Prince's Sign O' the Times (Thirty Three and a Third series)

Rating:
Summary: "Like Pac-Man eating one on-the-beat pellet after another"?
Review: I admire Matos' love of this Prince album, although I question his ability to express it. In these 33.1/3 series, Matos' book cannot stand up to the superior Neil Young Harvest book, but it does surpass the Smiths-Meat Is Murder and Kinks-Village Green books. In fact, what I hate most about the Smiths-Meat book -- namely, how engrossed it is in personal recollection, talking more about the author and less about the music's place -- is something Matos does fairly well. Chapter One of this Prince book gives us the setting for Matos' discovery of the album (13 years old? -- can't we get folks to write about these albums they discovered when they were a bit more mature?) and in doing so, conjures up the late 80s quite well. The author's "place" in the album's musical history does not overshadow the album, thankfully.

Given that Prince hardly speaks to the press, Matos has done a fairly good job assembling material to talk about Prince and this great album. It's not as good as the 33.1/3 Young-Harvest book, but it does a fairly good job providing the context for "Times" and helping us see the album in a new light. (Sometimes this context is all too-Matos-personal.) The voice of the book at times wavers from a personal tone, to a historical tone, to a comparative-contextual one. Is this editorial pressure, or a lack of it? Although I can forgive the wavering tone of the book, I cannot forgive Matos' imprecise wording (like the quote from my review title). I found myself lost: what does the adjective "Camille" mean?

All of these stylistic inconsistencies detracted from what should be the main point of the book: to get you to listen to the record and hear it in a fresh way. Although some of Matos' explications of the songs are good (Housequake, Sign, Cross, Hot Thing/It), others are not (If..Girlfriend, Adore, Strange Relationship). At times, his criticism becomes too murky. Matos is good when he is retroactively contextualizing the songs with the 87/88 music scene (George Michael, Janet Jackson, hip-hop). His writing is less helpful when he adds his too personal metaphors as his sole aid in explaining the songs (although I loved his take on Starfish.)

Overall, it's a nicely condensed retrospective look back on Prince. The author's lack of bias against Prince's 90s material is refreshing and helpful. I wish 33.1/3 had gotten him to write about "Emancipation". "Sign" is not a perfect album, but for all it's quirks, it's an interesting album. One could say the same for Matos' book.

Rating:
Summary: "Like Pac-Man eating one on-the-beat pellet after another"?
Review: I admire Matos' love of this Prince album, although I question his ability to express it. In these 33.1/3 series, Matos' book cannot stand up to the superior Neil Young Harvest book, but it does surpass the Smiths-Meat Is Murder and Kinks-Village Green books. In fact, what I hate most about the Smiths-Meat book -- namely, how engrossed it is in personal recollection, talking more about the author and less about the music's place -- is something Matos does fairly well. Chapter One of this Prince book gives us the setting for Matos' discovery of the album (13 years old? -- can't we get folks to write about these albums they discovered when they were a bit more mature?) and in doing so, conjures up the late 80s quite well. The author's "place" in the album's musical history does not overshadow the album, thankfully.

Given that Prince hardly speaks to the press, Matos has done a fairly good job assembling material to talk about Prince and this great album. It's not as good as the 33.1/3 Young-Harvest book, but it does a fairly good job providing the context for "Times" and helping us see the album in a new light. (Sometimes this context is all too-Matos-personal.) The voice of the book at times wavers from a personal tone, to a historical tone, to a comparative-contextual one. Is this editorial pressure, or a lack of it? Although I can forgive the wavering tone of the book, I cannot forgive Matos' imprecise wording (like the quote from my review title). I found myself lost: what does the adjective "Camille" mean?

All of these stylistic inconsistencies detracted from what should be the main point of the book: to get you to listen to the record and hear it in a fresh way. Although some of Matos' explications of the songs are good (Housequake, Sign, Cross, Hot Thing/It), others are not (If..Girlfriend, Adore, Strange Relationship). At times, his criticism becomes too murky. Matos is good when he is retroactively contextualizing the songs with the 87/88 music scene (George Michael, Janet Jackson, hip-hop). His writing is less helpful when he adds his too personal metaphors as his sole aid in explaining the songs (although I loved his take on Starfish.)

