|
|
Post by aj on Jun 26, 2009 16:52:31 GMT 10
I will decline your invitation to debate Ellington I wasn't really looking to debate Ellington. I merely ventured a hypothetical example of an iconoclastic position for which scant tolerance would be afforded. No-one should assume that this putative position reflects my personal opinion. It might, or it might not. Fair enough. Or perhaps not.  |
|
|
|
Post by aj on Jun 26, 2009 16:55:05 GMT 10
- Thanks Mark, you've provided some very perceptive insights, though I did have to look up concatenate in the dictionary. Now let's see someone use it as a lyric. (By the way, interesting exchange to read between Lloyd and Mark). |
|
|
|
Post by punter on Jun 26, 2009 21:46:15 GMT 10
Let's start a shopping list. Here's three of mine, nothing new, I've said them before many times: *Its dumfounding obsession to demolish a PR Godsend who also happens to be a motherfucker player, Wynton Marsalis, for daring to propose a definition of jazz *Its vitriol towards anyone who dares achieve mainstream success playing mainstream jazz (James Morrison, Don Burrows) *The unaccountable way "fusion" is made a dirty word despite the absolute masterpieces from Weather Report, Return to Forever, Pat Metheny etc (and I realise this may appear to contradict my first point since fusion is excluded from Wynton's definition of jazz but I am not defending the totality of Wynton's definition of jazz, just his right to make it) Wynton can (and does) say anything the hell he likes; others have the right to cut him down. And they do because he is full of shit. Wynton Marsalis is the guy who made race, once again, an issue in the music. Who cares how well he plays the trumpet, if he stopped today his legacy would not be positive. The thing about Wynton is that, for all his sophistry and political skill (and jazz 'heritage'), he actually misses the point of the music. George Lewis writes in his influential essay, 'Improvised Music After 1950: Afrological and Eurological Perspectives' that the differentiating aspects of 'jazz' include, “its welcoming of agency, social necessity, personality and difference, as well as its strong relationship to popular and folk cultures.” He goes on to say, “The development of the improviser in improvised music is regarded as encompassing not only the formation of individual music personality but the harmonisation of one’s musical personality with social environments.” In other words, you can't define the music in terms of style and idiom and that's what Wynton is trying (and failing) to do. Ironically Wynton's perspective is closer to what Lewis might define as 'Eurological' because his project is about the creation of a jazz 'canon' in function similar to that of the European classical canon. In my opinion (and in the opinions of many others far more qualified than me) this is antithetical to the spirit that has driven the creativity embodied in 'jazz.' That's probably enough from me for tonight... |
|
|
|
Post by isaacs on Jun 26, 2009 23:01:36 GMT 10
Let's start a shopping list. Here's three of mine, nothing new, I've said them before many times: *Its dumfounding obsession to demolish a PR Godsend who also happens to be a motherfucker player, Wynton Marsalis, for daring to propose a definition of jazz *Its vitriol towards anyone who dares achieve mainstream success playing mainstream jazz (James Morrison, Don Burrows) *The unaccountable way "fusion" is made a dirty word despite the absolute masterpieces from Weather Report, Return to Forever, Pat Metheny etc (and I realise this may appear to contradict my first point since fusion is excluded from Wynton's definition of jazz but I am not defending the totality of Wynton's definition of jazz, just his right to make it) Wynton can (and does) say anything the hell he likes; others have the right to cut him down. And they do because he is full of shit. Wynton Marsalis is the guy who made race, once again, an issue in the music. Who cares how well he plays the trumpet, if he stopped today his legacy would not be positive. The thing about Wynton is that, for all his sophistry and political skill (and jazz 'heritage'), he actually misses the point of the music. George Lewis writes in his influential essay, 'Improvised Music After 1950: Afrological and Eurological Perspectives' that the differentiating aspects of 'jazz' include, “its welcoming of agency, social necessity, personality and difference, as well as its strong relationship to popular and folk cultures.” He goes on to say, “The development of the improviser in improvised music is regarded as encompassing not only the formation of individual music personality but the harmonisation of one’s musical personality with social environments.” In other words, you can't define the music in terms of style and idiom and that's what Wynton is trying (and failing) to do. Ironically Wynton's perspective is closer to what Lewis might define as 'Eurological' because his project is about the creation of a jazz 'canon' in function similar to that of the European classical canon. In my opinion (and in the opinions of many others far more qualified than me) this is antithetical to the spirit that has driven the creativity embodied in 'jazz.' That's probably enough from me for tonight... I rest my case |
