Taking the audience on a Jungian journey into the collective unconscious by using the shadow as a metaphor for the primal self that gets repressed by the modern persona and also by using an underground setting and labyrinth office design to represent both the depths of the psyche and the dungeon-like isolation of our increasingly mechanistic society which prevents people from finding satisfying work or meaningful connections with others.
Showing posts with label online. Show all posts
Showing posts with label online. Show all posts

Thursday, July 6, 2017

Time? It's a trick!

Time. What is time? That precious commodity that we never seem to have enough of when we need it? Is it an illusion? Douglas Adams said, "Time is an illusion. Lunchtime, doubly so!" St. Augustine said, "There are three times; a present time about things past, a present time about things present, a present time about things future. The future exists only as expectations, the pasts exists only as memory, but expectation and memory exist in the present." Physicists from Einstein to Barbour have debated its existence and true meaning for years! 

What i found interesting was this essay that Prince posted on his old Love4OneAnother website back in the day concerning the concept of time. Here's what he had to say (copied from the website verbatim):
Time & Space: The great separation ILLusion
ONcE upon an eternity, the notion of "time" did not xist.... 
time: the origin of the term is the word 'tide', which comes from the Greek daiesthai, 2 divide.
Time is an xpression of separation, a means used 2 segregate life in2 individual portions instead of a whole. 
There r many who pull themselves apart by tying their health and sanity 2 a clock - the stockbroker monitoring the tickertape, hoping the market closes b4 his ticker does... the partier measuring the years since her day of birth as if rings on a tree, developing more rings under the eyes as she does so. 
When we dream, worlds xist without time or space. The mind accepts without judgment because the mental censor which filters r thoughts is turned off. A dream lasting minutes can feel like hours, and easily flows from one location 2 another as if the same... there is no separation. 
When doing things we injoy most, the sensation of time stops. When in love with life - when r minds and spirits r ONE and act in unison - there is always enough 'time.' Though the day may fly by, much is accomplished. Alternately, where there is conflict within the self - friction due 2 SEPARATION between one's inner knowing and outward actions - 'time' turns 2 drudgery, stretching endlessly with little fulfillment. 
When we all choose 2 live in the spirit of oneness, looking within rselves (instead of 2 outside, separate sources) and acting upon what r hearts reveal, we will also b united with one another. Living this way will free humanity from the hands of the clock 4ever... there will b no more desire 2 judge pure love, beauty and joy by putting increments on it because they r endless! The kingdom of love is upon us!
Uhhhh, okay brother! Why don't you play me another funky guitar solo and leave the quantum theorizing to someone else? Oh lawd! Somebody help him! 

Wednesday, January 11, 2017

Will the Digital Haze prevail in 2017?

"You take the blue pill, the story ends.
You wake up in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe. 
You take the red pill, you stay in Wonderland, and I show you how deep the rabbit hole goes."
As we begin the new year, there are so many questions about where the world is heading. Fake news, political hacking, scandals and pseudo-reality TV wash over us like never-ending tidal waves from a tsunami and threaten to drown us in a wasteland of lethargic human-like robots.  Sometimes we need to unplug from the digital world and clear out the noise in our heads.  Let the haze abate so that we can clearly see the real world and not the matrix that has been programmed for us.  Back in the old NPGMC days, Prince shared an essay entitled The Digital Haze. I thought I would share that here.

