|
|
Post by vickibonet on Oct 12, 2008 21:43:41 GMT 10
Interesting article by Ashleigh Wilson on Wang and the state of Australian jazz. Mentions of some of our forum regulars. www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,,24460064-16947,00.html It was in in Saturday's Review section . |
|
|
|
Post by ironguts on Oct 14, 2008 7:22:26 GMT 10
Interesting indeed.
I think part of the issue is that actually some of the 'Jazz' venues are indeed way to daggy and expensive for the younger hipper crew. In Sydney for example the Excelsior gets pretty good turn out of a younger crew because it's pub prices and feel. The place that really has a rocking crowd( not sure I can mention the name?) and is byo often gets sold out (100) and mostly young people not usually associated with the J word.
Hopefully in Syd the change of licensing laws will allow more funky places that aren't the stilted club atmosphere to open up and have live music. In Melb there are places for the energetic person to find performance opportunities, and many nights there are a choice of gigs on.
Having just returned from NY I see no difference there at all. If there is a big name on at an established venue, there is a crowd, but many gigs I saw of reasonably well known players had 10-20 people in the audience. Come to think of it the set I saw Lovano/Motion/Frissel at the Vangaurd there was maybe 30. These artists make more money in Europe as it is easier for them to travel there to the big festivals.
I agree with PG in this article when he says; "The point should be that our improvised music, is among the best in the world and should be better known globally. That, in my opinion, is the issue." ; Paul is so right here and this is an area that could do with much attention.
Indeed this trip to NY was assisted through the Aus-Co Fellowship and the exposure it offered me was fantastic. Luckily for me I had Carl Dewhurst and Ken Edie both who found their own way there, to play with so it was truly our music to present, and might I say they loved it too. But in terms of actual cost for this one gig? Between the 3 of us in the vicinity of $15,000 Aus dollars!!
|
|
|
|
Post by gatoraids on Oct 15, 2008 3:07:20 GMT 10
Was that before or after the bar tab?
|
|
|
|
Post by ironguts on Oct 15, 2008 6:31:08 GMT 10
mm, beer was expensive, if I added that on it might equal the bail out of the stock market,,,,, in fact we only partook on the hope it might keep the economy afloat.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kenny on Oct 15, 2008 10:38:08 GMT 10
Yes, an interesting read ... but let me play devil's advocate:
This was, as far as I know, the biggest, widest, most elaborate and best-dressed feature article on Australian jazz for quite some time.
More, it was run in what is definitely a classy arts/features liftout.
I found it disappointing, then, that the ENTIRE focus of the piece was seemingly negative and totally preoccupied with a sort of "what's wrong with Australian jazz" angle. Notwithstanding frequent mentions of the calibre of the music being discussed. But always as a forerunner of a but "no one's listening" line
The internal workings and politics of various aspects of the broader Australian arts scenes surely have their place in media coverage, and are no doubt of high interest to those directly involved. And, let's face it, Robin Usher makes a living at The Age doing very little else.
But I'd guess that to yer average readers - those whom Oz jazz would dearly love grab the ears of - such a dry approach would be yawn-inducing.
Could've been easily fixed by running a side panel down one side titled "10 Australian jazz/imrov albums you should own" or "10 Australian jazz/improv heroes you must hear" or some such.
Just saying ...
|
|
|
|
Post by vickibonet on Oct 16, 2008 16:51:30 GMT 10
Yes, an interesting read ... but let me play devil's advocate: This was, as far as I know, the biggest, widest, most elaborate and best-dressed feature article on Australian jazz for quite some time. More, it was run in what is definitely a classy arts/features liftout. I found it disappointing, then, that the ENTIRE focus of the piece was seemingly negative and totally preoccupied with a sort of "what's wrong with Australian jazz" angle. Notwithstanding frequent mentions of the calibre of the music being discussed. But always as a forerunner of a but "no one's listening" line The internal workings and politics of various aspects of the broader Australian arts scenes surely have their place in media coverage, and are no doubt of high interest to those directly involved. And, let's face it, Robin Usher makes a living at The Age doing very little else. But I'd guess that to yer average readers - those whom Oz jazz would dearly love grab the ears of - such a dry approach would be yawn-inducing. Could've been easily fixed by running a side panel down one side titled "10 Australian jazz/imrov albums you should own" or "10 Australian jazz/improv heroes you must hear" or some such. Just saying ... I disagree with the DA, Kenny. I thought the subject matter worthy of that much space. I thought it was quite engaging for an arts audience and well researched, and it did mention quite a few of our heroes. That section uses the star rating for CDs and films but not for books. Now why is that? Grrrrr.... |
|
|
|
Post by Kenny on Oct 17, 2008 13:02:32 GMT 10
I disagree with the DA, Kenny. I thought the subject matter worthy of that much space. I thought it was quite engaging for an arts audience and well researched, and it did mention quite a few of our heroes. Fair enough. But ... running such a long piece supported only by stock pics - and without a supporting panel/story/list/sidebar - is not merely a bad look for jazz, IMO. It is also poxy, lazy journalism. Something about which I'm a fucking expert.  |
|
|
|
Post by vickibonet on Oct 18, 2008 9:37:29 GMT 10
I disagree with the DA, Kenny. I thought the subject matter worthy of that much space. I thought it was quite engaging for an arts audience and well researched, and it did mention quite a few of our heroes. Fair enough. But ... running such a long piece supported only by stock pics - and without a supporting panel/story/list/sidebar - is not merely a bad look for jazz, IMO. It is also poxy, lazy journalism. Something about which I'm a fucking expert. Kenny, you're being mean to yourself! I've noticed the increasing use of the term 'lazy journalism' in my working circles. I think it is unfair given the continuing slashing of editorial staff by media moguls. If journalists had enough time to research everything then all those PR people would be out of work. :-0 Mind you, nowadays most of them are ex journos anyway. |
|
