Is Alfred and Francis turning in their graves

[Brad]

My feeling on this question is that we're trying to predict how a couple of entrepeneurs from the 50-60s would act in the late 90s and early 21st century. Conditions were quite different then than now (other than jazz being not the popular form of music at both times). It can be like mixing apples and oranges. We know how they'd operate then, but not really now (with any certainty). Chris, who was experienced in that field, is probably right, they wouldn't be happy but it's really hard to know. On the other hand, BN was a small label then so would she have even gone to them. I doubt it. Since BN is now part of a large corporation, it's probably a different story.

[DrJ]

WNMC 

Posted: Feb 17 2004, 11:10 AM

On Rozzi, he seems to be an Atlanta based critic and liner-note writer who writes for Jazziz pretty often. In fairness to him, I think the contradictory quotations may be intended to complicate the story he's telling.

Currently working my way through the fascinating, outstanding FORCES IN MOTION: THE MUSIC AND THOUGHTS OF ANTHONY BRAXTON book by Graham Lock (I owe a BIG thank you to Jim Sangrey for putting me on to this one).

After reading Braxton's insightful, clear-headed, and (most importantly) thoroughly authentic and lived-in viewpoints about issues of race in jazz, the stuff quoted in some of the prior posts just sounds so academic and inconsequential.

I'd strongly suggest you check this essential book out, Eric, it'll stimulate your thinking on this topic and you'll never want to settle for anything less again.

Edited February 18, 2004 by DrJ

[chris olivarez]

What Brad said.

[Dr. Rat]

WNMC  

Posted: Feb 17 2004, 11:10 AM

On Rozzi, he seems to be an Atlanta based critic and liner-note writer who writes for Jazziz pretty often. In fairness to him, I think the contradictory quotations may be intended to complicate the story he's telling.

Currently working my way through the fascinating, outstanding FORCES IN MOTION: THE MUSIC AND THOUGHTS OF ANTHONY BRAXTON book by Graham Lock (I owe a BIG thank you to Jim Sangrey for putting me on to this one).

After reading Braxton's insightful, clear-headed, and (most importantly) thoroughly authentic and lived-in viewpoints about issues of race in jazz, the stuff quoted in some of the prior posts just sounds so academic and inconsequential.

I'd strongly suggest you check this essential book out, Eric, it'll stimulate your thinking on this topic and you'll never want to settle for anything less again.

I'll put it on my list. Thanks.

But, well, I ahve to wonder what makes Braxton's views "thoroughly lived-in and authentic" and others "academic and inconsequential."

This topic is not, of course, on jazz and race in any grand sense, but rather about the blue note legend, my take being that from the days of Wolff, the label's image has carefully (brilliantly, I'd say) exploited a constellation of ideas and feelings about race and sexuality in this country. And that a lot of the sense of violation people feel about the current tack the label is taking is because of the abandonment of that particular constellation (it just isn't relavent in the same way today) and the effective re-imaging of the label as something different and not-yet-altogether clear.

I think this point of view is eminently subtle and insightful

--eric

[Dr. Rat]

Went surfing for some Braxton on this general topic and hit this iceberg of words:

Anthony Braxton (interview transcript! -- can you imagine speaking this way?)