The Digital Haze
If u have ever found urself staring endlessly at the screen, without purpose, feeling strangely empty-headed — u r not alone. Millions of people worldwide r feeling xactly the same way u do, and u know it.
It used 2 b that the screen in front of which u felt that way was the TV screen. “Tele-vision” — such a promising medium, full of wonderful, educational, cultural, artistic potential… And what do we have now? We do have the 500 channels that the technocrats kept promising us. And we’ll soon get high-definition, theater-like TV as well, no doubt.
But all the technological advances in the world cannot hide the fact that the screen we r staring at is an empty screen — a screen blurting out a constant stream of pointless, meaningless images stuffed down r gaping throats. Television has slowly but surely turned us in2 hallucinated dummies. The average IQ of the TV-fed population might have increased by a few points, but anyone who has set foot in a classroom recently knows very well that this is not the kind of intelligence that ENLIGHTENS or uplifts anyone.
TV has definitely become the “supreme time waster” (George Gilder), the ad-impacted wall of universal banality, gratuitous violence, unbearable silliness, and beyond-embarrassing innuendo against which any remnants of lucidity will inevitably come crashing and fade away.
The Real Virtuality
In this brand new millennium, however, r lives r just as full of computer monitors as they r of TV screens. And, un4tunately, much in the same way TV has more or less wasted all its potential, it seems that the computer — this potentially amazing tool which was supposed 2 bring us “interactivity,” 2 xpand r horizons far beyond the limited, 2-dimensional world of TV — is quickly following the same path.
We r not talking about the infamous “world wide wait” here — the constant waiting 4 ur computer 2 do whatever u asked it 2 do. No, technological advances will soon take care of that. We won’t have 2 wait 4 much longer. We will soon all get “instant access.” That’s not the problem.
The problem is — instant access 2 what? If current trends r any indication, we won’t have access 2 much more than a slightly “enhanced” replica of the collective hallucination that TV has ended up creating. U might b able 2 participate in pseudo-“polls” and “surveys” (which no one xcept 4 the FIFA ever really takes in2 account), u might b able 2 fill out “feedback forms” and subscribe 2 “mailing lists”… However, whatever ignorance the traditional moguls don’t manage 2 impose on u themselves thru those “official” vehicles is soon perpetrated by the anarchy of confusing voices and endless inarticulate babble that disguises itself under fancy labels such as “web forums” or “newsgroups.”
Who is still able 2 use the word “news” without quotation marks 2 describe any of the mainstream services labelled as such? Does anyone really believe that what is called “news,” be it on TV, on the radio, in the morning papers or on the Net, is actually anything new?
A politician who campaigns against clear-cutting or rampant urbanization and actually gets elected — that would b news.
A new record that sells millions of copies without over-the-top promotion, thru the sheer quality of its music — that would b news.
A major movie without sex or violence that still manages 2 b both erotic and cathartic — that would b news.
A profit-making multinational that puts its workers ahead of its shareholders — that would b news.
A health report that covers a scientific achievement that actually brings relief to long-suffering patients, rather than the promise of potential relief 10 years down the road if all further tests are conclusive and not 2 many rats or monkeys die in the process — that would b news.
A half-hour news program that devotes 20 percent of its airing time — that would b a full 6 minutes — 2 addressing issues directly affecting 20 percent of the population — that’s how many still live in poverty in the US — that would b news.
But what u r watching on TV, hearing on the radio or accessing on the web isn’t news. It’s a collective ILLUSION that poses as the “real world” and has made us all 4get what the real real world looks like. It’s a “virtual reality” that has become more real than the actual reality, that occupies r minds much more than the actual reality ever manages 2 do. It’s a constant stream of immediately 4gettable and immediately 4gotten “content” based on a meaningless, mind-numbing “cult of the next” (designer Michael Graves). “Give us something other than what u gave us yesterday” is the one and only philosophy upon which the little bit of thinking that happens 2 go on in the minds of r “decision-makers” is solely based.

Music or Plastic?

It becomes even sadder when u look at what this whole system has done 2 music — or what now passes 4 music in these computerized days… The use of the computer continues 2 further blur the line between real talent and plastic. In order 2 produce something “new,” u just need 2 push the same buttons in a different order. Just like any other field subjected 2 the joint forces of technology and capitalism, music is becoming more and more of a “product” and less and less of an art.
Is there any denying this objective, palpable, observable decline? How many real music lovers actually listen 2 anything in the Top 40? Or, as Chuck D. puts it, does real art matter much “2 the masses that see hip hop as something similar 2 fast food fries”?
The computer, un4tunately, has become the tool of choice in this decline. Drum machines, digital synthesizers, music software, digital recording equipment — those were tools that, once again, were supposed 2 xpand r musical horizons, 2 take us in2 new realms of endless sonic possibilities…
Instead, they've turned out 2 b mostly the right tools in the wrong hands. Rather than being used 4 sonic xploration, they r being used as a cheaper SUBSTITUTE 4 the real thing, a faster, more “cost-effective” way of producing product.

