Hi there folks--I need a bit of advice here. Tomorrow I need to turn in a 100-word review of Donna Summer's "This Needs to be Your Style." Not a big deal, but I can't decide which version to turn in. They're pretty much totally different, so I'll post 'em here and see what you think. Vote in comments--#1 or #2.

#1

What the hell happened to Donna Summer? We knew she had an experimental streak (i.e. the Moroder collaboration I Remember Yesterday), but a cut 'n' paste laptronica album that throws in references (?) to Britney and the Go-Gos? Yoinks! Shocking though it may be at first (no vocals!), the music is so-so: neither very smart nor danceable, it sounds like your average college student with a Powerbook and Reason who slaps on the granulizer to remind you that it's art, to paraphrase Tom Ellard. The high concept falls flat, but it's fascinating to see this side of the disco diva. You go, girl!

#2

The diva reconfigured as a pudgy male record geek: this album, made entirely from rock/pop samples, sounds unique if simultaneously default.IDM-circa-2003. Donna Summer a/k/a Jason Forrest wants electronic music to be more rawk (thus "cockrockdisco.com") and this reportedly come through live, but here...well, it's not bad (it's pretty good, actually), but it's not what it's supposed to be, kind of like Cex's "Oops..." Ostensibly Plunderphonics-o-tastic, it's too chopped to sample-spot; theoretically poppy, the grooves are few. No doof-doof should run our lives, but we can do better for a rockist rekindling of disco's glory days. Still, it's fine experimental pop.

(there're your options. I considered doing a longer post on Donna, which I can if requested, but I need some free advice more!)

UPDATE: Comments seem to be periodically leaving and doing bikini car washes to raise money for the PTA or something, but you can always e-mail me.

UPDATE 2: Went with #2. Damn you literalists!
posted by Mike B. at 11:02 AM 0 comments