| Author |
Message |
    
Thumper
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, September 03, 2003 - 10:43 pm: | 
|
Hello All,
I got to thinking about why male authors, especially the older ones, are always striving to write novels, essays in the jazz idiom during my reading of Reconsidering The Souls of Black Folk. Both Playthell Benjamin and Stanley Crouch speaks of it, of course I've read some of Crouch's jazz writing. I guess my question is why jazz? Why not the blues, or R&B, or gospel? Many believe that jazz is the only original art form that is truly American. But, didn't jazz come from the Blues? Is it that now when folks speak of jazz, one thinks of sophistication?(sp) And with the blues, a dirty, off the road juke joint or sitting on the front porch, or in the backyard or something?
And then, the artist that most authors want to emulate is Coltrane. Now, I love some of Coltrane stuff, but not that experiment, free form stuff. I like to hear at least a shadow of a melody, every now and then. And why are the jazz artists that are to be emulated instrumentalists, why not the vocalists? Do these authors think Billie Holiday or Ella had it easy, or that it took no thought or preparation to pull off the vocals? I can't see anyone believing that after hearing Ella sing How High The Moon? I'm just wondering.
Me? I'm a R&B type of fella. Ray Charles, Etta James, Al Green, Otis, and of course The Queen. it seems to me that it would be more challenging to write like Aretha sings. To have in literary form the same amount of exposed passion and pain that she is able to sing in that one note, the note that don't exist on any keyboard, would be off the chain.
These are all random thoughts. If anyone can enlighten me, please do. |
Cynique
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, September 04, 2003 - 11:07 am: |
|
Yes, jazz and blues do have the same root, and jazz was once stigmatized like the blues, but for some reason it evolved and in many aspects became very cerebral.And although jazz is free-wheeling, it still operates within a structured framework of musical theory. Listening to it requires a degree of focus and its esoteric culture is probably more appealing to those with an affinity to write. Coltrane was anointed early on by a few jazz critics and everybody just fell in line, making him the "in" musician synonomous with being hip. I personally prefer saxophonists like Charlie Parker and Lester Young. As for blues music, it tends to be underrated as an art form. Yes, it's about the nitty-gritty, but legendary bluesman Robert Johnson's intricate mastery of the guitar elevated the genre to another level. It has been said that he played the guitar like it was a piano. Yet, maybe the simple repetitive lyrics of the blues don't translate that well into prose.
And as far as Billie and Ella, I don't know that a lot of thought went into their music. They were natural talents, and their singing just flowed. Ella's scatting was spontaneous, created in the moment, made up as she went along. Billie just opened her mouth, caressed the lyrics and made the song her own.
These are my random responses to your random thoughts, Thumper. |
Yukio
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, September 04, 2003 - 11:36 am: |
|
No enlightenment, jus comments. Gayl Jones early literature was considered blues literature. Sections of Gloria Naylor's Bailey's Cafe are also bluesy, in my opinion.
Also, there are some writers writing in a hip hop/jazz form, adam mansbach comes to mind. |
Chris Hayden
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, September 04, 2003 - 12:49 pm: |
|
Thump:
I have approached this problem in my own writing. Good jazz is a mixing of European classical, blues, pop, etc.
My problem with a straight up Soul or Blues approach--so much of soul music and the blues depends on non verbal elements--how do you duplicate the part of "Dr. Feelgood" where Aretha stetches out "Good" ("goo-oo-oo-oo-oo-oo-ooo-oo etc) without readers rolling their eyes?
How do you write like James Brown singing "Cold Sweat"--the lyrics are ludicrous,(I don't care about your past, I just want our love to last--I don't care about your faults, I just want to tell ya bout ya does and don'ts) huh?
The delivery was everything, the sweaty non-sequiturs were part of the whole, "I'm all the way out of it and in Holyghost land" thang.
Jazz, on the other hand, lends itself well to verbal pyrotechnics. The extended line, the multiple, quickly executed runs.
Think of a whole book as written by Howlin' Wolf--page after page of "Hoy! Hoy! ah'm de boy"--(from "300 pounds of Joy") Or, "Well now de cop's wife cried, Don't take him down. Ruther be dead, Six feets in the ground!--When you get home, you can have po'k n beans; Ah eats mo' chicken, any man seen." (From Backdoor Man)
I can just see your review.
