Diana Ross’s I Love You stars a dreamgirl stuck in a dream
For all those Dreamgirls fiends (you know the ones) who are still humming “One Night Only,” Diana Ross’s new collection of standards — the straightforwardly titled I Love You — could not have come at a more convenient time. Coincidence? Probably not.
Motown nostalgia is suddenly in (too bad for the poorly timed 2002 documentary Standing in the Shadows of Motown), and the 62-year-old diva has re-emerged into public view to collect on her once-upon-a-time fame by literally replaying the classics of yore — high cheekbones intact. This is a recycled image, not a new one. (Even the cover photo appears to be of a Ross much younger than the one who stood statue-like on Regis & Kelly a couple weeks ago.)
My mom, who doesn’t like to waste money or time, has never forgiven Diana Ross for arriving at a concert drunk more than 20 years ago. But frankly Ross’s singing here might’ve been served well under the influence. She is just serviceable, and her delivery is passionless.
Listening to I Love You, I can’t help but remember when Ross cupped Lil’ Kim’s boob at the 1999 MTV Video Music Awards, looking a sad mix of creepy and washed-up. She doesn’t seem to have a creative bone left in her body. Her album might sell better, but compare I Love You to the ecstatically performed collection of jazz standards by another aged Motown icon, Smokey Robinson’s Timeless Love, and the difference is stark: Ross lazily taps into an old sound, whereas Robinson keenly and passionately keeps the music he loves alive.
As a friend put it, Diana Ross’s voice is good, but not fantastic. When she was younger, she was fortunate enough to sing very well-written soul music by Motown Records geniuses like Ashford and Simpson (“Ain’t No Mountain High Enough,” “The Boss”) — even give a breathy, sultry masterpiece of a performance on “Love Hangover” — but she has always sounded pretty vanilla. Even Dreamgirls, originally a Broadway monstrosity inspired by Diana Ross and the Supremes, touched on this idea, with the ironic twist being that a similarly vanilla Beyoncé played Ross’s role. To get an idea of Ross’s career trajectory from her Motown days until now, you might as well extrapolate her protégé’s: Can you imagine Beyoncé making invigorating music in 30, 40 years? Jennifer Hudson has a better shot.
Whether it’s Marvin Gaye’s “I Want You” or Queen’s “Crazy Little Thing Called Love,” Ross flattens (if not butchers) her source material with a milquetoast vocal delivery and anonymous piano-and-drum arrangement. Eventually you might imagine the sound is coming from some distant, nameless piano bar with a withered singer as its jukebox, spinning back pop’s love songs from every genre, all for a frumpy, drunk audience right out of Van Gogh’s Night Café. The problem is that the moment for Ross has faded, and I Love You, like Dreamgirls, is a cheap, mass-culture dip into the Motown archives without any of the spirit. A guilty pleasure at best.
Reviews of hipper music than Diana Ross: Deerhoof, Clap Your Hands Say Yeah, Jay Z and Nas. Or you can return home.
WOW, talk about LOW Culture! I don’t know what Diana Ross did MR Schrodt did to him but what a Poor excuase for a review. All it has is personal slams to Miss Ross. As for his mother thinking Miss Ross had arrived drunk to a concert some 20 years ago I have seen Diana Ross in concert more times then I care to admit and 20 years ago Miss Ross was at the top of her game and held a stellar reputation for live performaces. (If someone thought she was drunk at her show 20 years, maybe THEY had too much to drink..)
Oh well, I know we can’t all like the same things and that’s ok. I had no idea who paul schrodt was before I read this personal against Miss Ross, but now I will know to stear clear of anything he writes.
Bill Schultz
Bill Schultz
February 5, 2007 at 7:48 am
The anecdote about Diana Ross’s drunk performance (unconfirmed by me) was only meant to highlight the staleness of her latest album. I’m sure Ross was impeccable 20 years ago. That doesn’t make her any less bland, as a vocalist and as an artist. If people are looking to champion Motown, they should look to other icons of the musical movement, like Marvin Gaye, Smokey Robinson and Ashford and Simpson. If my review relied on any personal attack, then my apologies to Ms. Ross. I’m sure she’ll get over it and be singing just fine again soon. ^^
Paul Schrodt
February 5, 2007 at 10:17 am
Paul, I am a huge Diana Ross fan. Her voice is in the top five of the soundtrack of my life. She has a tone and unique vowel phrasing that is hers and hers alone. It strikes a chord in the ears and heart of those equipped with the right radar. And yes, her new album is sleepy in some respects, lazy, generic and not my favorite. In fact, many of the song choices are dreadful for me. However, she is still able to signal the radar within me that has been touched so profoundly by Ms. Ross. You, my friend, don’t have that radar it which is ok.
