News

Society

Science

Health

Culture

Subscribe

Prince broke a borrowed guitar with a wild onstage toss in 2013. But the story ended well.

“I went through some complicated emotions,” said The Roots’ “Captain” Kirk Douglas

By

Ryan Reed

By  Ryan Reed
Add to Google News
guitar, prince, the roots, captain kirk douglas, guitar smashing
Photo credit: Julio Enriquez via Wikimedia Commons, Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic, cropped (left) / Micahmedia via Wikimedia Commons, Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0, cropped (right) – In 2013, Prince borrowed someone's guitar—and then smashed it on 'Late Night with Jimmy Fallon.'

When Prince took the stage, anything was possible—from feral, shirtless screaming to hall-of-fame guitar solos to the kind of destructive rock-star showmanship that few others would be willing to attempt. One of his signature moves was throwing his instrument—sometimes into the air, where, on one memorable occasion, it seemed to vanish completely; other times over to a technician waiting in the wings. Many of these guitars—including his “Cloud” axe, built by Dave Russan—suffered a fair amount of abuse. “He would always throw them to the roadie at the end of the show, and they weren’t always caught, so they’d have to be repaired often,” Russan told Alternative Nation. “They were hard rock maple but couldn’t always stand up to that.”

But that was Prince’s gear. Not the case in a case from 2013, when The Artist performed on Late Night with Jimmy Fallon, having borrowed a guitar from “Captain” Kirk Douglas of house band The Roots. The wild promotional spot ended with a bold toss, a broken instrument, and a supremely bummed-out musician. But the story is even weirder than you might expect, and it led to a surprisingly happy ending.

Prince destroys—in more ways than one

[vimeo https://vimeo.com/254237430 expand=1 site_id=26881454]

On taping day, Prince’s team had forgotten to bring his requested six-string, and Douglas—a huge fan of the rock/funk chameleon—was more than cool with sharing his own, a beloved 1961 Epiphone Crestwood. In fact, it’s almost like the stars had aligned: “The crazy thing is the only reason that guitar was in 30 Rock [home of NBC Studios, where the show was taped] was because I was rehearsing for a Prince tribute at Carnegie Hall this week,” Douglas later tweeted.

The performance itself is pure electricity. Joined by his back gin band 3rdEyeGirl, Prince brought a majestic psych-funk energy to 1979’s “Bambi,” concluding with a wah-wah-heavy solo on the Crestwood. Afterward, he tossed the guitar into the heavens and confidently stomped backstage as it crashed to the floor, spurting feedback through the room. A giggling Fallon walked up to plug Prince’s latest single, and the camera briefly cut over to The Roots, including a somewhat confused-looking Douglas, as they played the show’s theme song.

“Completely crestfallen”

“And at the end of the song, he lifts the guitar up, and I think he’s about to play behind his head, but he’s not playing behind his head,” Douglas reflected in a 2020 video on The Roots’ YouTube channel. “He lifts the guitar up and throws it in the air, and it comes crashing down to the ground, and it’s squealing in feedback. And he just struts off the stage. I was completely crestfallen, and I knew that there were cameras on me, and I knew there was nothing I could do about it, and I just had to sit there and be in it. I remember looking to my right, and Mark Kelley, our bass player, was laughing hysterically.”

Naturally, Douglas was devastated—at least at first. “I went through some complicated emotions in that very moment,” he recalled to Consequence of Sound in 2019. “Initially it was kind of negative. After it happened, I had my guitar in pieces. I went to Prince, and I was like, ‘Hey, you broke the guitar. If you don’t mind, could you sign it at least?’ And he was like, ‘Oh, I haven’t signed anything since the ’70s.’” After assessing the immediate damage, he tweeted a photo of the guitar with the caption, “Purple Pain…Maybe it’s because I’m a dad,” he added, “but I think framing the guitar is a little like rewarding bad behavior.”