Mind-Opening vs Mind-Numbing

Real drummers don’t play every note perfectly. They go with the flow, so 2 speak, they strive 2 squeeze as much tightness as possible out of their interaction with the other instruments in the band. They create a 4m of anticipation, of MUSICAL AWARENESS both in their fellow players and in the listener. They keep the listener aware of the xploratory nature of their playing. It’s the same with all instruments. And when u put them 2GETHER, when that funky guitar lick falls xactly where the drummer wanted it 2 fall, where he had created SPACE 4 it, between the pumping bass and the keyboard chord — and that’s not necessarily xactly on the beat — then it all makes musical sense, it all GELS — and the resulting jelly is a xhilarating, mind-opening xperience 4 both the players and the audience.
How is a machine ever going 2 b able 2 recreate that? The best effect that a drum machine, playing uni4mly, xactly, directly on the beat can hope 2 have on the listener is some kind of numbing effect, some 4m of HYPNOSIS that doesn’t require awareness, but surrender.
This hypnotic value, in itself, can of course b used, on occasion, 2 convey some sort of “message” or 2 evoke some specific kind of mood. Also, skilled drummers with their own xisting mastery of the instrument might find ways 2 complement their drumming thru clever, innovative use of drum machines.
However, when computerized music machines r used — like they r in most cases these days — as a substitute 4 the real thing, then they can’t really hope 2 b much more than an ERSATZ, a desperately dull imitation. In the sadly very real world of “virtual” music, instead of being an instrument, instead of just being a vehicle 2 xpress the creativity of the musician, the computer is quickly becoming the musician itself. When all it takes 2 “play” a song is 2 just press a button once and then listen 2 the machine play and sing the entire song 4 u, can it really still b called art? When one single half-baked, half-original musical idea is stretched through endless, repetitive looping over 5 boring minutes, is it still really a song?
R scientists still know very little about how r brains operate, but we wouldn’t b surprised if science one day demonstrated that live instrument playing and musical machines affect 2 completely different areas of the mind. Intuitively, we would say that machines pretty much shut down what live instruments manage 2 open, that is, the part of r selves that can b TOUCHED, that can b MOVED — in other words, r HEARTS and SOULS.

Tainted Water

The drumming machine is a perfect xample of what the computer will never even come close 2 recreating — let alone actually CREATING. We have no doubt that further technical “improvements” will enable the people using those machines 2 achieve a seemingly more accurate imitation of the real thing, but it is and will remain an imitation.
And it makes perfect sense, really.
Most machines r created by engineers, not by artists. Engineers can spend all their lives trying 2 get their machines 2 reproduce what they think is human thought or creativity as closely as possible — without ever asking themselves WHY on earth they would even want 2 achieve a thing. It’s silly, no?
And most machines r used by merchants, not artists. Which brings us 2 another point. By the time u get 2 hear a certain piece of music on the air, it has already gone thru half a dozen MATRIXES:
  • the artist
  • the manager
  • the record company
  • the visual medium (what song would make a good video)
  • the program director
  • and the DJ (who says whether or not he likes the song)
As u can c, when a program director says, “I can play whatever I want,” he means 2 say, “I can play whatever I choose from what I am GIVEN.” And what he is given is something that has already gone thru a xtensive selection process that has little 2 do with music.
The worst matrix of all is the artists themselves, un4tunately, becuz most let all the other matrixes have a pernicious influence on them and their “artistic choices.”
The end result is that, by the time the water finally reaches us, it’s so dirty that we gag.
The problem with machines is that they r, here again, used 2 make the matrixes even more “efficient.” Where, in the past, an artist could still faintly hope 2 find, by chance, a human ear able 2 abstract itself from all that jive and let its instinct speak — now we have machines crunching numbers and spitting out “market surveys” and “profit estimates.” Everything is becoming more and more computer-assisted, automated, and the real victims r the artists, with their quickly disappearing freedom of thought, freedom of choice.

The Greatest?

