Sign o’ the Times is the 1987 double album on which Prince pulled funk, rock, pop, gospel-tinged balladry and drum-machine minimalism into a single sprawling record. A new book has revived the argument that it is the fullest showcase of his range.
Key takeaways
- Sign o’ the Times, released in 1987, is widely treated as the album that best demonstrates the full breadth of Prince’s writing, playing and production.
- The Guardian reports that a new book on Prince by author John McKie presents the album as the ultimate showcase of his genius, and describes it as his final masterpiece.
- The record arrived after a run of commercial peaks that included the 1999 album and the film Purple Rain, and after the worldwide failure of his second film, Under the Cherry Moon, in 1986.
- The Guardian notes that the Under the Cherry Moon soundtrack still produced a major hit in Kiss, and that Prince kept moving forward regardless of whether audiences followed him.
- Much of the album’s reputation rests on its refusal to settle into one genre, which makes it a difficult record to summarise and an unusual fit for playlist-driven listening.
A book has put a 1987 double album back in the conversation
The immediate development is publishing rather than musical. A new book about Prince has been released, and in coverage of it the Guardian reports that its author, John McKie, makes the case for Sign o’ the Times as the album that best captures what Prince could do. That framing — one record standing in for an entire catalogue — is what has pushed a decades-old album back into current music discussion.
The argument itself is not new. Sign o’ the Times has long occupied a particular position in writing about Prince: less commercially dominant than the records that preceded it, but more often cited as the artistic high point. What the book adds is a sustained case for that view, aimed at readers who may know the hits and the films without having spent time with the album as a whole.
Nothing about the album has changed. What has changed is the volume of attention, and the terms in which it is being discussed.
Why this is being discussed now
Music catalogues generate news in predictable ways: reissues, anniversaries, estate decisions, documentaries and books. This is the book variety. The Guardian’s piece is built around an author explaining a thesis, which is a common way for older records to re-enter general coverage rather than specialist coverage.
There is a second, quieter reason. Prince’s catalogue has been reassessed steadily since his death, with archival material reaching listeners who never encountered the original releases as new. Each wave of that reassessment tends to shift which album is treated as the centre of the story. Sign o’ the Times has benefited from that shift more than most, partly because its sprawl rewards the kind of deep listening that archival releases encourage.
The precise commercial or editorial reasons behind the book’s timing are not stated in the reporting, and should not be assumed.
The background a newcomer needs
By the early 1980s Prince was an established pop heavyweight. The Guardian points to the phenomenal success of the 1999 album, and to the film Purple Rain, which made him a movie star as well as a recording artist. That combination — chart success plus screen presence — placed him among the most visible figures in popular music.
The run did not continue unbroken. His second film, Under the Cherry Moon, described by the Guardian as an old Hollywood throwback, failed worldwide in 1986. Its soundtrack nevertheless yielded Kiss, another substantial hit. The Guardian’s account is that the commercial disappointment did not slow him: audience confusion was not treated as a reason to change course.
Sign o’ the Times followed in 1987. It is a double album, unusually wide in style even by the standards of an artist already known for moving between idioms, and it is generally understood to have emerged from a period in which several planned projects were reworked or abandoned before the final sequence was settled. The full documentary record of those sessions is uneven, and specific details about what was recorded when are not established in the material available here.
Who this affects, and how
For general listeners, the practical effect is a recommendation: an entry point into a large and sometimes forbidding catalogue. Double albums are a hard sell to newcomers, and a book arguing that this particular one is the place to start changes how people approach the discography.
For the wider music-writing world, the album functions as a test case. Arguments about which record represents an artist’s peak shape reissue campaigns, festival programming, syllabus choices and streaming editorial. A consensus pick becomes self-reinforcing.
For musicians and producers, the album’s interest is technical as well as historical. It is frequently studied for its arrangement decisions and its use of drum machines and studio processing alongside conventional band playing — an approach that sits between the analogue and digital eras rather than committing to either.
Where informed people disagree
The phrase “final masterpiece”, which the Guardian’s coverage applies to the album, is itself contested. Prince continued releasing music for decades afterwards, and a substantial body of listeners regards parts of that later work as underrated rather than post-peak. Treating 1987 as a closing statement is a critical judgement, not a documented fact.