|
|
|
Post by lloydswanton on Jun 27, 2009 11:20:31 GMT 10
- Thanks Mark, you've provided some very perceptive insights, though I did have to look up concatenate in the dictionary. Now let's see someone use it as a lyric. Well, if Jerome Kern can squeeze "asbestos" into a song lyric, anything's possible. |
|
|
|
Post by punter on Jun 27, 2009 12:38:09 GMT 10
mmmm... I should add that I really dig a lot of Wynton's trumpet playing (especially his early work... ahem). But PR godsend??? You've got to be having a lend there Mark surely. Unfortunately for Wynton, most likely he will be remembered more for his polemic than for his playing... |
|
|
|
Post by isaacs on Jun 27, 2009 13:13:08 GMT 10
mmmm... I should add that I really dig a lot of Wynton's trumpet playing (especially his early work... ahem). But PR godsend??? You've got to be having a lend there Mark surely. Unfortunately for Wynton, most likely he will be remembered more for his polemic than for his playing... Better you should focus on how you are remembered. |
|
|
|
Post by andrewh on Jun 27, 2009 14:12:28 GMT 10
mmmm... I should add that I really dig a lot of Wynton's trumpet playing (especially his early work... ahem). But PR godsend??? You've got to be having a lend there Mark surely. Unfortunately for Wynton, most likely he will be remembered more for his polemic than for his playing... Better you should focus on how you are remembered. Why on earth? |
|
|
|
Post by isaacs on Jun 27, 2009 14:14:51 GMT 10
It could be elsewhere.
|
|
|
|
Post by punter on Jun 27, 2009 14:25:10 GMT 10
Interesting that you just cannot bring yourself to engage with the actual points I raise...
|
|
|
|
Post by isaacs on Jun 27, 2009 14:31:55 GMT 10
No I'm floored by your originality.
|
|
|
|
Post by punter on Jun 27, 2009 15:15:38 GMT 10
uh huh... cool then Mark. Cheers
|
|
|
|
Post by captain on Jun 27, 2009 15:46:16 GMT 10
Youv got to be kidding punter.... I think you underestimate how many trumpet geeks are out there who aren't even aware of the political stuff. These are people who have no real interest in jazz either, but he will forever be a trumpet hero if nothng else. Just check out any YouTube clip and read the comments. Most of the debate is about if he can tongue faster than Maynard.
|
|
|
|
Post by utensils on Jun 27, 2009 20:22:06 GMT 10
I think describing Wynton Marsalis as a PR godsend may stretching it a bit.
Viewed in strict PR terms, you could certainly call Sun Ra a PR godsend. You could call Thelonious Monk a PR godsend. Charles Mingus. Likewise self-destructive figures like Chet Baker and Art Pepper. All huge characters or big stories. Plenty for any publicist to work with.
But a highly-opinionated rent-a-quote who apparently thinks jazz sounds better if played whilst wearing a suit, and whose musical legacy is far from assured?
Sure, everything he does contributes to the profile of jazz, but I'm not so convinced that he helps nearly as much as people automatically assume, compared with more colourful, less carefully-constructed personalities.
Or maybe it's unfair to compare Marsalis with the figures of the past. It's a very different world now, and plus, he's genuinely seeking to be a spokesman for jazz; most of those figures were by no means wishing be lumbered with that role, nor would they have necessarily been up to it.
But there is a figure from the past with whom he should rightly be compared, and it's telling: Dizzy Gillespie. Dizzy was every bit the jazz ambassador that Marsalis is, taking jazz to the far corners of the world and contributing immeasurably to the general public's perception of jazz. He was a natural, spontaneous, larger-than-life character who always communicated with wit and humour. And he earned the right to speak for jazz by ushering in a revolution in music. (Or two, if you consider Afro-Cuban Jazz a revolution.)
Hmmm.
Still, maybe Marsalis is the best that this generation has to offer. (But if so, perhaps that says some pretty unflattering things about the state jazz finds itself in these days.)
|
|
|
|
Post by utensils on Jun 27, 2009 20:27:56 GMT 10
Getting back to daveyboy's original theme, I think in jazz discussions "Wynton" is one first name that should always be said with the subject's surname. Some very real possibilities of misunderstandings there otherwise.
At the peak of his considerable fame, a certain flautist might also have protested that he was not only The Mann, but also The Herbie.
|
|