For my own part--I like a mixing of it--a jazz run here, a down home blues phrase or word there--just like the jazz greats also did, if you listen to them closely. |
Yukio
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, September 04, 2003 - 01:12 pm: |
|
As i read CH's and Cyn's comments, i think, perhaps, jazz could be considered more translatable because it is primarily instrumental and jazz's translation into prose is often the jazz form not necessaryily word choice, i.e. it's provisional element. I made comments about GJ's literature, but when i think about Morrison's, Naylor's, and recently Danticah's word choice and its emotive effect, I also think of blues, which i think could reminiscient of Aretha.....? |
Chris Hayden
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, September 04, 2003 - 02:23 pm: |
|
Yukio:
Dat's it. De form.
You're not a jazz saxophonist, are you?
Thump:
Pharoah Sanders, Marion Brown, Cecil Taylor, Ornette Coleman, Sun Ra, Trane at his screamingest free form and circular breathingest--now that's jazz! |
Thumper
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, September 05, 2003 - 08:36 pm: |
|
Hello All,
Cynique: I have to disagree with the vocalists assessment. I think the great jazz vocalists makes it look easy, but taking from one who tried to do it, its harder than it looks. Scatting is tough. Ella made it look easy. The vocalist have to have the feeling and knowledge that an instrumentalist do. What makes scatting difficult is that its real easy to go off-key. It's what made Sarah Vaughan and Betty Carter remarkable becauce they pushed the limits. But, I do understand what you're saying, that to a lot of people it easy as pie.
Yukio: Good choices. I agree. To feel it down deep without force.
Chris: Here's my list: Clifford Brown -- a big ol' fat, pretty sound that was totally masculine; I love bird and no matter what anyone say Bird with Strings is total beauty; Ahmad Jamal, Errol Garner, and the ultimate above all favorite...MONK! As you can see, I'm partial to the pianists. |
Cynique
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, September 06, 2003 - 12:33 am: |
|
I love Errol Garner, Ahmad Jamal, and Clifford Brown, too. Can you believe we agree on something, Thumper? That's almost as shocking as hearing that you dabbled in scat singing. Especially since I use to do a little scatting myself when well-fortified by the false security of alcohol. Splibee-doo-ool-ya-coo-shabba-da-ya-do-weee! And, quick, get the oxygen! I've started reading "Reconsidering The Souls of Black Folks" and it's holding my interest! |
Chris Hayden
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, September 06, 2003 - 10:55 am: |
|
Thump and Cynique: I can see us putting together one of those MP3's or whatever they call those digital music downloads of you two scatting--let me be the producer--I'll be the Suge Knight of AALBC.
Thump: Least you got Monk on there--I gots to have me some dissonance and atonality! |
Mike Evans
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, September 06, 2003 - 12:57 pm: |
|
I don't believe any one is denigrating the blues. The best writers draw on all forms of black music.Ellison, Murray and Hughes are prime examples of writers who synthesized blues, jazz and various other forms of black cultural expression.The late Sterling Brown was a poet who was highly successful at crafting a genuine blues poetry. Sterling Plumpp of Chicago carries on that tradition.
I'm into the entire jazz pantheon from Armstrong through Ellington, Parker, Gillespie, Monk, Coltrane, Blakey and many, many more including young cats like Greg Osby, Jason Moran & D.D. Jackson. I also love the blues and I grew up on sixties through mid-seventies r&b and soul[ by the mid to late 70's jazz became my music of choice except for the occassional Stevie Wonder or Funkadelic jam].
Jazz singing doesn't come easy. It too is an art form that one develops through trial & error.
I seem to remember Darius James surreal novel NEGROPHOBIA starting off in a strong r&b vein and then going off in other directions. Though I have not read any of the black pop fiction that has appearred in the wake of Terri McMillan's success I do notice alot of r&b inspired titles; perhaps these writers are pursuing that avenue.