Silver linings

Prince eventually apologized for the ill-fated toss and arranged to have the guitar fixed. Plus, there were multiple silver linings to the heartbreak. As the guitarist told CoS, he wound up connecting with other music heroes, including Jackson Browne and Elvis Costello. And through conversations elsewhere (including one with Chris Rock), he realized he wasn’t the only one with a bizarre Prince story: “I feel like I’m part of this club of people who’ve been wronged by him,” he said. “For all I know, he could have just even known, in all of his genius, like, ‘Watch, I’m gonna hook this kid up. I’m gonna break his guitar so he can have this story and talk about it for the rest of his life.’ If that was his thought, he would not be wrong about that.”

He even ended up writing a song about it: “Little Friend,” which he released on his debut solo album, 2019’s Turbulent Times. “‘[It] was actually composed on the guitar I purchased with the money left over from the repair of the guitar he actually broke,” he told Rolling Stone. “I recorded the song with the Crestwood. The lyric comes from the emotion of the moment of that time where I was upset, but in retrospect it’s one of the coolest things that has ever happened to me. He’s probably looking down, saying, ‘I made your old-ass guitar way more interesting, paid you for your troubles, and gave you something cool to write about…You’re welcome.”

In the Roots YouTube video, Douglas rightly called the tale “one of the greatest guitar stories ever told,” noting that the instrument had since been displayed at the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame’s as part of the “Plat It Loud” exhibit. “That guitar is bigger than me,” he said. “But I’m so happy to have played a part in what’s now widely regarded as rock and roll history.”

Add to Google News

Tags

advertisement

More for You

  • Italian man claims to be ‘human cheetah’ with lightning-fast reflexes
    Photo credit: Canva – A man with fast reflexes.
    ,

    Italian man claims to be ‘human cheetah’ with lightning-fast reflexes

    “I blinked and I missed it”

    Mark Wales

    At first glance, this probably looks like a camera trick. Ken Lee, an Italian content creator, has built a massive online following by doing something that doesn’t quite feel real. Viewers refer to him as the “human cheetah” because it appears he has near-instant reflexes.

    Grabbing objects out of the air with uncanny precision, flicking clothespins and lighters, and throwing a blur of punches and kicks at impossible speeds, it is easy to call him unbelievable. Half the audience thinks his viral speed videos are fake. The other half is just as convinced they are watching something incredibly rare.

    @kenleefastestman

    KAIOKEN DELL’UNIVERSO!🐉😱 PER VOI DIVENTO LUCE!!!💥(Super Saiyan 11° livello!💫) #kenlee🐉 #kenshirorealstar💥 #kaioken #universe #animeman #live #supersaiyan #ultrainstinct #maivisto #manga #dragonball #fastest #saitama #brucelee #goku #funny #divertente #comic

    ♬ suono originale – Ken Lee👽⚡

    Hands so fast they blur time

    In the video above, a timer runs to confirm its authenticity. In what looks like half a second, he reaches out and snags the lighter from the table. To prove it is real, he does it twice.

    Having amassed millions of followers on his TikTok page, the identity behind the mysterious influencer remains largely unknown. Active since around 2022, with almost 100 million accumulated likes, Lee has cultivated a fandom around his self-proclaimed “Superhero per Hobby!”

    Do you believe it is real? Is this person the fastest human alive? Many followers cannot wait for the next video to be posted. Plenty of his fervent fans are Italian, so sifting through the remarks takes a bit of hunting. Here are some comments that sum up how much people enjoy the fun and the spectacle:

    “Ken lee the fastest and the best”

    “Most dangerous human”

    “Is this what the lighter sees before my homie steals it”

    “It was sped up during he grabbed the lighter, if u count up with the timer u would be off by like 0,5 seconds whenever he grabs the lighter.”

    “If the flash were human”

    “How is it possible to get such powers ?”