Lest we 4get, the music lover himself is caught in his own web of matrixes. From the record stores at which he is able 2 shop, 2 the radio stations that r available 2 him, 2 the selection of music 2 which he is xposed thru the various media outlets 2 which he has access, 2 his own internal conflicts between what he FEELS that he likes and he THINKS that he should like, between the responsibility he has 2 compensate the artists 4 their work and his reluctance 2 give most of his money away 2 record companies which r basically xploiting the artists he likes — the music lover is faced, on his own smaller scale, with the same type of struggle that faces the artist.
And, here again, at this point in time, the computer is mostly being used 2 enhance xisting structures and make them more effective, more profitable. There is a battle going on right now, as we speak, between the obsolete structures that traditional companies and media outlets r trying 2 impose on the digital world, and the FREEDOM afforded by this same digital world 2 its individual members.
Let’s take the xample of music charts, and more specifically of those “lists” that keep popping up out of nowhere and pretend 2 classify, rate, prioritize music 4 us. “The 100 Best Albums Of All Time,” “The 100 Greatest Guitarists,” “The 100 Greatest Guitar Solos,” “The Best of The Year 2000”… We’ve seen them all, we know how meaningless they r, and yet it seems that they r becoming the automatic escape mechanism 4 uninspired journalists and “pundits” who have run out of ways 2 talk — or more specifically not talk — about music, and r desperate 2 fill their columns or the cover of their magazines b4 the next deadline.
Does any music lover actually recognize themselves in those lists? We have nothing against people xpressing their own personal preferences… But they should at the very least b presented as such. Instead, the compilers of those lists claim 2 have consulted “music xperts,” 2 have conducted scientific polls among artists and 2 have established the ultimate, definitive, undisputable truth… until next month’s list, of course.
Revolver better than Songs In The Key Of Life? “Taxman,” “Yellow Submarine” and “Doctor Robert” better than “Love’s In Need Of Love Today,” “I Wish” and “Pastime Paradise”? If u could ask Paul McCartney, what do u think he would answer?
It’s a real competition out there. Each web site needs 2 have its own “Best Of,” or so it seems. Soon enough, we will get computer-generated lists: “Based on comprehensive scientific analysis of the digitally sampled sound waves of 10,000 recordings, our supercomputer has established that the Beatles were indeed better than the Rolling Stones and that the 100 Best Albums Of All Time are…”
Here again, instead of being put 2 good use, the computer, the Internet r merely used 2 amplify, 2 worsen an xisting source of wasted talk. It would b easy 2 just ignore the proliferation of such lists, if they didn’t play such a part in perpetuating the status quo that empowers the producers and the customers 2 the detriment of the artists and the music lovers.
It would be easy 2 ignore such lists if they were not such a typical symptom of the widespread tendency 2 avoid discussing the REAL ISSUES.

The Real ?s

Indeed, as every1 can c, music is fast becoming a prime xample of the fundamental issues that r “digital world” is raising — issues such as:
Where is the soul in a computer-induced world?
If the world we create is driven by computers, where do we live?
Can true artistic talent still survive against this mass of pseudo-art?
Will those who use the computer survive against those who let it use them?
Can and will true art live on?
Is true art still feasible, still realistic in 2day’s mind-numbing, computer-aided digital haze?
U b the judge.

From Bad 2 Worse

Computers rn’t bad in themselves, of course. It’s just that they r 2 often used by the xisting system 2 make everything that’s already bad even worse. Computers calculating what would please us. Computers guessing what we want. Y do we ever need 2 b TOLD what we want? Y do we ever buy music based on what we r told rather than what we HEAR? No one seems 2 dare 2 take the time 2 xplore music at his/her own pace. Let the computer do the xploring 4 u and find something “new” 4 u. Fast food fries indeed.
Real music by real artists 4 real music lovers is being relegated 2 the margins. Those margins might b somewhat stronger thanks 2 some of those new technologies (such as digital distribution), but they r still margins — and there is little sign of a 4thcoming, wide-ranging revolution that would really reverse the balance.
The NPG proposes 2 reverse the trend. NPG Online Ltd. wants u 2 use ur computer 2 make a difference. R site eliminates the matrixes. Xplore the music. Choose ur way. Let others b used. Tell us what u want. Say goodbye 2 the hype. Open ur mind. FEEL the music.

Like Prince once said, "The war will go on and on! You best leave now!" Is it the microchip in your neck? Is it a brave, new world? The choice is yours! Wake up, children! Dance the dance electric and Free Urself! 

So now the question remains, do you take the red pill or do you take the blue pill? 



Wednesday, November 30, 2016

Showing off an advanced degree in Musicology, Jared Grant delivers an amazing acapella version of the Prince title track.

So, what did you think? Did he graduate with honors? I think so and I think Prince would have loved this version and would have loved this young man's talent!!


Wednesday, July 6, 2016

Free Ur Mind From This Rat Race

Glam Slam
Free your mind from this rat race
Glam Slam
Escape!

Pop quiz time! How do you get 46,000 people to forward an article that amounts to nothing more than gibberish? You give it a sensational headline. After all, most people don't read anything more than the headline before forwarding anything on to the masses. That's how the true thieves in the temple get to us. They know it's like herding sheep blindly through a fantasy. Because few people question what they read anymore. It's all clickbait for the rat race and its time we escaped. Now that I have thoroughly confused you, let me explain exactly what I am talking about here.