Chris: I too need some dissonance & atonality. Sam Rivers, Don Pullen, Art Ensemble of Chicago, World Saxophone Quartet; all good!! |
Cynique
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, September 06, 2003 - 01:53 pm: |
|
Let's not forget that chaos and dissonance is an aberration of jazz known as be-bop. And, I still say that truly great jazz singers have a natural talent for singing in this genre. Their timing, and phrasing and ablility to simulate an instrument is not something they had to study and practice because its an art that can't be taught; it is a gift that has to do with hearing what's inside their heads and with being able to improvise. Of course these singers do have to be familiar with the melody of the song they are interpreting. And, this is not say that there aren't some synthetic jazz vocalists out there who are imitating the classic jazz renditions note for note. |
Mike Evans
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, September 06, 2003 - 03:09 pm: |
|
Calling bebop an abberration of jazz. Are you a disciple of those old moldy fig critics like Philip Larkin who felt that anything other than New Orleans jazz circa 1922 was bogus. I'm sure you're not because some of the singers you mentioned earlier came up thru bebop. Sarah Vaughn, Carmen McRae, Betty Carter even Ella expanded her craft by studying and trying out new things with those young bop turks of the 40's, like Dizzy,Bird & others. Read about these singers and you will find that though they had a some "natural" ability they still had to practice and "woodshed" before they got it together. These things don't come naturally, they must be learned. Check out Abbey Lincoln; she said she had to learn to sing jazz. Same with Betty Carter.
At some point in time all jazz has been called chaotic & dissonant but to still consider that as applying to bebop at this late stage [almost 60 years after its innovations became widespread] is like saying that this here rhythm and blues will lead you down the path to damnation. |
Cynique
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, September 06, 2003 - 05:56 pm: |
|
Don't assume that because I said chaos and discord characterized be-bop that that was a put down. Be-bop earned its place in the jazz annals. And its latter day disciples carry on its tradition. I don't have a problem with that. And why would you think I am a proponent of New Orleans Jazz when I said I was a fan of Charlie Parker, Lester Young and Clifford Brown?? And, nothing will convince me that singing jazz is difficult for a person who has a facility to do so. How do you teach somebody to improvise and create????? Was Betty Carter high on drugs when she made that statement?? And Abby Lincoln! As far as I'm concerned, she never learned the craft. She talks a song and is frequently off key. After surviving her marriage to Max Roach she'd done better singing the blues. |
yukio
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, September 07, 2003 - 12:23 pm: |
|
Cynique & ME:
I agree with both of u. I'm not an expert on jazz , but to effectively improvise, you must understand and know the different proponents in order to manipulate that to form/create an artistic product, which suggests that though improvisation can not necessarily be taught, it does require a bountiful knowledge base.
Indeed, many of the most creative jazz musicians, ie parker, the duke, miles, were classically trained. |
Carey
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, September 07, 2003 - 11:25 pm: |
|
Hello all
Yes I am lurking *smile*. This has been interesting reading.
To do anything consistently well takes practice and more practice. God given talent may take you to the bridge but to cross it, you have to do the footwork!
I've always disliked the labeling of music, categorizing it........flip it, smack it, spin it around, if it moves me I go with it *smile*. There has been some fine names dropped in this thread, I am just going to drop my favorite....Miles Davis's Kind of Blue.
I'm with you Thump on some of Coltranes free form stuff, it reminds me of some forms of poetry that just mangles my mind. Yeah, give me his "My favorite things" and I'm cool.
Did anyone mention Dinah Washington natural talent? Just thought I'd ask. Now was she a Blues singer or a Jazz singer....Just thought I'd ask *smile*.
