Customer Reviews

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

5 star:		(1)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(9)

 

 

There have been a lot of negative reviews of this book and, to be fair, they are not totally unfounded. If you bought this book and expected it to be a factual narrative with gooey bits of trivia concerning only the making of this album... well, then you'll be disappointed.

But that doesn't mean this book isn't worth your time. It's a delightful little read that not only covers the making of the album (including the various incarnations and playlists of the concepts that preceded the final release), but also tells a personal narrative that contextualizes its impact.

Yeah, there's a lot of personal narrative, but so what? This series of books takes an alternate approach to charting and cataloguing musical history. The editors encourage a varied approach to evaluating these albums. The one on Black Sabbath is an entirely fictionalized account of the action the album describes. The one on Celine Dion is a sort of social experiment in which the author (who is Canadian and hates the album) eventually comes to appreciate the work for what it is.

Though some are a little more straight-laced in their approach, most of these books are meant to be different. If you understand that notion before purchasing and reading this volume (that you'll be reading something closer to a blog or OpEd than a history book), then the book is fantastic and extremely fun.

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.

I'm actually sorry I read this book. I don't honestly believe the author loves the source material as much as he mentions repeatedly during the autobiographical first half of this publication. His actual song-by-song dissection of the album is a big, pompus 'MEH' and super bummed me out. I do, on the other hand, feel good about having properly recycled Michaelangelo Matos' self-indulgent pamphlet along with the Sunday paper and my small collection of empty toilet paper tubes.

Oh Prince fans can be awful sometimes. I see the bad reviews of this book and it just breaks my heart. This book is easily a five star read, and a heartfelt, sincere tale about how the music of Prince affected the life of a boy growing up in the 80s.

The entire premise of the 33 1/3 series is to have a people who love albums write about said albums. Michaelangelo Matos, in telling his story, has made me smile and reflect upon my own formative years growing up with this music.

Prince, in the 1980s, was such a trailblazer. He was on the cutting edge of forward throught, social revolution, and bounary blurring like few others. I too remember being a young kid and buying SIGN OF THE TIMES, and I remember how it changed my life.

Of course I disgree with some of Matos' statements here and there...but that's the gorgeousness of this whole series...opinions differ and tha opens up dialouge and discussion. There is no right or wrong.

Don't listen to the naysayers. This is a wonderful slice of life as inspired by a man many of us loved in the 1980s forward. If you are a fan of Prince and want a quick and entertaining read, don't pass this sincere book up.

As a music journalist myself, and someone who has read eight of the other 33 1/3 books, I found Matos' book to be both refreshing, enlivening, and if not completely meticulous, one of the best in the series. The book offers a fluidic, highly personal account of the author's discovery of the album while at the same time discussing Prince's history and the album's development. While some of the books in the series offer either historical analysis (see, Neil Young's Harvest) or the author's autobiographical reflections of the album discussed (see, The Smiths' Meat Is Murder), Matos finds the middle ground, doing a lovely balancing act between introversion and vulnerability.

It seems to me that the major complaints offered in the reviews on this page are, if not intensely emotional, all polemic and illogical. Some seem dubious at best. One reviewer complains that he couldn't help but wish that Matos was older than 13 when he first discovered Sign 'O' The Times. To me, it's the most appropriate age of all, seeing that it is in our adolescence when we find our musical templates and are most susceptible and accepting of new music. It is only as we get older that we become such snobs.

Another complaint is of "imprecise wording," which I find silly as I am yet to find a book (nonfiction or otherwise) that isn't a bit imprecise at times. That doesn't wholly excuse Matos' literary shortcomings, but when the imprecise wording in question concerns the author's use of the adjective "Camille," the complaint loses validity as Matos uses the word "Camille" to describe a particular sped-up singing style Prince was using at the time.In any case, it's not that hard to figure out what Matos is discussing when he uses the word, even if you did doze off on page 62 where it is clearly defined.

The complaint that anyone reading the book might be daunted by the descriptions of the plethora of material Prince was recording at the time, and the subsequent incarnations of Sign, has some merit. I'll admit that for anyone not immediately familiar with Prince could find all the material overwhelming. But I also believe that when writing the book Matos, consciously or not, suspected that this material might be a little superfluous. I imagine he left it intact not to bewilder people, but simply because he knew who he was addressing. He knew that he was writing about an artist (no pun intended) whose hard-core fans are, if not more so, as meticulous and anal-retentive as Prince himself.

As for the other reviews, or more accurately, the other vengeful complaints. They all share one common outlook in that Matos was too personal. That the book was "self-indulgent," that it was Matos' "life story," that he "writes more about himself in the book then Prince," and that Matos himself is the "center of the story." In truth, only about a third of the book is actually written from the personal point of view. While that may be a considerable amount for someone who wants to read solely about the album, I find the complaint hollow considering that right on the back of the book (and in the above Amazon description) it says, "He [Matos] also illustrates beautifully how-if a record is great enough and lucky enough to hit you at the right time-it can change your way of looking at the world." Buyer beware I guess, but I suspect that most of these people never made it past the first 31 pages where the bulk of the autobiographical material is at.

Two of the reviews also come from a "REALLY Big Prince fan" and a "big Prince fan." I think that any huge fan of Prince's would probably know would probably already know the bulk of the material in the book. It leads me to conclude that what these two readers really wanted was an encyclopedic re-hash of the information they were already semi-experts at. They seem to want uncreativity; music criticism without being critical, musical analysis without the author being analytical. It's also quite hilarious that one of these fans uses the majority of his review to tell a personal story about stumbling upon the book by accident while he and his wife were at the bookstore. It is completely illogical to complain about something while you yourself are doing it at the same time. His whole review reads like an ethics speech on corruption coming from Tom DeLay.

The truth is that Matos' book is a lot like his subject's musical output. It's a gamble certainly, but if you're open to it, you'll discover things you may have missed the first time around. And it is only when an author is personal and vulnerable with his readers that you can discover these things. Matos does this superbly, but only if you let him. If you come in with an agenda, then ultimately you'll be disapointed. If you want a straight biography of Prince, there are plenty to be had. But if you want a highly readable and heartfelt book that has the feel of a great musical discussion with a friend then I would highly recommend Matos' book.

I have read at least 20 books in the 33 1/3 series and this was definatley the worst one. I agree with the people who said its more about writer, Michelangelo, than about Prince. I think the Seth guy who wrote that other review got paid off by the writer to write what he did, because this book is not like a discussion about Prince with your best friend but about some guy I don't care about's life, and then a bunch of stuff about Prince that didn't make sense as if he didn't even listen to the album really. Dosen't matter though because I looked up the Seth guys writing and he's an even more horrible music writer than Michelangelo. Anyways, whatever, the point is there are lots of other better books in this series to spend your money on, this one was a waste of time and $$$.

This is a self-indulgent meandering bunch of crap that is about lots of things - EXCEPT Prince's classic album. It's just a bunch of nostalgia about the author really liking Prince's music. Hey, most people reading this book really like Prince's music too, and we'd expect to learn something about it. Not to be found here.

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.

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.

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.