It seems that the satirical news site Science Post wanted to have fun with people so they made a post on Facebook with the headline, "Study: 70% of Facebook users only read the headline of science stories before commenting." Now the text of this post was nothing more than lorem ipsum but that didn't stop more than 46,000 people from sharing the post with their friends. Now let's think about that for a minute.  First, the post is nothing but lorem ipsum.  For those of you who may not know what that is, lorem ipsum is defined as:
In publishing and graphic design, lorem ipsum is a filler text commonly used to demonstrate the graphic elements of a document or visual presentation. The lorem ipsum text is typically a scrambled section of De finibus bonorum et malorum, a 1st-century BC Latin text by Cicero, with words altered, added, and removed to make it nonsensical, improper Latin.
So, lorem ipsum basically amounts to nothing more than gibberish. Now, let's look at the post's headline, "Study: 70% of Facebook users only read the headline of science stories before commenting." According to this, 70% of the people who read this should have commented without reading the article (which they couldn't read anyway because it was gibberish). I don't know how many commented but more than 46,000 people shared it. How do you share an article that is total gibberish? I don't get it! Come on people, free your mind from this rat race!!!

Now to show you that the above incident is not a fluke. A new study by computer scientists at Columbia University with the French National Institute shows that 59% of the links that are actually shared on social media have never been clicked. Once again, herding sheep blindly through a fantasy! Wake up children! Free Urself! Almost 60% of people retweet articles without ever actually reading them? Then what's to be expected from 3-3? Absolutely nothing! The Purple Army knows what I'm talking about!  Anyway, here is part of the Chicago Tribune's article on the subject:
Worse, the study finds that these sort of blind peer-to-peer shares are really important in determining what news gets circulated and what just fades off the public radar. So your thoughtless retweets, and those of your friends, are actually shaping our shared political and cultural agendas.

"People are more willing to share an article than read it," study co-author Arnaud Legout said in a statement. "This is typical of modern information consumption. People form an opinion based on a summary, or a summary of summaries, without making the effort to go deeper."

To verify that depressing piece of conventional internet wisdom, Legout and his co-authors collected two data sets: the first, on all tweets containing Bit.ly-shortened links to five major news sources during a one-month period last summer; the second, on all of the clicks attached to that set of shortened links, as logged by Bit.ly, during the same period. After cleaning and collating that data, the researchers basically found themselves with a map to how news goes viral on Twitter.

And that map showed, pretty clearly, that "viral" news is widely shared — but not necessarily, you know, read. (I'm really only typing this sentence for 4 in 10 people in the audience.)

The researchers made a few other telling observations, as well: Most clicks to news stories, they found, were made on links shared by regular Twitter users, and not the media organization itself. The links that users clicked were much older than we generally assume — some had been published for several days, in fact

But most interesting, for our purposes, is this habit of sharing without clicking — a habit that, when you think about it, explains so much of the oft-demoralizing cesspool that is internet culture. Among the many phenomena we'd tentatively attribute, in large part, to the trend: the rise of sharebait (nee clickbait) and the general BuzzFeedification of traditional media; the internet hoax-industrial complex, which only seems to be growing stronger; and the utter lack of intelligent online discourse around any remotely complicated, controversial topic. (you can read the full article here)
So is this the colonized mind? Is this the microchip in your neck?  When will we wake up and realize that they are force-feeding us the story they want us to hear and not the truth? You can see in the study above how we propagate their lies by taking their stories viral. We base our opinion on the summary of a summary or an opinion of an opinion. We need to do the work and go deeper than that so grab your scuba gear! Ask the questions that need to be asked! Don't be afraid to find the truth! Free your mind from the rat race and FREE URSELF!

If U look, Ur sure gonna find
Throughout mankind's history
A colonized mind
The one in power makes law
Under which the colonized fall
But without God it's just the blind leading the blind

Love4OneAnother! Love4EachOther! Love4UsAll! Peace & B-Wild!