Just my little One cents
Carey
Carey |
Cynique
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, September 08, 2003 - 12:17 am: |
|
Well, Carey, you might be interested in hearing where your boy (and mine) Miles Davis stood on this subject. Herbie Hancock who played piano for him said that Miles discouraged his sidemen from practicing because he felt they would give their "juice" away, and would have nothing left for the performance before an audience. What I'm trying to say is that you can master the playing of an instrument, and you can train your voice, and you do this by practicing and learning. But once you've honed your skills and you immerse yourself in the jazz vernacular, then you're own your own, because what makes jazz "jazz" is its spontaneity. Certain artists find it much easier to do this than others because - they have the gift! BTW, the story goes that Ella Fitzgerald started out her act as a dancer when she was a first-time contestant at the Apollo, but when she saw she was losing the crowd, she broke out in song, just singing off the top of her head, winning the prize. And, as they say, the rest is history. Dinah Washington? She could do it all. But she kinda left her jazz and blues roots behind when she went mainstream in order to reach a broader audience. And, yes, I'm opinionated. LOL |
Thumper
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, September 08, 2003 - 07:19 pm: |
|
Hello All,
Cynique, I'm with Carey. Although I'm still in shock with you agreeing with my musical choices, but you're wrong on this one. All of the musicians were classically trained or home trained themselves. For instance, it was nothing for Ella or Sarah to read books on music theory. And Ella sang all the time. If you have any of her CDs that have liner notes, check some of them out. There were musicians that recall how Ella would sing on the bus going to dates. Sarah Vaughan and Carmen McRae were both classically trained pianist. Errol Garner didn't know how to read music, but both he and Monk was "tutored" by Mary Lou Williams. And didn't Miles go to Juiliard. So, no, many of the musicians did study music, either formally nor informally. Dinah Washington, although there are no recording of her playing the piano, it has been said that she was a hell of a pianist. She states that she learned diction from watching Bette Davis movies.(for those of you who don't know what diction is, that's when you can understand what the singer is singing because the "t"s sound like "t"s, the "s"s sound like "s"s and so on, unlike the last two Toni Braxton CDs where she's mumbling all over the place.) And Dinah could write and read music. And Dinah did not leave her jazz and blues roots. I don't know where you got that one from. Dinah started her career singing any and everything. That's what makes her so uniuqe is that she could never be pinned down as just a jazz singer. Neither could Ella for that matter. How do I know? I have about every stitch of music by both of these singers that has ever been put out on CD. From Dinah's Apollo Record recording to all of her Mercury Records recording to her very last on Roulette Record, Dinah sang it all. On one of her last albums, her songs went from Fly Me To The Moon to the Bessie Smith standard, You've Been A Good Ol' Wagon (...but you done broke down!) *LOL* I love that song!! So no, Dinah didn't abandon anything.
My point being, they all studied. There were standards to up hold. There were no "happy" accidents. Billie Holiday coming in after the beat was no accident. There were some serious music theory being stretched to the limits and going where it had never gone before. |
Seymour
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, September 08, 2003 - 08:59 pm: |
|
I recently read two books by a black person raised here but not really from here, Kola Boof of Sudan.
I was stunned at how much her voice sounds like Gayl Jones's, Richard Wright's and especially Toni Morrisons, all of whom write, IMO, from the blue print of jazz and blues music. Not only is Boof's work bleeding with the blues and jazz, but it's the most compelling stuff I've read from a female author in a long while but cannot necessarily be called American.
I find this to be a testament to how far reaching jazz and blues has become and find it a little sad that others are able so easily to incorporate it into the realm of their own ownership. Can anyone speak to that?
|
Cynique
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, September 08, 2003 - 11:44 pm: |
|
I never said that any of the people you mentioned were not classical trained, Thumper. If you'll re-read my post you'll see that I conceded that a musician has to practice and study in order to master their instrument or train their voice. This regimen is what helps them to develop their technical skills. But when they jump into the jazz pool, it's their innate creativity which determines whether they sink or swim. I doubt if any of the musicians you named ever performed a song the same way twice. And that's because they had the gift to create in the moment. I've seen the late Carmen McCrae perform live. I always admired her crisp delivery, her perfect pitch and her flawless timing, natural assets that can't be taught. When I watched her singing, it was obvious she was taking the song she was performing to a new level, spontaneously doing variations on theme. And when a bunch of musicians get together for a jam session, you better believe that a "happy surprise" is the result. Like you, I expressed the opinion in my previous post that Dinah could do it all. But late in her career, she did start singing a lot more commercial ballads. |
bliss proteus
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, September 09, 2003 - 02:05 am: |
|
Miles told Herbie Hancock many zen koan-like things, like, "Try sitting on your left hand," so although I'm sure he told him not to practice, could he have just meant for him not to play himself out before the concert? Because Miles liked to tell the story about how Tony Williams told him, "Man, why don't you practice?"
