Is Reviewer Ben Watson an Idiot?

[Guy Berger]

From amazon:

Pianist Paul Bley begins by exploring the low, clunking end of his Bösendorfer, then plays a boogie riff, followed by a melancholy descending refrain and some jazz canons. When Paul Motian's drums enter, we marvel at the somewhat unreal multi-track recording rather than the playing, though his touch is as crisp as ever. Bassist Gary Peacock picks up on Bley's low-pitch intro, boiling some low-register funk. The improvisation on "Not Zero" resembles the bustle used to signify "busy downtown New York" in Broadway musicals. Did someone mention the word "jazz?" That's where all three players started. The ECM label claims the trio has developed a European slant, distinct from the "pure energy" of free jazz, emphasizing "subtlety, lyricism, and chamber-music sensibilities" (to quote from the press release). The abandonment of traditional rhythmic pulse is celebrated. However, unlike the music of Bailey, Oxley, or Brötzmann, this does not thrust the musicians forward into new realms, but strands them in impressionist stasis. As the disc proceeds, the languid pace and minor keys become utterly predictable, less like independent creativity than marketable clichés. After nearly an hour of this lackluster drifting, the sententiousness of Bley's meanderings starts to irritate ("Don't You Know"). This version of "free" is about sustaining a reverent atmosphere, not waking up to the sound of now. Any recourse to Improv proper would break the churchy spell. In the early '60s, the pianist Krzysztof Komeda combined the melancholy of Polish folk with out-bop to great effect. But this trio's free-improvised recasting of folk and jazz becomes soporific. Rather than turning improvisatory interplay into the main event, removing the bookending forms simply dissipates any energy. They sound like they could play this stuff in their sleep. "Not Two, Not One" has neither the variety nor density required for active listening, instead suggesting a species of highbrow mood music.

[JSngry]

I don't know if he's an idiot or not, but he hears that music a helluva lot differently than I do!

[7/4]

I wonder if Ben Watson really wrote that. It could be some fool in the sticks.

[JSngry]

Like this?

Meet Ben Watson!

[7/4]

I was thinking of the Ben Watson of The Negative Dialectics of Poodle Play & the Wire. Maybe someone is pretending to be him. :rsly:

[Niko]

this is my first experience with "out-bop" ... sounds ugly (or s that a widely used term)

[Guy Berger]

I wonder if Ben Watson really wrote that. It could be some fool in the sticks.

Possible, but it was in the editorial reviews section.

Guy

ps Meet Ben Watson!

[B. Clugston]

If it's the Ben Watson I think it is (author of tome on Derek Bailey), I'm surprised he didn't bring up class war and attacks on the bourgeois.

[Larry Kart]

"Ben Watson, music journalist and longstanding contributor to The Wire, Hi-Fi News and Signal To Noise, is well known for his deviant and polemical music criticism."

That would seem to explain it.

[Ken Dryden]

After reading such drivel, it would be hard to imagine anyone taking his opinion seriously.

[David Ayers]

He got it about right, didn't he? That 'impressionist' put down is the trade mark John Litweiler jdugment on where so much post-free becomes, er, less interesting. I thought this was a pretty standard way of thinking.

[Larry Kart]

And what's a "jazz canon"? Does he mean anything canonic (i.e. music in which one part imitates note for note and overlaps another part at a particular pitch e.g. canon at a fourth) that happens to occur in a setting that's more or less jazz-like (which would be a possible but fairly useless and/or really sloppy thing to say). Or does he mean that there is a particular way to play canonically in jazz that's different from the ways one might play canonically elsewhere? What a maroon.

[Christiern]

I wonder if he would review Stanley's book?

[Nate Dorward]

It is Watson, not a phony, yes--I think it's a reprint from one of his Hi-Fi reviews.

[Guy Berger]

It is Watson, not a phony, yes--I think it's a reprint from one of his Hi-Fi reviews.

I enjoyed your dig at him in your review (as well as the review itself).

Guy

[Alexander Hawkins]

His writing is often idiotic. On the plus side, his championing of Derek Bailey is to be commended IMHO, he seems to be a nice guy, and can be a very entertaining performer!

[Big Wheel]

Nice review. I give it 3 Jureks.

(On the Jurekometer?)

[AllenLowe]

I've never heard Paul Bley play a boogie riff - I think Watson was getting some cross talk on his radio or tape recorder - probably from Meade Lux Lewis -

[EKE BBB]

I've never heard Paul Bley play a boogie riff - I think Watson was getting some cross talk on his radio or tape recorder - probably from Meade Lux Lewis -

In fact he was reviewing "Honky Tonk Train blue(y)s"

[7/4]

It is Watson, not a phony, yes--I think it's a reprint from one of his Hi-Fi reviews.

Yeah, he's an idiot.

[Alexander Hawkins]

I've got to stick up for him here. I agree - the writing is rubbish. BUT, he DOES care about the music, and is a great champion of the British free improv scene, especially Derek.

I can certainly do without his writing - nobody get me wrong here - and I agree that he can come over badly. But, he is genuine about the music, and for my money, I'll forgive any perceived pretensions in someone's writing if I know they love the music, and I believe he does.

[7/4]

maybe he should learn to write.

[Alexander Hawkins]

maybe he should learn to write.

Sure - and I don't think anyone here is defending his writing? The only thing which would make stuff like this look creditable would be a side-by-side with a Thom Jurek piece...

But, I'll say it again, Watson isn't a dilletante - he know's his stuff, and does care about the music. 'Maybe he should learn to write' is an exhortation which, let's face it, applies to more music writers than not!

[AllenLowe]

isn't he a Marxist? Or am I confusing him with someone else? If so, just goes to show how ideology bends reality -

Edited July 19, 2006 by AllenLowe

[B. Clugston]

isn't he a Marxist? Or am I confusing him with someone else? If so, just goes to show how ideology bends reality -

He's a Marxist all right.