Tuesday, July 5, 2016

Retrospeculation with NPGMC

Wow, I can't believe that it's been a month since I've posted here.  So much has gone on that you would have thought I would've posted something. Anything.  But nope, not a thing.  Hmmm... well time to remedy that.  Since my last post we found out the actual cause of death for Prince but I don't want to discuss that in this post. Maybe in a later post I'll broach the subject but I am here for a specific reason. Let's see, what else has happened in the last month? Oh yeah!!! The BET Awards kept their promise and gave us a tribute worthy of his Purpleness unlike that other awards show.  Yeah, I'm talking about you Billboard and your weak @ss Madonna tribute that wouldn't have made it in a third-class karaoke bar.  But, I'm not here to talk about the BET tribute either.  No, like I said, I am here for a specific reason.  I am here to retrospeculate on the NPGMC.
First off, let me say, I know that retrospeculate is not an actual word but hey, it's my blog and I like the sound of it.  Besides, it describes what I am doing perfectly.  I'm speculating what might have happened if certain events had happened in the past in a different way.  Anyway, it's not like I invented the word.  I stole it from Prince and the NPGMC.  Track down the commentary Freedom, Pt. 2 from the 2003 version of the NPGMC and you will see Prince used it first. So there!!! Oh lawd, I sound like I'm in third grade! Once again I digress. Or maybe I regressed in my digression? Huh? Okay, forget all that noise and let's get on with this retrospeculation thang!
So, on February 14, 2001, the world (at least all the Purple Party People and True Funk Soldiers) was introduced to the first version of the New Power Generation Music Club.  It was basically a download manager/media player that gave you access to various media made available by the club. Looking back at that first incarnation, I'm astounded I actually joined.  It was pretty lame but then again, by 2001 standards.... hell, who am I kidding.  It was Prince's website! I was joining! And join I did.  I was a loyal member of the NPGMC until it closed in 2006.  I bought the music, the merchandise and the tickets.  Especially the tickets.  Afterall, members got the best seats, didn't we? I know when I got my Musiclology 2004ever tickets through the club, I was on the front row.  That is a show I will never forget!!!! So yeah, I'm like sailing along doing the whole club member thing like a good little soldier when 2006 rolls around and POOF!!!!! It was gone!!! (Side note: I think this is first time I have ever typed the word poof, much less used it on a blog post! So don't judge me! Now back to my regularly scheduled rambling.) But what if that hadn't happened? What if Prince had kept the club open and not lost interest in it like so many of his other projects?

Would we have gotten  more music through the club than we did in real life? Maybe a few more live videos? How about a concert snippet or two from the 21 Nights in London concerts? Or maybe a live album from the 3121 residency in Las Vegas? I know, we could have gotten a concert video, a la Lovesexy Live, of the Welcome 2 America tour! Yeah, he could have released 3121 and Lotusflower through the club and...and...uh...hmmm....wait a minute. So in this alternate timeline that I am retrospeculating on, Prince hasn't lost interest in the NPGMC so he may not have come up with 3121.  There may not have been a Lotusflower for him to release.  His journey would have been greatly altered and may not have even crossed the path of...say....Welcome 2 America or Welcome 2 anything for that matter.  It's that whole Butterfly Effect theory playing out in my purple universe! Instead of Schrodinger's Cat, I have created Schrodinger's Purple Yoda! Oh wow, I think I have officially lost it now.  
I guess this has made me realize that it was probably a good thing that the NPGMC closed down when it did since he moved on to so many other things that are essential in the Purpleverse (that's the Purple Universe. Get it? Of course you do. Why am I explaining things to you? You are obviously all very intelligent since you listen to Prince. But not too smart if you actually read this stuff. LOL!). Wait...there I go with the regressing digression again! Let me try to wrap this up since I have rambled a lot longer than I meant to when I started.  
Yesterday, princeonlinemuseum.com went live and they offer a virtual walk-through of Prince's various websites from over the years.  The site is run by the same people that brought us these sites to begin with and are a great document to Prince's large on-line presence over the years.  If you get the chance, I strongly recommend you visit the site and take a cyberstroll down random access memory lane. I spent hours reading the various commentaries Prince wrote that were posted on the different sites. Matter of fact, I will probably write a post or three at a later date about some of the articles he wrote and posted.  But while reading all the stuff he posted on the NPGMC, I started to wonder what it would have been like if the club was still around. And that's how we ended up here...wherever here is.  Just kidding, I know where here is....it's in the opposite direction from there. What??? Nevermind. Just ignore the man behind the curtain who may be a little senile and sleep deprived. Now, quit reading and head over to princeonlinemuseum.com and remember the Days of Wild!