Oscar Peterson's biography is interesting, although I haven't read it cover to cover. He talks about the first time he met with Billie Holiday at her place. She lived in a second floor walk-up. When she buzzed him in, her former piano player came tumbling down the stairs and landed at his feet. So he just stepped over him and went up, warily I guess. But he does talk about musicians trading fours with Ella and how she'd throw their own lines back at them note for note, but in a different tonal range. He quotes Lester Young as saying it's a no-win situation trading fours with Ella. He also talks about his early exposure to Garveyism in Toronto which is really interesting.
Playthell Benjamin mentions that Jean Carne won a national opera singing contest at age 18. I heard her a long time ago opening for Weather Report, but she seemed to have a natural as opposed to an operatic voice, which I would think would be a liability for a jazz vocalist. She could sing though. |
Cynique
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, September 09, 2003 - 11:40 am: |
|
Interesting anecdotes, Bliss Proteus. BTW, I've always considered accomplished jazz artists to be Zen Masters. |
Carey
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, September 09, 2003 - 07:12 pm: |
|
Hello Cynique
I got it. You said to Thump that you doubted if any of the musicians he named ever performed a song the same way twice. For the most part that would be tecnically impossible but you'd better believe that was their goal. Some people tend to believe that "Jazz" is this willy nilly free for all absent of structure, which is far from true. You did mention Jam sessions, now one might be able to get his thang off in one of those impromptu sit-ins but you better believe perfection is the name of the game.
Carey |
Thumper
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, September 09, 2003 - 07:27 pm: |
|
Hello All,
Now you all see why I missed my ol' Grayhead. *smile* Cynique, I don't think you're picking up what I'm putting down. The jam session wasn't just to play for "happy" surprises. A lot happened at a jam session, from musicians trying out new ideas, checking out other musicians, even battles took place at a jam session. It was a little more than, "hey gang let's play a song" type of thing. I've read too many biographies and now that many of these musicians couldn't wait to get to a jam session to see if the theories they earlier developed would flower and bear fruit. I got to disagree with you. Yes, perfection was indeed the name of the game. |
Cynique
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, September 09, 2003 - 08:02 pm: |
|
Surely you are not saying that a theory "developing and blooming and bearing fruit" is not an example of creative spontaneity that will produce a happy surprise. (Yes, we are on 2 different wave lengths in this discussion.) And there is a difference between a battle of the bands and a jam session. Around Chicago, jam sessions were "after hours" sets when guys playing different gigs around town got together after the shows and just bounced off each other, free styling for the sheer joy of improvising on a melody. Now, I won't deny the Modern Jazz quartet was very structured in its baroque style, but when its members took their solos, they were free to ad lib. And, anyway, why would anyone want to keep on playing a song the same ol way everytime. Why wouldn't an artist want to pursue the challenge of making what's old fresh and new? |
Carey
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, September 09, 2003 - 11:02 pm: |
|
Hello Cynique
I know it might seem like Thump and I are teaming up on you but it's just that you're on the other side of the fence on this one and now seem to be treading water *smile*. What's up with the Modern Jazz quartet's baroque style thing? To have structure within your music doesn't mean it has to be pretentious, stoic or overly elaborate. Did I miss something.....Battle of the bands? I think Thump said, battles took place at Jam sessions. For example one artist might play a rift and another might run off the same notes with a different flare or in a different key . Now for sure guys might get together and free style and ad lib and they might do it in a jazzy way But that's not what Jazz is all about, that's free style and ad lib *smile*.
Carey
Carey |
Cynique
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, September 09, 2003 - 11:21 pm: |
|
The Modern Jazz baroque style was intentional on the part of its founders because they were into experimentation. I also think that jazz is different things to different people; that's why it has been fragmented into different genres over the years. Jazz is a very fluid vernacular, so for anybody, including me, to say exactly what jazz is, is presumptous. |
Cynique
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, September 10, 2003 - 10:09 am: |
|
and furthermore - your condescending attitude was a bit much, Carey. "Treading water", huh? As opposed to your being in limbo, quick say what jazz isn't, but never giving a comprehensive answer as to what jazz is. ( And your put-down of John Coltrane, would certainly have his fans questioning as to whether you are an authority on the subject.) OK. I just had to get that off my chest. Just had my caffeine fix and I'm hyped up. LOL. Good Morning to you.
|
Yukio
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, September 10, 2003 - 10:32 am: |
|
what were ya'll talkin bout? LMAO! |
Cynique
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, September 10, 2003 - 10:51 am: |
|
Good question, Yukio. Everybody really went off on tangents. The original topic was why so many black male authors write in a jazz idiom. The book which inspired Thumper's question was "Reconsidering The Souls of Black Folks" which I am currently reading, and finding extremely interesting! Praise the lord! |
yukio
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, September 10, 2003 - 04:26 pm: |
|
Jus playin....tangents are good!
