Music

Booka Shade: More!

The best part of the fourth album from the German techno duo comes from another band altogether.


Booka Shade

More!

Label: Get Physical
US Release Date: 2010-05-04
UK Release Date: 2010-05-03
Amazon
iTunes

It’s got to be hard being a straight-up house or techno act in 2010. With the commercial and arguably the artistic peak of that type of music more than ten years in the past, there’s a strong sense that everything there is to say has been said already. DJs and record labels keep adding adjectives like “minimal” and “tech”, just barely staying ahead of the backlash. In such circumstances, that the German duo Booka Shade could enter the game in 2005 and make a name for themselves is something of an accomplishment.

It’s a bit sad, then, that Booka Shade’s music is gradually, continually becoming more populist and less distinguished. That’s the case more often than not on fourth album More!, whose very title seems like wishful thinking in a couple different ways. It’s trying to conjure up the energy and excitement that accompanied the electronica boom of the late 1990s, and it’s also an implication that the band has something different to say. You could add “But wait! There’s…” to the title and you’d have a better sense of how hard Booka Shade seem to be trying to close the deal. And though More! fails to live up to that exclamation point, it goes down easy in a way that makes repeated listening painless, if not revealing.

If only some of the songs worked as well as their titles. “Havana Sex Dwarf” opens with a voice making the not-so-original claim, “I feel like such a consumer whore”. What sounds like a detuned gamelan gets thrown in with the beats. Then, the track is overtaken by a second-rate “Funkytown”-type descending riff, and Booka Shade’s populist intentions become all-too-transparent. “Scaramanga” is named after the memorable James Bond villain, but can’t manage more than a tried-and-true synth pattern to go with its bump’n’grind. The lesson is well-executed pap, but pap nonetheless.

Ironically, More! has more to say on its less clubby numbers. “Donut (Interpretation)” sets up a spacey, mid-tempo groove, and compliments it with as effortlessly catchy little funk riff. Daft Punk did this years ago, sure, but it’s still a nice throwback. “Regenerate” generates whatever pathos the album has with a whispered female voice and a powerful coda that dies out much too soon. Closer “This Is Not Time” provides a nice, end-of-the-night vibe. Again, this is territory covered years ago by the likes of Chicane, but it works. You can’t even say that much about completely inconsequential tracks like “The Door” and the all-too-accurately titled “No Difference”.

The nadir comes with the single “Bad Love”. Booka Shade are clearly going for a radio/club hit here, employing classy yet nondescript vocals by Chelonis R. Jones and a sleek electro rhythm. Yet, whatever the track had going for it is undone by the “shout out the name of the song” non-chorus.

Leave it to Yello, those old hands at truly innovative techno-prog, to deliver More!’s high point. With a simple minor-key electric piano and ticking clock, “Divine” isn’t exactly heavenly, but it’s sinister in all the most pleasant ways. There’s Dieter Meier, his deadpan delivery as strangely charismatic as ever. It’s Meier’s genius that he can make a simple word such as “minutes…” sound like an urgent, secret message. It’s tough to say exactly what Booka Shade had to do with “Divine”. The song sounds like pure Yello, and it’s too bad little of the Swiss duo’s character rubbed off on their German collaborators.

Booka Shade will always have their status as co-founders of the much-respected Get Physical label. With More!, the impression is not that they’re coasting on their reputation and resume. Rather, it seems they’re struggling to stay afloat in a dance music world that is constantly changing and seemingly more underground than ever.

5

So far J. J. Abrams and Rian Johnson resemble children at play, remaking the films they fell in love with. As an audience, however, we desire a fuller experience.

As recently as the lackluster episodes I-III of the Star Wars saga, the embossed gold logo followed by scrolling prologue text was cause for excitement. In the approach to the release of any of the then new prequel installments, the Twentieth Century Fox fanfare, followed by the Lucas Film logo, teased one's impulsive excitement at a glimpse into the next installment's narrative. Then sat in the movie theatre on the anticipated day of release, the sight and sound of the Twentieth Century Fox fanfare signalled the end of fevered anticipation. Whatever happened to those times? For some of us, is it a product of youth in which age now denies us the ability to lose ourselves within such adolescent pleasure? There's no answer to this question -- only the realisation that this sensation is missing and it has been since the summer of 2005. Star Wars is now a movie to tick off your to-watch list, no longer a spark in the dreary reality of the everyday. The magic has disappeared… Star Wars is spiritually dead.

Keep reading... Show less
6

This has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it.

It hardly needs to be said that the last 12 months haven't been everyone's favorite, but it does deserve to be noted that 2017 has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it. Other longtime dreamers either reappeared or kept up their recent hot streaks, and a number of relative newcomers established their place in what has become one of the more robust rock subgenre subcultures out there.

Keep reading... Show less
Theatre

​'The Ferryman': Ephemeral Ideas, Eternal Tragedies

The current cast of The Ferryman in London's West End. Photo by Johan Persson. (Courtesy of The Corner Shop)

Staggeringly multi-layered, dangerously fast-paced and rich in characterizations, dialogue and context, Jez Butterworth's new hit about a family during the time of Ireland's the Troubles leaves the audience breathless, sweaty and tearful, in a nightmarish, dry-heaving haze.

"Vanishing. It's a powerful word, that"

Northern Ireland, Rural Derry, 1981, nighttime. The local ringleader of the Irish Republican Army gun-toting comrades ambushes a priest and tells him that the body of one Seamus Carney has been recovered. It is said that the man had spent a full ten years rotting in a bog. The IRA gunslinger, Muldoon, orders the priest to arrange for the Carney family not to utter a word of what had happened to the wretched man.

Keep reading... Show less
10

Aaron Sorkin's real-life twister about Molly Bloom, an Olympic skier turned high-stakes poker wrangler, is scorchingly fun but never takes its heroine as seriously as the men.

Chances are, we will never see a heartwarming Aaron Sorkin movie about somebody with a learning disability or severe handicap they had to overcome. This is for the best. The most caffeinated major American screenwriter, Sorkin only seems to find his voice when inhabiting a frantically energetic persona whose thoughts outrun their ability to verbalize and emote them. The start of his latest movie, Molly's Game, is so resolutely Sorkin-esque that it's almost a self-parody. Only this time, like most of his better work, it's based on a true story.

Keep reading... Show less
7

There's something characteristically English about the Royal Society, whereby strangers gather under the aegis of some shared interest to read, study, and form friendships and in which they are implicitly agreed to exist insulated and apart from political differences.

There is an amusing detail in The Curious World of Samuel Pepys and John Evelyn that is emblematic of the kind of intellectual passions that animated the educated elite of late 17th-century England. We learn that Henry Oldenburg, the first secretary of the Royal Society, had for many years carried on a bitter dispute with Robert Hooke, one of the great polymaths of the era whose name still appears to students of physics and biology. Was the root of their quarrel a personality clash, was it over money or property, over love, ego, values? Something simple and recognizable? The precise source of their conflict was none of the above exactly but is nevertheless revealing of a specific early modern English context: They were in dispute, Margaret Willes writes, "over the development of the balance-spring regulator watch mechanism."

Keep reading... Show less
Pop Ten
Mixed Media
PM Picks

© 1999-2017 Popmatters.com. All rights reserved.
Popmatters is wholly independently owned and operated.

rating-image