As far as I'm concerned, the political decisions of the last 15 years have involved what I would call quadrant-specific coalition politics. Quadrant-specific in the sense that, looking back on the last 15 years we see a movement that has sought to move toward idiomatic certainty, as opposed to what my interest has always been, which is responding to composite reality. Idiomatic certainty is a way of talking about the kind of reductionism that has come to characterize present-day notions of what we call the jazz musician. Reductionism, in the sense of where in the beginning, we could look at the continuum of the music and the recorded materials available demonstrating the music as the artifacts, the sonic footprints of the path of evolution and experience of the great creative masters who have brought us to this point in time. Reductionism, then, is my way of looking at how that information has been redefined to where the language and conceptual experiences from the great lineage of mastership of those individuals that we call jazz musicians have been frozen, and have become the sonic artifacts that have been used to reduce the composite conceptual and vibrational implications of what that information originally meant. And so when the term jazz musician is put forth in this time period, it's put forth as part of a grand Southern political strategy. Southern political strategy in the sense that since the 1980s, in my opinion, what we have seen is a continuum of political decision that, one, would reposition the New Orleans experience as a point of definition of this erected concept of canon, at the expense of a composite American creative experience that reflects on American experiences in a way that transcends the political and ethnic position parameters that have characterized, even historically, how American progressionalism is viewed. What am I saying? I'm saying that the emergence of the modern era—say from 1880 to 1920—can be viewed on many different levels. The most important level in this example would be the concept of the IQ as a reflection of Darwin's evolution of the species, on the one component; and on the other side of that composition would be the concept of rhythm and blues as a way to establish a thought unit that on one side says the European and trans-European continuum is responsible for all of the intellectual advances of our species; and on the other side, the concept of rhythm and blues as a way of saying that African Americans have this special feeling, and that the Europeans, with all their intellectual advancement, are somehow retarded in the area of natural human feeling. I see this intellectual gambit as profoundly flawed and false; in fact this is a political gambit that is consistent with the original Southern gambit that would involve the concept of 3/5ths of a person as a way to justify a political decision that would enslave non-European, especially African American people.

I hope Lock pares this down for us a bit. Man, talk about wordy!

Dr. J: Were you pulling my leg with the Braxton rec.? Some irony that flew over my head.

There seesm to be a lot of intellectual sloppiness behind the dense verbiage. He's wrong about the 3/5 solution, for instance.

It wasn't introduced into the constituion as a way of justifying slavery. That wasn't necessary. Slavery was already happening and while some people saw a deep conflict between slavery and and the freedom and liberty talk in our founding documents, apparently this wasn't a crisis situation in 1789.

The 3/5 solution was enacted so that the slave holding states could bulk up their representation in the House and be better able to protect their peculiar interests (the continuation of the slave economy), so slaves, for the purposes of the census and distribution of congressional seats, were counted as 3/5 of a person.

They could not be counted as a whole person because Northern states protested aginst counting non-citizen property (which they compared to livestock) at the same rate as voting citizens got counted.

The 3/5 solution was an expression of rather than a justification of the slave-holding mentality.

And why all these newly-coined, pseudo-technical phrases?

But, anyhow, I'll see what Lock can make of it,

--eric

[Chuck Nessa]

Read the fucking book. Dr J spoke the truth. Take a chance, if you can stop typing. It must be in the library. You won't even have to pay the author!

[Pete C]

And why all these newly-coined, pseudo-technical phrases?

He was probably trying out some new song titles.

[Christiern]

One of my favorites is...

>/0

<_—

[Chuck Nessa]

Sing it for me.

[JSngry]

Will the lyrics suffice?

[Dr. Rat]

Read the fucking book. Dr J spoke the truth. Take a chance, if you can stop typing. It must be in the library. You won't even have to pay the author!

No go on the library copy.

There are two copies of Blutopia : visions of the future and revisions of the past in the work of Sun Ra, Duke Ellington, and Anthony Braxton / Graham Lock in Northern Michigan.

Dr. J's book being an expansion of this, I guess?

My curiosity isn't burning enough to justify buying the thing, simply put.

You don't have anything against libraries, do you? Books like Lock's probably woud have a hard time getting published if it weren't for library purchases.

Just part of being in the knowledge dissemination business: there's no money in it.

Chuck Nessa's level of hostility seems to allow him to wish any misfortune on me, even unto actually buying a book.

--eric

[JSngry]

There are two copies of Blutopia : visions of the future and revisions of the past in the work of Sun Ra, Duke Ellington, and Anthony Braxton / Graham Lock in Northern Michigan.

Dr. J's book being an expansion of this, I guess?

My curiosity isn't burning enough to justify buying the thing, simply put.

Sorry, dude, but you guess wrong. FORCES IN MOTION is a series of interviews/observations/etc. w/a Braxton Quartet (inc. Marilyn Crispell, Mark Dresser, & Gerry Hemmingway) over the course of a two-week or so tour of England. All sorts of ground is covered, musical, political, economic, humor (turns out that Braxton is a pretty funny guy, full of whimsy and good-natured irony), you name it. It's a fascinating read, and as real a portrait of a group of musicians as I've ever read. It's appeal should not be limited only to those who like Braxton's music.