Overall, it's a nicely condensed retrospective look back on Prince. The author's lack of bias against Prince's 90s material is refreshing and helpful. I wish 33.1/3 had gotten him to write about "Emancipation". "Sign" is not a perfect album, but for all it's quirks, it's an interesting album. One could say the same for Matos' book.

Rating:
Summary: You've GOT to be kidding me
Review: I read one other book in this series, the Kinks "Village Green", and it was a great little read. Lots of great information on the making of the album as well as good analysis of the content.

I bring this up because I don't want to sound disparaging about the whole series. THIS book is a rambling reminiscence of the authors teenage years when he first discovered Prince. WHY would I want to read this?? I was a kid when I got into Prince too, about the same age as this author. I wouldn't subject the public to my boring little anecdotes, much less CHARGE them for it. This book doesn't actually examine the Sign o' the Times album. Most of it focuses squarely on what kind of life the writer was leading when he bought the album. Who cares? I'm sure the dude has family and friends that are very interested in what he was like as a teenager, but that's not what I got the book for.

I found out the dude is in Seattle, which is where I live. Hopefully I never encounter him, or I will demand my ten bucks back. He writes for a highly liberal-biased junk paper called "Seattle Weekly", which is available for free every week but isn't worth the time.

Rating:
Summary: You've GOT to be kidding me
Review: I read one other book in this series, the Kinks "Village Green", and it was a great little read. Lots of great information on the making of the album as well as good analysis of the content.

I bring this up because I don't want to sound disparaging about the whole series. THIS book is a rambling reminiscence of the authors teenage years when he first discovered Prince. WHY would I want to read this?? I was a kid when I got into Prince too, about the same age as this author. I wouldn't subject the public to my boring little anecdotes, much less CHARGE them for it. This book doesn't actually examine the Sign o' the Times album. Most of it focuses squarely on what kind of life the writer was leading when he bought the album. Who cares? I'm sure the dude has family and friends that are very interested in what he was like as a teenager, but that's not what I got the book for.

I found out the dude is in Seattle, which is where I live. Hopefully I never encounter him, or I will demand my ten bucks back. He writes for a highly liberal-biased junk paper called "Seattle Weekly", which is available for free every week but isn't worth the time.

Rating:
Summary: HATED THIS BOOK
Review: I was really excited to get my hands on this book because I am a REALLY BIG Prince fan, and it turned out to be one of the most dissapointing things I have ever read about Prince. The person who wrote this book, Michelangelo Matos, did a really bad job, he messed up some of the facts in the book and a lot of it is written in a way that is snobby, like he is trying to be extra smart but you can tell he really isn't. And also, the author writes more about himself in the book then Prince, like I care about Michelangelo's life! I wanted to read more about Prince and more about what went into this album but there wasn't enough of that and the way the songs are described is kind of stupid. It doesn't make me understand Prince or the album any more. I think Michelangelo Matos wrote this book to try to impress his friends, not to actually write a good, interesting books for Prince fans. That's just my opinion.

Rating:
Summary: Where's the research?
Review: I'm gonna keep this short and sweet. This book lacks anything in
regards to research. As the previous reviews have pointed out, I
really didn't expect this book to be about the author and what he
was doing at the time of "Sign of the Times" release. I wasn't
very happy. And while I'm at it, I'd like to quickly educate one
of the previous reviewers on this book: Robert D. Johnson. He said
he was "just getting into Prince" Where have you been the last 20+
years or so? And did you actually say one of Prince's parents was
white? Your research is worse than the author of this book. Just
to set the record straight, the Nelson family is all black. Oh, in case you didn't know, that's Prince's real last name... You have
alot to learn my friend... Michael