DJ
February 6, 2007 at 12:47 pm
Mr. Schrodt, I find this less a review than a caricature of a pioneering black female artist whose emergence and presence in pop I still find to be of tremendous significance and relevance if for no other reason than the hatred she manages to draw from an increasingly “vanilla” (your word) corp of hip cultural critics who seem to feel less threatened by the minstrelsy of commercial rap and overwrought r&b. As journalism, the bit about your Mom was particularly slipshod and shrill. I am not familiar with your work or this publication, but this piece is not a good introduction to either.
Don Belton
February 6, 2007 at 11:15 pm
Mr Schrodt,
I am sorry to have read this review and wonder if your mother might at some point someday find something else to hold a grudge over. Drunk at a concert 20 years ago? Naw. Never happened. Testy, nervous, late, heck yes!
And you, too! Why add such gratuitous bits, and employ such negative words - hell, if I disliked some one as much as this, I certainly would not review their work - I would be too biased! Save your reviews for what you can tolerate so that the reader has some idea about what is in store musically. I don’t imagine you are some sort of moral or musical compass for us are you? I thought not.
Tom Flanagan
February 7, 2007 at 1:56 pm
tsk! tsk! tsk! Mr. Schrodt…your intellectual dishonesty is showing!
Sean West
February 7, 2007 at 3:57 pm
How is my intellectual dishonesty showing? I think my thoughts about Diana Ross are pretty honest. Some people have accused me of being bitchy, which might hold some truth to it, but I think the piece is still basically rooted in my level-headed observations about Diana Ross’s album and her career overall, especially when compared to the much more inspired work of much less famous artists like Smokey Robinson. I wish someone would debate the points I made about Diana Ross the artist rather than just lob vague insults at my credibility and personal beliefs (I’m pretty sure Don Belton thinks I’m a racist), or question the validity of my mom’s anecdote about Ross’s drunk performance. As I said, I can’t confirm she was actually drunk–I was simply repeating my mom’s story as a humorous lead-in. It’s not surprising that an artist who has done so many performances over so many years would at least once be drunk. Anyway, I wasn’t trying to use the anecdote as an attack against her in any way. So please don’t fuss. You’d be better off going to Best Buy and giving more money to your diva of choice. Obviously I can’t change your mind that she doesn’t deserve the prominence in media that she gets.
Paul Schrodt
February 7, 2007 at 6:48 pm
Not a review as much as a harsh attack against a vastly talented entertainer. In the course of her career, Diana Ross has soared where others only managed to fly among the treetops. Her voice can move you emotionally, which is hardly ever mentioned. On her new album, she she sings with a passionate abandon, as on the song, “What About Love,” from the musical version of ‘The Color Purple.’ Her delivery of a song can put to shame so many singers of today. I find it dis-heartening to see yet another review with their inaccurate, and sub-par critiques once again taking a negative stance against one of the greatest interpreters of popular music to ever have graced our world.
David D.
February 7, 2007 at 9:04 pm
What makes you “pretty sure” I think you’re a racist, sir? And what precisely “validates” your mom’s anecdote as a basis for me to believe that Ross was drunk because you say your mother thought she was. I merely set out to show up your shoddy journalism. Whether or not you are a racist is your own business. You, like Ross, have a right to have your work judged on its own merits or the lack thereof.
Don Belton
February 8, 2007 at 9:27 am
There is a difference between disagreeing with one person’s view on a subject matter and attacking the writer’s character. I just want to remind everyone that a review is only one opinion. If your outlook differs, please don’t verbally assault the writer by calling him racist or intellectually dishonest. At northbynorthwestern.com, we appreciate everyone’s viewpoint just as we appreciate comments that show varied opinions. Please feel free to leave your opinion for people to read, but please don’t attack someone for theirs.
Rachel Aguiar
February 8, 2007 at 2:18 pm
If what you say is true, Ms. Aquiar, then northbynorthwestern.com should not traffic in reviews that are thinly veiled character attacks. I never called the reviewer a racist. It is he who stated that he was “pretty sure” I think he is a racist. I have no way to judge whether he is or isn’t. I do think Mr. Schrodt’s review had racist, sexist, and ageist overtones and that it is not well written.