Of course, if your curiosity isn't burning enough to allow for the possibility that you might enjoy such a book, or if you've decided in advance that everything Braxton has to say is going to be wrong to one degree or another because you think he's invalid as an artist (and notice I said "if" - no accusation being leveled) then don't bother. Otherwise, I'd suggest looking in remainder bins, where a copy can be had for cheap. At least in these parts it can.

[Dr. Rat]

There are two copies of Blutopia : visions of the future and revisions of the past in the work of Sun Ra, Duke Ellington, and Anthony Braxton / Graham Lock in Northern Michigan.

Dr. J's book being an expansion of this, I guess?

My curiosity isn't burning enough to justify buying the thing, simply put.

Sorry, dude, but you guess wrong. FORCES IN MOTION is a series of interviews/observations/etc. w/a Braxton Quartet (inc. Marilyn Crispell, Mark Dresser, & Gerry Hemmingway) over the course of a two-week or so tour of England. All sorts of ground is covered, musical, political, economic, humor (turns out that Braxton is a pretty funny guy, full of whimsy and good-natured irony), you name it. It's a fascinating read, and as real a portrait of a group of musicians as I've ever read. It's appeal should not be limited only to those who like Braxton's music.

Of course, if your curiosity isn't burning enough to allow for the possibility that you might enjoy such a book, or if you've decided in advance that everything Braxton has to say is going to be wrong to one degree or another because you think he's invalid as an artist (and notice I said "if" - no accusation being leveled) then don't bother. Otherwise, I'd suggest looking in remainder bins, where a copy can be had for cheap. At least in these parts it can.

You are a good salesman.

My curiosity good and properly stoked.

We'lls ee what can be done.

As to Braxton, personally--I read a bunch of the series of interviews I quoted in the former post, and though I feel its a shame his realtionship with language appears to be so tortured, and I really have my doubts about his hopping and skipping across the intellectual landscape, he has a really affecting personality.

I began to think of him as a kind of Dostoyevski-esque "holy fool" or "idiot" as in "The Idiot."

There's a certain innocenece or openness or something to him you don't usually see in folks.

--eric

[JSngry]

As to Braxton, personally--I read a bunch of the series of interviews I quoted in the former post, and though I feel its a shame his realtionship with language appears to be so tortured, and I really have my doubts about his hopping and skipping across the intellectual landscape, he has a really affecting personality.

I began to think of him as a kind of Dostoyevski-esque "holy fool" or "idiot" as in "The Idiot."

There's a certain innocenece or openness or something to him you don't usually see in folks.

Well, that's the thing you get in this book - he actually speaks in "plain" English most of the time!

And that helps put his more "formal", or "homemade", or, if you like, "tortured" pronouncements into perspective as to the "hows" and "whys" of his want/need to go that route when he does. There may be a bit of madness to his method, but there is defintiely a method to his madness, if you know what I mean (or even if you don't know what I mean. But I think you do. )

Far from being an "fool", holy or otherwise, a portrait of a man who probably knows more than most of us but who is either unwilling, unable, or at times both, to articulate it in an "easy" language emerges. Myself, I've come to the point where the "what" of what he says is more important than the "how". It's not been easy, but I do feel that it has been rewarding, to say the least.

Chuck's right - read the fucking book!

[Tom Storer]

I don't think Braxton claims to be a scholar or expert on social issues, he's just a feverish thinker of the mad-scientist variety and loves to talk about ideas. There's not much point in subjecting his lengthy, eager rambling to grim academic peer-review as if it were for intended for publication as an article in some weighty journal. It's no doubt a better approach to just read what he has to say and glean what insights might be available, as if you were sitting down together over a few drinks.

I recall a mid-70's Braxton trio concert with Dave Holland and Barry Altschul in upstate New York. Braxton came out for a question-and-answer session after the concert and rather stunned everyone with mile-a-minute explanations of his detailed, idiosyncratic system of analysis, complete with vibrational-structures this and perception-dynamics that, and so forth. And to illustrate his talk he did sing some of his compositions, and long ones, too!