Rating:
Summary: False Advertising
Review: I'm just getting into Prince and so far it's proved to be a difficult experience in many ways. I bought Sign and wanted to learn more so I did what I always do and got on the internet. Where I quickly learned it's nearly impossible to find any illuminating content on his work such as interviews, making ofs, etc., or even any prince content period, because he's crushed, nazi-like, any attempts by fans to put it up on the web, which is intended to make you pay a monthly subscription fee to his site (which I find annoying. I don't mind paying for music, but interviews??) But I gave in and figured if I want to read about Prince I'm going to have to pay for it.
Unfortunately, this book was just another frustrating Prince experience. It claims to be the story of how Prince made a great album and more. IT IS NOT the story of how Prince made Sign O the Times. This is a music journalist riffing on how much he likes this album with way too much autobiography. No offense, but I didn't buy a book about Prince to read about some music journalist's childhood. To give you an idea: The book is short, 120 pages. I started to get antsy when 20 pages in (1/6 of the book) the author was still talking about his childhood. I started to get mad when 60 pages in (1/2 way) he hadn't even begun discussing Sign O' The Times propererly.
There are many annoying things about this book. The fact that it isn't what it claims to be. The hopelessly unedgy muso-journalist tone that you're likely to find in publications like Rolling Stone that makes you feel that all music is somehow cheesy. The fact that he keeps calling Prince black even though one of Prince's parents is white and one is black (which would mean it would make just as much sense to call him white).
If you're looking for something mildly approaching researched, this is not the book for you. The amount of inside info contained in this book approaches non-existence. This is a fan's musings. If you're like me, you supply your own images and contexts for good music. If you would be interested in somebody else's, you might like this.

Rating:
Summary: AWFUL
Review: Let me say that I also read a couple of the other books in this series (the ones on the Kinks, Neil Young, and Joy Division), and being a big Prince fan I thought I would get a similarly interesting, well-written, well-researched examination of "Sign O' the Times." WRONG! This was more about the author, which is so typical for so much of what passes for "music journalism" -- the writer placing himself at the center of the story instead of his subject matter (maybe it's an ego or insecurity thing). I mean, it's great that the album affected Mr. Matos so much, but shouldn't we assume that's already the case since he's WRITING A BOOK ABOUT IT??? There's no reason that 25% of the book should be dedicated to his childhood and family and such. A brief introductory couple of pages would have sufficed for that. Anyhow, the rest of the "analysis" of the album, most of which isn't very illuminating to anyone with more than a passing knowledge of Prince, is written in the most joyless, hip-music-journo, almost condescending tone that is a real turn-off. After reading this I did a web search of this guy and found some articles he's written for some weekly newspapers, and it's more of the same. I would recommend staying away from this book and (hopefully) waiting for a better Prince book to come along.

Rating:
Summary: Seduced by image to the detriment of reviewing the music
Review: This book starts so well with a great explanation of the context as to why Prince and his music mean so much to the writer and then a joyful tirade against the way 1960s music dominates peoples, especially critics and reviewers, views (a fact confirmed by the preponderance of such titles in this 33 1/3 Series to date!) given this artiste and this recording is clearly rooted in the 1980s.

There then follows a concise history of Prince's life and his recording career and its development up to "Sign 'O' the Times" (including his films and how his mercurial personality was already showing through with adverse effects including alienating original band members and black fans). Thus the scene is set beautifully halfway through the book to provide a critique of the title under scrutiny but the author seems to lose it (though he does make a good effort especially at conveying what a workhorse Prince was at this time and the sheer volume of creative output he was producing), which is a pity as with retrospect this was clearly Prince's tour de force release.

The reasons for this unfortunate outcome are:

1. his infatuation with Prince's sex mystique to the detriment of seeing the recording within little of its social context and the ills of society at that time but more as one long screw;

2. he makes a bad move in starting with the triple LP that Prince originally wanted released until his record company refused rather than the final recording that surfaced and everybody knows so well. Given the many variations later released piecemeal you get lost in the "sea of titles" and by ending his overview with extensive links being made to hip-hop recordings, most of which e suspects will mean nothing to most readers, adds to the confusion;and,

3. finally, when getting to consider the actual key tracks he seems to see it all as Prince's work whereas the evidence is increasingly that like Dylan, Zappa and James Brown while not underestimating the man's many talents he knew how to surround himself with the right personnel to create the right result.

Saddest to me is that while the potential comparisons with Dylan's "Blonde on Blonde" are made (especially what happened in each career afterwards) and the sampling of James Brown music, the most obvious linkage to Prince's personna being Marvin Gaye and his breakthrough 1970s duo of "What's Going On" and "Let's Get It " do not get a single mention.