Don Belton
February 8, 2007 at 3:05 pm
At least you’re right on one point. My review isn’t very well-written.
Paul Schrodt
February 8, 2007 at 3:29 pm
I feel that while Diana Ross was the soundtrack of my childhood, Paul is right on a lot of points. She is rather over-rated, and her popularity overshadows a lot of the more talented Motown artists. Paul’s review is an opinion piece, he isn’t presuming to tell you what your opinion should be, just what he thinks of Ross and her new album. The personal attacks on him have no basis, and calling him racist, or a bad-journalist is completely unwarranted. If his review upsets you because you are a fan of Ms. Ross, read another review of the same CD and you will get many of the same points — sleepy, not up to her usual standard, etc. Paul shouldn’t be forced to put up with slurs on his character and mean-spirited remarks simply because you’re a fan upset by one negative review. Find something more worthwhile to do, instead of insulting someone you don’t know.
Emily Hoffman
February 8, 2007 at 3:56 pm
Take your own advice, Ms. Hoffman.
Don Belton
February 8, 2007 at 4:08 pm
I don’t believe I said anything insulting. I made no personal attacks on anyone. So, Mr. Belton, where do you get off telling Paul he’s a shoddy journalist because he wrote a review that expresses his opinion? Seems to me, that’s what a review is supposed to do. And frankly, I applaud him for putting up with such heavy fire when he’s done nothing to deserve it.
Emily Hoffman
February 8, 2007 at 9:27 pm
Even though you (and by you I mean anyone) may not like this particular review, please don’t call all of Paul’s work into question, especially without reading anything he has written prior to this. Paul happens to be one of the best writers I have ever met, and even though this isn’t his best work, he has written really great pieces in the past. You are welcome to your own opinions, but please make informed ones.
Amanda N
February 9, 2007 at 2:42 am
This is one of the most revealing “reviews” I have ever read. Obviously the author HATES Diana Ross. He is enough of a slimeball to claim that Ross was drunk at a concert 20 years ago because HIS MOTHER SAID SO. Oh honey, this guy is such a loser! He’s probably jealous of Diana Ross because he got caught dressing up in his mother’s clothes 20 years ago in a pathetic attempt to look like Diana Ross. Who is this guy anyway, and what qualifies him to review a CD release, let alone take cheap shots at the artist by quoting his mother’s unverified story of Diana Ross showing up DRUNK at a concert 20 years ago? As another person posted in reply here before me, his mother was probably the only one who was DRUNK at the concert 20 years ago. God, this sleazeball is an asshole!
Lance Krystopher
February 13, 2007 at 12:31 am
I can’t believe how personally some people have taken this review. You’d think that they knew Ross on a personal level. It’s a bit ridiculous to be honest, a review is meant to be an opinion piece. I’m sure that Ross has had much worse things said about her during her lifetime. I understand that everyone has a right to their own opinion and respect that. But you cross a line when you start personally attacking somone for having an opinion that does not match your own. It is NOT THAT BIG A DEAL. The world is not going to end because Diana Ross got one bad review.
Clare Lopez
February 13, 2007 at 3:20 pm
Hear hear!
Emily Hoffman
February 13, 2007 at 3:25 pm
After reading Mr. Schrodt’s review, it was obvious to me he wasn’t a fan of Ross and some of his comments were borderline personal. However, he is entitled to his opinion. I seriously doubt Ross showed up drunk at a concert twenty years ago. She was in her prime during that period. Her concerts were always top of the line. I love You is not Ross’s best CD, but it’s not her worst either. I agree it pretty vanilla, but some of us happen to like vanilla. While Mr. Schrodt felt Ross delivery was lazy, I thought it was laid back ,easy and relaxed–some of us like that! I think her voice is as pretty as it’s always been. Vocally, she’s no Aretha Franklin, but that’s the beauty of her voice–lite and pretty. Sometimes instead of a thick juicy steak, you’d prefer a nice salad. It’s all a matter of personal taste. As far as I’m concern Ross taste just great!
