umum_cypher

Also, he's almost the only composer whose music I love (partly) for its humour. Most 'funny' music I can't bear (Zappa, e.g.). But the gags in Haydn are always good. My favourite recordings are of the London symphonies - the deeply inauthentic, romantic readings by Solti and the LSO (late-60s?). The slow movement of 104 is far too slow, with as much pathos wrung out of it as possible, and is absolutely gorgeous.

I'm sure he would have loved that comment. I thoroughly recommend this book, a good chunk of which is about how contemporary philosophy and literature influenced Haydn into taking that kind of approach to his audience (quite a small and directly observable entity for him at that time, of course). Blurb: Schroeder here sets out to challenge the widely held view of Haydn as an inspired instrumental musician who composed in isolation from 18th-century enlightened thinking. By means of both documentary and musical investigation the author seeks instead to present him as a culturally and politically sensitive representative of the Age of Englightement. Haydn's awareness of contemporary aesthetic opinion and the tenets of the Enlightenment is reflected by the transformations in his own compositional style, and there are fascinating implications here for our understanding of instrumental music from the second half of the eighteenth century. Of fundamental importance in this survey is Haydn's relationship with his audience, which, it is argued, had a significant bearing on the nature of the works. The author suggests that Haydn was well acquainted with the contemporary view that works of literature or music should serve a moral functionand he points to numerous instances in the late symphonies where this end is effectively pursued. For the eighteenth century, however, morality did not imply dullness; indeed, its goals were best served through wit, humour, popular appeal, and beauty, as well as through intellectual challenge.

Looks great, thanks for the hard work.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/2009/dec/09/jazz-festival-larry-ochs-saxophone

I'm sure they'll find themselves turning to that top shelf more and more ...

IMHO it's the best non-BN Blakey album from that period by a long way. Blakey wears a karate or judo suit on the front. Why I wonder? Is it to do with the plot of the musical?

All the editors I've ever had have been wonderful individuals.

Still ...

Forgive me if I'm missing something obvious here, but - why?

I'm enjoying reading Devilin' Tune at the moment, Allen - but who is this Louise Armstrong you keep mentioning?

It's not "slightly clumsy", it's fundamentally incorrect. I'm not saying he's above criticism, far from it. In the binary opposition sense critiqued above this is fundamentally incorrect, but I'd be inclined to cut him a little slack - it's wrong, but you know what Kelley's driving at, at least. Should have been edited though.

Imagine if somebody wrote a book about food which confused lemongrass with lemons. If I knew/cared about food at a certain level, that would leave a sour (no pun intended) taste in my mouth for the rest of the book, no matter how spot on it might otherwise have been. Guaranteeing proper use of craft-specific terminology is a simple sign of respect for that craft. I've lived in a time where the craft was respected while the art was overlooked, now sometimes I feel that it's the craft that is getting disrespected & the art glorified. Neither is a satisfactory dynamic as far as I'm concerned, becuase ultimately you can't have one without the other, not in a living, breathing world. I don't know about that $800.00 guy, but who was your real buddy? Bill Kirchner, that's who. Is that an actual career, being a reader for music books and stopping it before it gets started? If so, how much does the gig pay, and where do I go for an interview? A few academic presses now ask for camera-ready copy - what you send is what goes on the page, not even any proofing. In a hothouse university 'research' culture where academics publish whatever because they have to, not because it's important, or ready, that's how it's going to be - thousands of poorly produced titles and a miniscule margin for the publisher. Respect for the craft is nowhere in that equation. In this case I'd be wary of criticising a historian for slightly clumsy music vocab use, since most music scholars come off far worse when (if) they try and engage with history - proper history, not chronology and list making.

Hmm - you're right, that's a bit of a clunker. Looking forward to getting into the book tomorrow.

Morgan gave Campbell lessons at the sessions Jazzmobile ran in a Harlem high school. Campbell has a tribute to LM on his New Kingdom album.

Can Larry or someone clear this up? Just curious because Kelley seems to use the term for any vocal noise that Monk produces while playing. The term seems funny to me, though. I imagine Monk singing "fa so la ti..." over his compositions. That's exactly what it is (do re mi etc). Sounds like Kelley's being ironic, or rather serious-joking. Yeah, that's what I thought, but I don't think he's being ironic in the context. A number of times he wrote, "Monk's solfeggio was particularly loud that day, indicating how good of a mood he was in," (I'm paraphrasing), but when I listen to the recording he refers to, I just hear grunting. Of course, loud grunting could say something about his state of mind, or at least his enthusiasm that day for his performance, but is that solfeggio? I'm not trying to nitpick, and I LOVE this book, but I was just confused by this. I won't start reading this until the weekend, but I can't believe that Kelley would think that 'solfeggio' = 'any noise made with mouth in musical context'; your paraphrase above is the kind of thing I expected from you first post on the subject, namely that Kelley's talking about *Monk's* solfeggio, rather than solfeggio tout court, solfeggio as found in the classroom. Isn't the use of the word meant to create that kind of ironic distance between trad musical descriptors and Monk's practice (in an affectionate kind of way)? Maybe not.

Can Larry or someone clear this up? Just curious because Kelley seems to use the term for any vocal noise that Monk produces while playing. The term seems funny to me, though. I imagine Monk singing "fa so la ti..." over his compositions. That's exactly what it is (do re mi etc). Sounds like Kelley's being ironic, or rather serious-joking.

If you get the Monk practice tape released as The Transformer on Explore a couple of years ago, you can persevere along with him. Aebersold it ain't.

There's not much in it, but I think my iTunes would show the OST version of MFT getting more plays that Coltrane's. It's dramatic!

Ah. Well, as internet rumours go that one was pretty unspectacular.

I hear that a bit of a hoo-hah is developing between Lewis Porter and Kelley regarding the book. Anyone know any details?

That's what I'm talking about!

Oh man! Those have been out for years. This is a news item, and the news must get through!

Yesssssssssssssss! Hope it's as good as the HARYOU-ACT live set from - when? - 1964? Why aren't clubs called things like The Flamboyan nowadays?

Yes, I think I'm defending a theoretical version of what academic jazz studies could be. I'm not sure I'd go into bat as much for the actuality.

Well, the dividing line between historian and critic in jazz is and always has been extremely thin ... Monk has been on the receiving end of plenty of 'critical'/journalistic writing, inc. the available biogs, but not much of what I suppose you could think of as a more historical appraisal, if that means anything. I suppose I'd put my feelings like this: I would rather read a Monk biog by Kelley than by, say, Martin Williams, critic's critic, by a factor of about a thousand. And by Whitney Balliett, a million.