And yes, Prince is one of the most prolific artists out there. I think only Macca can top him in output and quality as far as musicality goes.

[ahawk66]

Fair enough, bonovox. You're right that I wasn't hitting on any deep cuts from the Purple One, so I may have been out of my element by generalizing him from just the bigger songs. I guess that's what happens with Paul, too. And, yes, I'm sure everything he does is compared to The Beatles. Tough legacy to beat, but he's done some great music after 'em. ...I don't take anything away from Prince's musical abilities because what he can do by himself is unbelievable (and I've heard his live shows are jaw-dropping), but maybe some of that generational stuff creeps in, too. I mean, I'm a teen of the '80s but I really latched on to '50s, '60s, and '70s stuff as well. I'm a high school teacher who hears some of the stuff the kids are listening to these days and I - gulp - hear my father when I sit back and think, "Man, a lot of this isn't even music!" I'm just getting old, although I still look for new stuff that I like.

Lucinda Williams is terrific, and I also like Josh Ritter, Matthew Ryan, Peter Case, and a lot of others who are probably hand-to-mouth when it comes to making a living. I think at the very least that the charts have shrunk in scale to where rap and country dominate, with the occasional Lady Ga Ga or Britney Spears stuff thrown in. At least I can say that in the '80s you had Macca, Human League, Willie Nelson, Men at Work, Duran Duran, The Stones, and the odd bubblegum on the charts at the same time.

OK, I started the thread and now I've veered off into digression territory. I'd better quit before I start talking about something else non-topic related...

[bonovox66]

I was a child of the 80s who hated 80s music, which is why I didn't get into Prince until the mid to late 90s. Lets face it, 80s music was just not good. I too latched onto the 50s and 60s stuff early on.

But you're right, people only hear certain aspects of what Paul (or even Prince) is capable of and judge him on that saying well he was a Beatle so everything should be that grand. Well, in my opinion, he has easily eclipsed his Beatles work. Whenever people see me wearing a Paul shirt and go "oh, you like the Beatles" I say "yeah, but I'm first and foremost a Paul fan". They are always baffled that I prefer his Wings and solo work of the great and powerful Beatles. I'll go back to a story I've told before. A couple years back when I saw Macca and he was playing material from Electric Arguments the audience was really responsive and even a couple people asked if he was playing a Beatle song they were not familiar with. Just goes to show how pre-judgemental people can be.

[Girl4Beats]

I got you all beat. I am a Child of the 60's and today's music, I guess to me sounds like my music did to my dad. I can't stand some of the stuff that is suppose to pass as "music". As to Prince? I have only heard his stuff played on the radio and I liked a few of them. I have seen some of his videos on MTV or VH-1 and I did see "Purple Rain" on TV. Yes he can write but Paul's writing and Prince's writing are two different veins. They grew up in two different times.

Frankly I can't stand rap or hip hop or techno pop. As I said, I am a Child of the 60's and that is the kind of music I like. Of course, Paul is my boy but there are songs he has written that I don't like either. In fact, these last couple albums when he was with "She Who Must Not Be Named" were real downers for me. I like the hard driving rock and roll. The Russian Album. Flaming Pie. BOTR. Even Red Rose Speedway.

Sorry all, but give me some good ole rock and roll any day.

[mr h atom]

i always like being beaten by a girl....


two words: 'hi hi hi' and 'let's go crazy'...? (ok...that's two songs...but, the thought is still the same...i think)
twin songs of a different mutha ??

today...i agree with everybody

[warmerchord]

:wink: i always like being beaten by a girl....


two words: 'hi hi hi' and 'let's go crazy'...? (ok...that's two songs...but, the thought is still the same...i think)
twin songs of a different mutha ??

today...i agree with everybody

Eat at Home has sexual connotation too I guess.

[mhnso]

Prince is a great artist, a giant when it comes to songwriting and some of his songs are rather dirty - in a nice way. Don t see much connection between Paul and Prince though exept that both are multitalended geniuses. Actually I saw Prince perform this summer and he went on for almost three hour makin it one of the best concets I ever attended - and he sure can play a mean guitar the little man