I don't think many of us present had much of a clue what he was talking about, but it was interesting to try to puzzle out. And the music was fantastic!

[JSngry]

And to illustrate his talk he did sing some of his compositions, and long ones, too!

Dude, you seen that clip from the woodstock concert where Braxton's singing one of Lee Konitz' old solos to him? Chick Corea's looking on with a look of impish delight, and Lee's all like, "MY GOD! WHAT KIND OF A MONSTER HAVE I CREATED???" Priceless!

But the cat's singing the solo PERFECTLY. He "knows", this Anthony Braxton does. Even when he is unable/unwilling to express it conventionally, and even when/if his tangents go off far beyond any value to us mortals, he KNOWS. Of this I am convinced.

[Dr. Rat]

Far from being an "fool", holy or otherwise, a portrait of a man who probably knows more than most of us but who is either unwilling, unable, or at times both, to articulate it in an "easy" language emerges. Myself, I've come to the point where the "what" of what he says is more important than the "how". It's not been easy, but I do feel that it has been rewarding, to say the least.

A pretty servicable definition of "holy fool," I think!

--eric

[JSngry]

Semantics - can't live with 'em, can't be misunderstood without 'em.

[John L]

There are times when I think Braxton deliberately tries to be outrageous and fuel the controversies around him. Perhaps the best example of this are his statements of how he wants to compose pieces for multiple orchestras to be played simulataneously by different orchestras in different countries, and hopefully one day on different planets. His says it all with a straight face. For what purpose?

[7/4]

He "knows", this Anthony Braxton does. Even when he is unable/unwilling to express it conventionally, and even when/if his tangents go off far beyond any value to us mortals, he KNOWS. Of this I am convinced.

Amen brother!

[7/4]

There are times when I think Braxton deliberately tries to be outrageous and fuel the controversies around him. Perhaps the best example of this are his statements of how he wants to compose pieces for multiple orchestras to be played simulataneously by different orchestras in different countries, and hopefully one day on different planets. His says it all with a straight face. For what purpose?

Because Stockhausen is one of his heros?

[Nate Dorward]

A strong 2nd (or is it 3rd) for the recommendation of Forces in Motion. One of the great documentary books in jazz. Incidentally a fari bit of the interview material is appended to the Leo release of the Coventry concert. It's fascinating, & yes you get to hear Mr B sing a solo (Warne Marsh's solo on "The Song Is You" from the Konitz/Giuffre disc).

That said, I fully agree with Konitz's splenetic response to Braxton's Tristano/Marsh tribute album (when he was played "April" two or three years ago on a blindfold test for The Wire). A lot of sloppy, too-fast playing on that album. & in general I'm not keen on most of Braxton's standards playing--some of it's terribly verbose & messy (witness the Charlie Parker disc, which is quite charming really but has some appalling goofs on in, including a "Ko-Ko" where everyone seems hopelessly lost by the end of the track). But Braxton is an extraordinary musician in the right context.

[7/4]

Quite an influental book on me when it came out, highly recomended (aka me too).

I didn't think too much of his standards discs, but his own music knocks me out.

Did I just repeat almost what Nate said? Great minds think alike.....

[Simon Weil]

I began to think of him as a kind of Dostoyevski-esque "holy fool" or "idiot" as in "The Idiot."

There's a certain innocenece or openness or something to him you don't usually see in folks.

Well, you're putting him in a box. On my small (email) experience of the man, he was kind of absent-minded. But he also demonstrated a pretty acute awareness of the risks of interviews - and also the ability to get angry to achieve a result. This is not what fools, holy or otherwise, do.

The guy's a real life, large-scale, person. Doesn't fit in a box.

Simon Weil

[Pete C]

I'm not keen on most of Braxton's standards playing...But Braxton is an extraordinary musician in the right context.

I'm with you on the standards, and the one ghost trance performance I saw was appalling, but boy am I glad I saw him with Holland & Altschul (a sweltering night at Studio Rivbea).