Mike W
February 15, 2007 at 6:13 pm
Excuse me, but what qualifies you to call the author a sleazeball or an asshole? How do you know he “hates” Diana Ross? Do you know him personally at all? NO. You’re upset because you claim that he’s “attacking” Diana Ross when really all he is doing is saying he doesn’t like her new album for XYZ reasons and attacking him personally in the process. Way to have a pot call the kettle black. The internet really produces way too many people who feel the need to personally attack other people. Paul Schrodt is a fine writer and human being and I’ve just gotten sick of watching tons of people who don’t know him at all attack him for saying he didn’t care for Diana Ross’s latest album. BIG DEAL. And if you read the last line of the review, you would’ve seen he called it a guilty pleasure. That means he feels you can still enjoy it on some level. So please, get off your high horse and grow up.
Dagny Salas
February 17, 2007 at 7:51 pm
It is reckless to bring up some supposed drunken concert 20 years ago, because is certainly has nothing to do with today. I am a HUGE Diana fan, but there are a couple of things I agree with in Mr. Schrodt’s review.
I love a few of the tracks on Miss Ross’s new CD, namely ‘More Today Than Yesterday’, ‘I Want You’, and ‘The Look of Love’, but about half of them are poor choices to start with and suffer from cheap sounding production. I can think of at least a dozen songs that would have filled out this album far better.
She is sometimes rightly criticized for sloppy vocals–too much improv, not singing an entire song, or allowing the audience to join in a little too much– but none of that behavior was on display when I saw here April 6th, 2007 at Madison Square Garden.
I was THRILLED with her performance. Her singing was exceptional. She absolutely NAILED the vocals, nowhere more evident than on ‘Don’t Explain’ and ‘Fine and Mellow’. It was a superb concert. She has aged like fine wine.
Porter
April 7, 2007 at 5:01 pm
I don’t know how old Mr. Schrodt is; however, I’ll bet he is not old enough to remember the legendary Supremes. The legend of the Supremes is greater than the sum of its parts. Diane is merely one of (albeit a large part) those parts. The Supremes are classic and Diane’s vocal stylings, charisma, and stage presence were integral parts that contributed to the success of that classic trio. The songwriting team of Holland, Dozier, and Holland along with the Motown musicians (The Funk Brothers) also contributed to their magic. So huge were the Supremes that Diane was already an icon when she exited. So huge were the Supremes that Mary Wilson can maintain a “million dollar plus” career just by being remembered as a back-up singer in such a famous trio. When Berry Gordy got “Diane struck,” I began to resent her seemingly egomaniacal actions. As a solo act, Berry worked very hard to promote her as a “superstar.” Actually, she had more sucess with a new generation in the 70’s and 80’s who were not in their impressionable years during the heyday of the Supremes. The bottom line is that Diane has gotten older. Her voice is not what it used to be. The “I Love You” CD is not great nor did it sell well. These are facts. Despite Dine’s attempts to promote herself on national television programs, the CD didn’t sell because it isn’t that good and because most people don’t care about her as a solo act anymnore. Her major fans are single males in their 40’s who live in urban areas. I, personally, resent her (and her fan’s) pronouncements that it was always about her. I am sorry that many of you missed her in her prime when she was part of an ensemble that conquered the world. I am equally sad that there is no one out there today promoting the legacy of The Supremes so that Diane can get away with such slanderous and egotistical remarks as using the pronoun “I” instead of “we” when
referring to The Supremes. Obviously, what you “Ross as a Solo Act” fans don’t seem to get can be illustrated by a recent appearance on American Idol: “And now the finalists will sing a salute to Diana Ross!” What did they sing? They sang 3 songs made famous by The Supremes. That’s not a salute to Diane. That’s a salute to The Supremes. Her fans like to say that she has 18 number one hits.
Twelve of those hits were by The Supremes in a six year period. It took her another 15 years to get her 5 solo hits and one with Lionel Ritchie. Don’t you realize that many people have had Diane stuck down their throats since she left the Supremes and they don’t like her. It really is that simple. Add to that, the fact that she can no longer sing, she is a felon, and she destroyed the long awaited Supremes Reunion because it had to be about HER career and she thought she could get away with not including Mary Wilson. Well it backfired in her face, didn’t it? Except in the New York area, where her fans are based, Diane is forced to play small venues (1000-2000 seats). She is not a huge headliner any longer. Don’t be so hard on a man who writes an article about a solo singer that doesn’t have it anymore. I have already forgiven him for not being old enough to remember the glory days of THE LEGENDARY SUPREMES. You should, too.
Neil
April 15, 2007 at 7:35 pm