    “I blinked and I missed it”

    @kenleefastestman

    AIR OF THE DRAGON! 🐉😱 #kenlee🐉 #kenshirorealstar💥 #animeman #over100000 #ultrainstinct #over100000 #saitama #goku #brucelee #speedoflight⚡ #manga #cartoon #fastest #flash #velocita #sport #impossible #lighters #world #record #real #speed

    ♬ suono originale – Ken Lee👽⚡

    People love good entertainment

    The awe of peak performance attracts people to watch elite athletes, musicians, or even dancers. There is something that deeply satisfies all of us when a human appears to push a skill to its limit. Whether it is real or fake seems to matter less than the opportunity to chime in on some good entertainment.

    How far could any of us go by practicing and repeating a particular motion over and over until it is mastered? Beneath the flashy nickname and his viral speed videos, Lee’s content has a way of drawing people in. This is not a superpower. Just repetition. Focus. Obsession. And maybe some digital wizardry.

    @kenleefastestman

    KEN LEE💫THE NEW SUPERHERO! 👽⚡️🌎🐉#kenleespeed👽⚡ #fastestmanalive⚡️ #speedoflight #worldspeed🌎 #superhero

    ♬ audio originale – Ken Lee👽⚡

    Testing the science of speed

    If you wish to question the validity of Lee’s performances, maybe some basic science can help. Human reaction time is not just a reflex. A 2024 study found that the nervous system can fine-tune responses in real time. Practice can make movements appear almost automatic.

    It has been well established in research that the gap between seeing something and responding has a limit. A 2025 study concluded that the most elite extremes allow for reaction times of 100 milliseconds. At that speed, the human brain can barely process that something has happened.

    Science explains Lee is not necessarily moving as fast as we might perceive him to be. And therein lies all the fun of it. We cannot prove it is real, nor can we actually prove that it is fake.

    Maybe Lee is the “fastest man alive” or the so-called “human cheetah.” Or maybe he is just a remarkable entertainer. Either way, he has clearly tapped into something strange and fascinating: a blend of human ability and fantasy that people do not want to miss.

    To give context to Lee’s videos, watch this performance on Tú Sí Que Vales:

    Keep Reading →
  • Despite all the likes, literallys and dropped g’s, English isn’t decaying before our eyes
    Photo credit: LisaStrachan/iStock via Getty Images – Fear not: There isn’t anything that needs saving.
    ,

    Despite all the likes, literallys and dropped g’s, English isn’t decaying before our eyes

    Why “bad” English is nothing new.

    Good Partner

    Valerie M. Fridland

    Valerie M. Fridland

    As a linguistics professor, I’m often asked why English is decaying before our eyes, whether it’s “like” being used promiscuously, t’s being dropped deleteriously or “literally” being deployed nonliterally.

    While these common gripes point to eccentric speech patterns, they don’t point to grammatical annihilation. English has weathered far worse.

    Let’s start with something we can all agree on: Old English, spoken from approximately A.D. 450 to 1100, is pretty unintelligible to us today. Anyone who’s had the pleasure of reading “Beowulf” in high school knows how different English back then used to sound. Word endings did a lot more grammatical work, and verbs followed more complicated patterns. Remnants of those rules fuel lingering debates today, such as when to use “whom” over “who,” and whether the past tense of “sneak” is “snuck” or “sneaked.”

    The language went on to experience centuries of tumult: Viking invasions, which introduced Old Norse influence; Anglo-Norman French rule, which shifted the language of the elite to French; and 18th-Century grammarians, who dictated norms with their elocution and grammar guides.

    In that time, English has lost almost all of the more complex linguistic trappings it was born with to become the language we know and – at least, sometimes – love today. And as I explain in my new book, “Why We Talk Funny: The Real Story Behind Our Accents,” it was all thanks to the way that language naturally evolves to meet the social needs of its speakers.

    From dropping the ‘l’ to dropping the ‘g’

    The things we tend to label as “bad” or sloppy English – for instance, the “g” that gets lost from our -ing endings or the deletion of a “t” when we say a word like “innernet” – actually reflect speech habits that are centuries old.