There is also long-running disagreement about which album deserves the top position at all. Advocates for the earlier records point to their sharper focus and greater cultural reach; advocates for Sign o’ the Times point to its range. Neither argument can be settled by evidence, because the criteria differ.
A third disagreement concerns sprawl. Some critics hold that double albums of this kind are improved by editing, and that the record’s variety is also its weakness. Others treat the lack of a single organising style as the point. Where a listener lands usually depends on whether they value coherence or ambition more highly.
The practical implications
The most concrete implication is for how the record is consumed. An album built on sequencing and contrast loses a great deal when broken into individual tracks, which is the default behaviour of streaming platforms. Anyone approaching it through playlists will encounter a different object from the one being praised.
For the catalogue business, sustained critical attention supports the economics of reissues and archival releases: expanded editions, live recordings and previously unreleased material all depend on a durable audience for the original. Books contribute to that durability. Whether any specific release is planned as a result is not known.
For readers, the practical advice implied by the coverage is straightforward: listen to the album as a sequence, not as a set of singles, and accept that the abrupt changes of direction are intentional.
What to watch next
Three things are worth following. First, the reception of the book itself — whether its argument is taken up by other writers or treated as one view among several. Second, any further archival activity around the period, since critical attention and catalogue releases tend to move together, though nothing specific has been announced in the material available.
Third, and more broadly, whether the pattern holds: an artist’s most commercially successful work being gradually displaced in critical estimation by a denser, less immediate record made shortly afterwards. That pattern recurs across popular music, and Sign o’ the Times is one of its clearest examples. The interesting question is not whether the album is good, which is not seriously disputed, but what it takes for a record to move from respected to canonical several decades after release.
Frequently asked questions
What is Sign o’ the Times?
It is an album by Prince, released in 1987. It is a double album that moves between funk, rock, pop, balladry and sparse drum-machine tracks rather than settling into one style. It is frequently described in music writing as the record that best demonstrates his range as a writer, performer and producer, and it is often recommended as a starting point for listeners new to his catalogue.
Why is Sign o’ the Times considered Prince’s best album?
Because it covers the widest stylistic ground while still holding together as a single work. Critics tend to argue that earlier albums were more commercially dominant but narrower, while this one shows the full span of what he could do. The Guardian reports that a new book by author John McKie makes exactly this case, presenting the album as the ultimate showcase of his genius.
What happened before Sign o’ the Times?
The Guardian describes Prince as an established pop heavyweight by the early 1980s, following the success of the 1999 album and his film Purple Rain. His second film, Under the Cherry Moon, failed worldwide in 1986, though its soundtrack produced the hit Kiss. According to that account, the commercial disappointment did not change his direction; he continued moving forward regardless of audience reaction.
Is Sign o’ the Times a concept album?
No. It is not built around a single narrative or theme. Its unity comes from sequencing and from the consistency of the performances rather than from a story. The frequent changes of style between tracks are generally understood as deliberate, which is why the album is often described as genre-defying rather than as a concept record in the conventional sense.
What is Paisley Park?
Paisley Park is the name associated with Prince’s studio complex and creative base, and it is also used more generally to describe the working environment in which much of his later music was made. The Guardian’s coverage refers to him as the Paisley Park polymath. Detailed information about which specific recordings were made there is not established in the material used for this article.
How should a newcomer listen to it?
Listen to it in order and in full, ideally across the two halves rather than in a single sitting. The album’s effect depends on contrast between adjacent tracks, so hearing individual songs through playlists gives a misleading impression. Reading about the period afterwards, rather than before, tends to work better: the record is easier to appreciate on its own terms first.
Sources and further reading
- The Guardian — music coverage of a newly released book about Prince, in which the author sets out his case for the 1987 album.
- General music reference works and encyclopaedias — for release chronology, personnel and catalogue details beyond the scope of this article.
- Label and estate reissue notes — the usual source for session documentation and archival material accompanying expanded editions.
- Broadcast and public radio archives — for contemporaneous reviews and interviews from the period, useful for comparing reception then and now.
Surfaced from the rss:guardian_music signal “a landmark album reappraisal”. AI-assisted draft, editorially reviewed.
