Jump to content

Cedar Walton, Hank Mobley - Breakthrough!


Hardbopjazz

Recommended Posts

Mobley's playing, and as a description of his basic musical personality than as a negative psychological evaluation. From the beginning, Hank's playing had alwasy has a certain "held back" quality of sorts to it. That's what created the tension of those great early works - the pull between holding back and letting go. As he went further along, especially through the 60s, and his personal situation began to get more, shall we say, "frayed", it's the quality that he drew upon more and more. When everybody else was creating energy by playing more, Hank was, quite stubbornly (the passive-aggressive thing again), I think going against the grain by creating more energy by playing less, reducing his vocabulary to a relative handful of devices, which he packed with emotion, often to the point of sounding like he was about to explode. By the time you get to BREAKTHROUGH, the man's personal situation was definitely frayed, and his playing here is a "bare wire". He's still got all the internal emotional & musical conflicts going on, but the defense mechanisms are pretty much gone. I made a mix-tape for a friend once, w/o any artist IDs on it, and included "Early Morning Stroll" from this album. The title I gave it was "The Ultimate Hard Bop Fuck You". To me, that's what HAnk's got going on here - he's bitter, he's frustrated, he's slipping into darkness, but for whatever reason, he's unwilling and/or unable to go all the way and just VENT all the darkness he's got inside him. Passive-agressive. His remaining years, spent as they were in the pursuit of self-destruction and basically saying "fuck you" to any and all real offers of assistance are a classic example of passive-agressive behavior, I think.

In no way is this intended as a dis on Hank, nor on his artistry. The guy's a derious favorite of mine, and always has been. It's just a recognition, in rretrospect, that Hank always had some stuff going on inside him, stuff that, had his life taken a few different turns, either gotten resolved or at least stayed somewaht sublimated. And it's definitely a retrospctive conclusion which I draw. Listening to the early and mid period works on their own, there's no indication of anything other than a player who's juggling a lot of stuff quite masterfully.

But the trip to BREAKTHROUGH was not a sudden veer off the road, I don't think. The "signs" that this was a possible outcome were there all along, at least as "possible outcomes" of the inner life that Mobley's playing suggested, all the way from the beginning. But that's 100% hindsight.

I'm in no way saying that BREAKTHROUGH is representative of Hank Mobley at his "best", but I do think it's about as "naked" an album as he ever made, and naked ain't always pretty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 77
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Of course I agree that there is a passive quality in his playing and that his held-back style creates a wonderful tension. But I don't hear this as passive-aggressive. Nevertheless, your analysis is interesting and touches on some things I've been thinking about too. A good biography of Mobley would include insight into his music as it stands as music onto itself, but would also at least suggest that his personal behavior requires explanation. I understand that his addiction is not one easily overcome. And it's been remarked that among under-recognized jazz artists, especially Mobley suffered certain disappointments. But professionally, for a while, he seems to have been doing pretty well. A continual stream of albums for a prestigious label like Blue Note would be envied by many musicians. And many of his peers got even less recognition than he did, while it was clear that he had the admiration of many of those peers (though we can guess that he was hurt by Miles Davis) and especially of Alfred Lion. So I sincerely wonder what was so specially painful for Hank Mobley? We need to find out more about the tangible personal and professional circumstances, but one also must be led, as you are, to speculate as to what it is about his personality that caused him to face those circumstances as despairingly and self-destructively as he did.

I don't see enough evidence, at least so far, that Mobley was passive-aggressive. It's a good question for those who knew him intimately. Also, as you describe his state as worsening, you say that he became even more entrenched in his musical passivity. I see what you mean, but this was also a time when he decided to make his sound harder and bigger. That's not consistent with passivity, and that decision seems to me the most salient difference (other than adapting to modal, whole-tone, boogaloo, and other trends) from his earlier work

Then you say that in Breakthrough he gives us a "fuck you" as his usual defenses have failed him so that, as I understand you, he lets his music get ugly. Downright ugly, I would say. But, again, while that's a fascinating take on the album, I don't see enough evidence for it, as well as my own listening is primarily musical, not as psychological as yours. I also wonder if yours is not so much an explanation but rather a rationalization for bad music played by one of our musical heroes. And even if your psychological explanation were correct, it wouldn't make the music that much more valuable for me as music (especially as an example of the Hank Mobley I love), though I do see that with your explanation one would find a tremendous amount of drama and pathos in the album.