I think the Jazz idiom is good, but I agree w/Thumper, if i'm reading him correctly, i think writers should write in all of our african american cultural idioms....ie blues, r&b, etc...(though as i said, perhaps the form of jazz is more amendable to writing, i don't know)etc...whatever the artist can do to affirm the integrity of our art forms is commendable to me...... |
Carey
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, September 10, 2003 - 07:41 pm: |
|
LMAO!!!!! Oooouuuuu Weeeee
Okay, okay Cynique, I forgot we don't do this very well. I forgot we have different debating technics. I forgot our humor is not on the same plane. It totally slipped my mind that we've had ....aahhh....our differences. So, so I'm not going to do that with ya this time. I thought we were having a discussion.....a debat....an argument of such in which one drops his opinions or facts on an issue and then the other gets his thang off using his tools to enhance his position. I realize all discussions are not debates but lively discussions, if you will, are born out of differing opinions. But anyway, let me reel this baby back in. I didn't realize I was being condescending, I was trying to be funny. I thought your statements and confidence on the issue were waning and therefore my "treading water".
Re: Coltrane......I simply meant some of his stuff is too deep for me as is some ....most poetry. Put down of Coltrane?????
Hey, I don't even run my own house......authority....what...who....what.
Okay Cynique, I'll have to remember that you're not Thump. I can't play no holds barred with you. You won't call me old and gray, if I call you fat and balding *smile*. You will not call me wrinkly and smelly if I call you tight and cheap..... AND laugh about it. I have to remember that some love a good jab every now and then..... AND some don't.
Yep, you were correct when you said "Jazz is different things to different people", yep, for sure.
Carey |
Thumper
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, September 10, 2003 - 10:29 pm: |
|
Hello All,
Carey *LOL*, so true, so true.
Cynique: Since you were quoting Miles, what did Miles say concerning Coltrane's free form jazz? *eyebrow raised*
Yukio: Correct as usual. But, I had an idea that a definition and exploration of jazz could happen. And why not. How can we discuss literature written in the jazz idiom and not discuss the actual music? |
Cynique
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, September 10, 2003 - 11:41 pm: |
|
Carey, Carey, Carey, of course you wouldn't think that you sounded condescending. It's a matter of us both being subjective. What you considered humor, I considered ridicule. Whatever.
Thumper, I don't know what Miles, - who didn't want his side men to dilute their freshess by practicing before a performance, - had to say about Coltrane. I assume he would approve of his free-styling. And, obviously, Coltrane couldn't have been doing too much practicing because, as you and Carey agreed, except for "My Favorite Things" what Coltrane played was very often dissonance and chaos. |
Carey
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, September 11, 2003 - 01:32 am: |
|
Much of what coltrane played was very often NOT dissonance and chaos. His recording list is extensive. His ballads are sweet. "My Favorite Things" was cool alright but hey, the list goes on, much of it I truely enjoy. I merely said "some" of his stuff I didn't care for......"some". |
Cynique
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, September 11, 2003 - 11:09 am: |
|
Good music is good music. To pick and choose what you like from an artist's body of work is what makes one a discriminating listener. I can dig Coltrane. And for the record, I also like most of what the Modern Jazz Quartet. |
yukio
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, September 11, 2003 - 02:31 pm: |
|
Thumper:
Good question! Your question leads me to wonder what exactly is the blue print of cultural difference...it seems that at the end of the day, the form is what shapes and defines the content....especially since, existenially, we all deal and share a very common human experience, which are the ingredients of the content of most art..ie, love, hate, joy , pain, loss, etc.....this is why wright and ellison, even though they had ideological differences, could enjoy Dostoyevsky and interlace a blues sensibility w/an existential moment.
Cynique...this is what i call a tangent...lmao! |
Crystal
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, September 19, 2003 - 06:08 pm: |
|
I think J. California Cooper writes the blues. |
|
Email This Page