Single Minded: “Baby”

Angie.jpg 

Charles Hughes writes:

“Neo-soul” never quite lived up to its promise.  During the heyday of the R&B sub-genre, let’s say 1997 to 2001, the emergence of artists like Jill Scott, Erykah Badu, and Musiq Soulchild seemed to signal a return to—or at least an emphasis on—the sounds, themes and energy of soul culture. This was very exciting for those of us who, though loving much of 1990s R&B and hip-hop, craved soul’s deep-water intensity, and longed to hear some new voices enter the conversation. Although some of “neo-soul’s” achievements were notable, both artistically and commercially, the style ran out of gas shockingly quickly, bound by the surprising rigidity of a “conscious” outlook and disappointingly welded to a relatively uninteresting roster of musical touches.

There were exceptions of course, but a whole slew of great debut albums (Jill, Musiq, Bilal, India.Arie, Maxwell, etc.) gave way to increasingly diminishing artistic returns, and a waning of “neo-soul’s” already narrow cultural niche.  Something else happened along the way too, of course.  As many folks—some associated with this blog—have pointed out, soul experienced its own recent resurgence in American popular music over the last couple years, quite independent of the overt evangelism that made “neo-soul” artists so simultaneously comforting and, frankly, rather boring.

Just when I was ready to give up the ghost on “neo-soul” for good, Angie Stone decided to release the best single of her career, and one of the best R&B cuts of the past few years.  The premiere cut from Stone’s upcoming album, The Art Of Love And War, “Baby” combines the gravity and technique of neo-soul with the energy and enthusiasm of mainstream R&B and hip-hop, an accomplishment that I thought was impossible. This synthesis fits Stone perfectly: She began her career as a rhyme-dropping force in hip-hop’s first wave, a member of all-female group Sequence, whose mighty single “Funk You Up” remains evergreen. Moving into a solo career, Stone became one of the most acclaimed “neo-soul” artists, releasing a series of albums which—though not enjoying significant commercial success—helped define the sub-genre’s mix of retro musical textures and uplifting lyrical material. For example, her biggest hit, “Brotha,” a graceful love letter to African-American men, sounded a twenty-first century echo to Nina Simone, Aretha Franklin and other soul sisters.  (She was also linked, musically and romantically, to D’Angelo, perhaps the one artist who most effectively bridged “mainstream” and “neo-soul” sub-genres, before entering a multi-year hiatus that persists to this day.)

Still, on her last couple efforts, Angie Stone—like most of her stylistic contemporaries—started to sound like she was singing in circles, re-treading the same ground which, though valuable, sounded less and less interesting as an increasing swath of R&B and hip-hop acts reintegrated soul legacies into their records, which were usually much bigger, and often much better, than those produced by consciously “neo-soul” folks.

“Baby” is a fully realized masterwork, a smooth-tip slow-jam that intoxicates the ears with warm rhythms and infectious hooks. Although Stone’s never had the most powerful voice, this tune becomes something of a vocal tour-de-force, her restrained alto caressing the melody’s rolling curves.  Lyrically, it’s a classic admonition for Angie’s former love (and, by extension, her brothers in the hip-hop generation) not to get above his raising, forgetting his roots in favor of flash, dazzle and high-saddidy hype. Now, this kind of inter-gender debate goes as far back as there’s been artistic expression, but the specific conversation in Black pop traces the wonderful moment in the early 1990s when “R&B” and “hip-hop” decided that maybe they could be friends after all. Provoked most obviously by hip-hop-soul giants like Mary J. Blige and R. Kelly, but with significant help from the rise of the Dirty South, the (often false) schisms that pitted men-versus-women, gay-versus-straight, old-versus-new, light-versus-dark and bougie-versus-streets became rich fodder for deep-blue meditations on how the beloved community in the warm core of soul music’s supernova could be rebuilt, and even strengthened. 

It is in this spirit Stone crafts her “Baby” critique, dropping the hardest hip-hop imagery (“I was your ride-or-die”) in the same voice that she uses to sweetly moan the purest strain of soul’s romantic, existential melancholy.  As in the work of Mary J. Blige, whose significance seems to grow by the day, Stone blends strength and vulnerability into a seamless mix of spiritual blues: Stone’s keepin’ it real, no doubt, but she’s also keepin’ on keepin’ on, and she seems ready to keep on tryin’ ‘til she reaches the higher ground.

Now, the best “neo-soul” always aimed to (re-)build these bridges, but the music has rarely been as compelling as the gentle sway of “Baby”s Isley-esque textures.  Insistent rhythm and sweeping, Philly Sound-esque orchestrations give Stone’s message necessary support, and protects the tune from becoming either too sleepy or too preachy, two of “neo-soul’s” major flaws. As seductive as it is reflective, this is surely grown-folks music, but it’s got plenty of young-folks passion simmering inside the grooves.

Grown folks are in the house, too.  On “Baby,” Ms. Stone gets the assistance of Betty Wright, one of the few soul legends who hasn’t enjoyed the trumpeted “comebacks” of many of her contemporaries.  Despite this, Ms. Wright has arguably remained more connected to current music than her counterparts: She mentored Joss Stone, she’s sung back-up on any number of hits, and the assertive, funky tracks she cut in her Miami heyday have long served as a popular source of samples. On “Baby,” Wright’s influence on her younger sisters becomes even more obvious: Not only does Angie shout-out Betty’s participation with an affectionate introduction, but, when Wright starts singing, her near-identical similarity to Stone’s vocal style is stunning.  But this is not mere mimicry: The one thing that distinguishes Betty from Angie is the maturity of her voice, and the wizened grace of Betty Wright’s verses adds an extra weight to the song’s message of commitment and memory.  The circle is unbroken.