    Take, for example, “often.” Originally spoken with the “t,” that pronunciation gradually became less favored around the 15th century, alongside that “l” in “talk” and the “k” in know. Meanwhile, the “s” now stuck on the back of verbs like “does” and “makes” began as a dialectal variant that only became popular in 16th-century London. It gradually replaced “th” whenever third persons were involved, as in “The lady doth protest too much.”

    While dropping the “l” in talk may have been initially frowned upon, today it would be strange if you pronounced the letter. And the shift makes sense: It smoothed out some linguistic awkwardness for the sake of efficiency.

    If people learned to look at language more like linguists, they might come around to seeing that there is more than one perspective on what good speech consists of.

    And yes, that absolutely is a sentence ending with a preposition – something many modern grammar guides discourage, even though the idea only took hold after 18th-century grammarian Robert Lowth intimated it was a less elegant choice based on the model of Latin.

    Though Lowth voiced no hard and fast rule against it, many a grammar maven later misconstrued his advice as an admonition. Just like that, a mere suggestion became grammatical law.

    The rise of the grammar sticklers

    Many of today’s ideas about what constitutes correct English are based on a singular – often mistaken – 19th-century view of the forces that govern our language.

    In the late 18th century, the English-speaking world began experiencing class restructuring and higher literacy rates. As greater class mobility became possible, accent differences became class markers that separated new money from old money.

    Emulation of upper-crust speech norms became popular among the nouveau riche. With literacy also on the rise, grammarians and elocutionists raced to dictate the terms of “proper” English on and off the page, which led to the rise of usage guides and dictionaries that were eager to sell a certain brand of speech.

    Another example of grammarian angst reconfiguring the view of an otherwise perfectly fine form is the droppin’ of the “g.” It became so tied to slovenly speech that it was branded with an apostrophe in the 19th century to make sure no one missed its lackadaisical and nonstandard nature.

    Up until the 19th century, however, no one seemed to care whether one pronounced it as “-in” or “-ing.”

    Evidence suggests that -ing wasn’t even heard as the correct form. Many elocution guides from the 18th century provide rhyming word pairs like “herring/heron,” “coughing/coffin” and “jerking/jerkin,” which suggest that “-in” may have been the preferred pronunciation of words ending with “-ing.” Even writer and satirist Jonathan Swift – a frequent lobbyist for “proper” English – rhymes “brewing” with “ruin” in his 1731 poem “Verses on the Death of Dr. Swift, D.S.P.D..”

    Embrace the change

    Language has always shifted and evolved. People often bristle at changes from what they’ve known to what is new. And maybe that’s because this process often begins with speakers that society usually looks less favorably on: the young, the female, the poor, the nonwhite.

    But it’s important to remember that being disliked and bad are not the same thing – that today’s speech pariahs are driven by the same linguistic and social needs as the Londoners who started going with “does” instead of “doth” or dropped the “t” in often.

    So if you think the speech that comes from your lips is the “correct” version, think again. Thou, like every other English speaker, art literally the product of centuries of linguistic reinvention.

    This article originally appeared on The Conversation. You can read it here.

    Keep Reading →
  • 10 boys and 10 girls were left alone in separate houses and the different results are just wild
    Photo credit: Ian Taylor Photographer – Two young children play in the grass.
    ,

    10 boys and 10 girls were left alone in separate houses and the different results are just wild

    The premise was simple but high stakes.

    Adam Albright Hanna

    GOOD Staff

    It sounds like the plot of William Golding’s Lord of the Flies. However, in the mid-2000s, it was a very real and very controversial reality television experiment.

    Footage from the UK Channel 4 documentary Boys and Girls Alone is captivating audiences all over again. It offers a fascinating and chaotic look at what happens when you remove parents from the equation.

    The premise was simple but high stakes. Twenty children, aged 11 and 12, were split into two groups by gender. Ten boys and ten girls were placed in separate houses and told to live without adult supervision for five days.

    The Setup

    While there were safety nets in place, the day-to-day living was entirely up to the kids. A camera crew was present but instructed not to intervene unless safety was at risk. The children could also ring a bell to speak to a nurse or psychiatrist.

    The houses were fully stocked with food, cleaning supplies, toys, and paints. Everything they needed to survive was there. They just had to figure out how to use it.

    The Boys: Instant Chaos

    In the boys’ house, the unraveling was almost immediate. The newfound freedom triggered a rapid descent into high-energy anarchy.

    They engaged in water pistol fights and threw cushions. In one memorable instance, a boy named Michael covered the carpet in sticky popcorn kernels just because he could.

    The destruction eventually escalated to the walls. The boys covered the house in writing, drawing, and paint. But the euphoria of freedom eventually crashed into the reality of consequences.

    “We never expected to be like this, but I’m really upset that we trashed it so badly,” one boy admitted in the footage. “We were trying to explore everything at once and got too carried away in ourselves.”

    Their attempts to clean up were frantic and largely ineffective. Nutrition also took a hit. Despite having completed a cooking course, the boys survived mostly on cereal, sugar, and the occasional frozen pizza. By the end of the week, the house was trashed, and the group had fractured into opposing factions.

    The Girls: Organized Society

    The girls’ house looked like a different planet.

    In stark contrast to the mayhem next door, the girls immediately established a functioning society. They organized a cooking roster, with a girl named Sherry preparing their first meal. They baked cakes. They put on a fashion show. They even drew up a scrupulous chores list to ensure the house stayed livable.

    While their stay wasn’t devoid of interpersonal drama, the experiment highlighted a fascinating divergence in socialization. Left to their own devices, the girls prioritized community and maintenance. The boys tested the absolute limits of their environment until it broke.

    The documentary was controversial when it aired, with critics questioning the ethics of placing children in unsupervised situations for entertainment. But what made it so enduring, and why footage keeps resurfacing years later, is what it reveals about how kids are socialized long before anyone puts them in a house together. The boys weren’t born anarchists and the girls weren’t born organizers. They arrived at those houses already shaped by years of being told, implicitly and explicitly, what boys do and what girls do. Whether that’s a nature story or a nurture story is the question the documentary keeps asking without quite answering, which is probably why people are still watching and arguing about it nearly two decades later.

    This article originally appeared two years ago. It has been updated.

    Keep Reading →

advertisement

friendship, tap out, military, graduation, TikTok, family, community
Public Good

Air Force graduate tears up when friend steps in to ‘tap him out’ during graduation

Two persons applying sunscreen while sitting on a beach.
Well-being

59% of Americans worry about sunscreen chemicals. Only 32% understand how sunscreen works.

A view of the San Antonio River walkway in San Antonio, Texas.
Everyday Economics

The salary you need to live comfortably in 100 US cities

Teens contribute in ways that go far beyond organized volunteering.
Society

Teens aren’t as disengaged as you may think: What adults get wrong about adolescents’ civic contributions

Watching how dogs approach life can provide lessons for leaders.
Work

Dogs display many traits of great leaders − here are 5 breeds that can be your leadership role models

Sign Up for the Daily Good!

Advertisement

Explore More Culture Stories

See All
TikTok, influencer, fastest man alive, con artist, speed, world record, reflexes
Internet

Italian man claims to be ‘human cheetah’ with lightning-fast reflexes

Mark Wales
Fear not: There isn’t anything that needs saving.
Culture

Despite all the likes, literallys and dropped g’s, English isn’t decaying before our eyes

Good Partner
Boys and Girls Alone, child psychology, gender differences, social experiment, reality TV
Culture

10 boys and 10 girls were left alone in separate houses and the different results are just wild

Adam Albright Hanna & GOOD Staff
Steph Curry, girls in sports, gender equity, Under Armour, youth advocacy
Media

9-year-old girl asks Steph Curry why his shoes aren’t in girls’ sizes. The response was perfect.

GOOD Staff & Adam Albright-Hanna