Speaking of circles, “Baby”—and the upcoming Angie Stone album on which it appears—is the first major release from the re-launched Stax Records imprint.  I’ve got highly mixed emotions about the “new” Stax: while I’m overjoyed that so much of the label’s legendary output is getting the full, spiffed-up re-release treatment. But while any reintroduction of names like William Bell, Mable John and The Bar-Kays into the national consciousness is an unequivocally good thing, I can’t shake the suspicion that the new label is merely a mostly-empty attempt to attach old credibility to new talent, and the artists already signed to the twenty-first century Stax (Soulive, Lalah Hathaway) have a long way to go from their previous output if they want to make the imprint mean anything.  (I’m disappointed that the rumors about Memphian, and Stax fan, Justin Timberlake spearheading the new label have proven untrue.) 

But, much in the same way as Angie Stone’s buttery blues cuts through the static, I can feel my skepticism melting away as I give “Baby” another in the long series of spins that it’s earned since I first heard it.  While I’m not ready to believe the hype just yet, I’m incredibly encouraged by the fact that Stax’s “rebirth” comes attached to a single this memorable.  If everything, or even some of the stuff, released under the Stax name sounds like “Baby,” then everything might just work out fine.  That sweet soul music…

Angie Stone featuring Betty Wright “Baby” from the forthcoming The Art of Love and War (Stax, 2007)

4 Responses to “Single Minded: “Baby””

  1. Barry M. Says:

    Gla to hear about the happy “ending” (or moment!) there, Charles, but could you speak a little more to this pint you made: “…evangelism … made “neo-soul” artists so simultaneously comforting and, frankly, rather boring.”

    Are you saying this is inevitable–that a deliberate revival will inevitbaly be artificial, limited and boring? How come? My observation is that the question is whether they take on a life of their own, move forward–but are you saying that the very deliberateeness, or even just mentioningthe delberateness out loud (”evangelism”) dooms such projects?

    Or what ?

    Barry M

  2. Charles Says:

    Barry,

    I don’t think it’s inevitable; in fact, the very fact that it could be avoided is what made it so maddening. It seemed like every “neo-soul” album had to include at least one song that bemoaned the loss of “real music” (usually phrased in just those terms), and that - to guarantee their credibility - “neo” artists had to maintain a certain, vocal ideological presence in their work and public image. I’m not saying that this was insincere, necessarily, but it was (and still is) nearly ubiquitous among “neo-soul” artists.

    To me, the evangelism began to outweigh the actual *music*, which - however “real” the artists thought it was - usually wasn’t one-fourth as interesting as the music being made by “mainstream” artists. That’s where I got frustrated. I agree wholeheartedly with you that a revival doesn’t have to be this way, and - at its best moments - “neo-soul” managed to have its cake and eat it too, balancing the philosophy with the music, and making both the richer for it. Still, I do think that expressly “conscious” musical movements are constrained by certain expectations that don’t accompany their stylistic counterparts, and these expectations (for whatever reason) often seem to limit the artists within that movement. (”Conscious” hip-hop’s had a BIG problem with this, even more than “neo-soul,” and it makes sense that the two have often overlapped.)

    Of course, as I mention in the piece, there’s also something about “neo-soul” philosophy that I find very important, even necessary, and I think that Jill/Musiq/Angie/etc. deserve some credit for helping set the stage for the current popularity of soul within every sector of pop music. For that reason, and others, I don’t think that evangelism has to doom anything, but I’m not ready to sacrifice the music for the message. And that’s why I love “Baby” so much, and hope that the rest of the record sounds as good.

    I feel like I’m rambling a bit, so feel free to try to steer me closer to what you’re asking, if need be.

  3. Barry M. Says:

    I hear you. And believe me, similar issues follow honky tonk revivals and others in the country ifelds. It’s sort of “Dale Watsn Disease” in those terms. Too many songs about how they’re just not making real country records like this one, and this one, and this one, and this one, and this one..

    But then, loing self-consciousness has always bene a tough problem. Sees to have soemthing to do with acting–where acting training oftene amounts to years of discipline and efforts not to be thinking about doing, or indicating you’re doing–but just dang doing it!

  4. Edd Hurt Says:

    yeah, that’s good, Barry. I like Dale Watson but methinks he protests too much. I like him best when he’s just writing good songs and not evoking the spirit of Johnny Cash. Dunno if any of y’all have hied over to this site that my buddy Yuval Taylor and his co-author (of “Faking It,” an exceptionally fine music book) Hugh Baker have cooked up, at fakingit.typepad.com, but it’s smart stuff and addresses the issues of “authenticity” and conservatism and so forth that Charles’ post hints at quite effectively. In many ways, I’m a musical conservative; in real life I’m a liberal and a believer in the kind of collectivepolitical action that usually scares conservatives. So, I love soul music, and do think, I guess, that the evangelical aspects of neo-soul have often outweighed the musicality of same. Yet I respond to the vocal obsessions and what I perceive as the essential good nature of soul music–be it Joss Stone or D’Angelo or Al Green or Laura Lee–in ways that I probably don’t to other music. But I do think neo-soul performers get hung up on “authentic” in ways that can be unhealthy. Am I wrong? I love Lewis Taylor and many of the performers Charles mentions.

Leave a Reply