Edited by Cornelius
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course I agree that there is a passive quality in his playing and that his held-back style creates a wonderful tension. But I don't hear this as passive-aggressive. Nevertheless, your analysis is interesting and touches on some things I've been thinking about too. A good biography of Mobley would include insight into his music as it stands as music onto itself, but would also at least suggest that his personal behavior requires explanation. I understand that his addiction is not one easily overcome. And it's been remarked that among under-recognized jazz artists, especially Mobley suffered certain disappointments. But professionally, for a while, he seems to have been doing pretty well. A continual stream of albums for a prestigious label like Blue Note would be envied by many musicians. And many of his peers got even less recognition than he did, while it was clear that he had the admiration of many of those peers (though we can guess that he was hurt by Miles Davis) and especially of Alfred Lion. So I sincerely wonder what was so specially painful for Hank Mobley? We need to find out more about the tangible personal and professional circumstances, but one also must be led, as you are, to speculate as to what it is about his personality that caused him to face those circumstances as despairingly and self-destructively as he did.

I don't see enough evidence, at least so far, that Mobley was passive-aggressive. It's a good question for those who knew him intimately. Also, as you describe his state as worsening, you say that he became even more entrenched in his musical passivity. I see what you mean, but this was also a time when he decided to make his sound harder and bigger. That's not consistent with passivity, and that decision seems to me the most salient difference (other than adapting to modal, whole-tone, boogaloo, and other trends) from his earlier work

Then you say that in Breakthrough he gives us a "fuck you" as his usual defenses have failed him so that, as I understand you, he lets his music get ugly. Downright ugly, I would say. But, again, while that's a fascinating take on the album, I don't see enough evidence for it, as well as my own listening is primarily musical, not as psychological as yours. I also wonder if yours is not so much an explanation but rather a rationalization for bad music played by one of our musical heroes. And even if your psychological explanation were correct, it wouldn't make the music that much more valuable for me as music (especially as an example of the Hank Mobley I love), though I do see that with your explanation one would find a tremendous amount of drama and pathos in the album.

Fair enough, and opinions can't help but differ on matters such as this.

A few points for possible further consideration, just for grins.

Of course I agree that there is a passive quality in his playing and that his held-back style creates a wonderful tension. But I don't hear this as passive-aggressive.

The very nature of Hard Bop was agressiveness of some form or fashion. It was an "in your face" music. The fact that Mobley was one of the outstanding exponents of an agreesive music while at the same time utilizing passive elements is evidence tome of a passive-agressive mind set. Specically, his tone (who some fine writer somewhere once described, roughly, as being sucked into the microphone) wasn't really "soft" or "pretty, not in the easy senses of those words. I hear it as being "rounded off", which is similar but different to Hank's own description of it as "round". In other words, there are plenty of spikes and thorns in what he played, but the tone itself was such that these things were not in the forefront of waht you immediately heard. Agression delivered in a passive manner, if you will, or at least through a sound that blunted the initial impact of the agression. Larry Kart's observation as to the importance of hearing every note with the Hank of this period plays to this too, imo. If you just listen "generally", you'll miss the finer details, and those details are where the agression is.

Also, as you describe his state as worsening, you say that he became even more entrenched in his musical passivity. I see what you mean, but this was also a time when he decided to make his sound harder and bigger. That's not consistent with passivity, and that decision seems to me the most salient difference (other than adapting to modal, whole-tone, boogaloo, and other trends) from his earlier work

Exactly - the tone became more agressive at the same time that the lines were getting pared down, which I consider a passive act. (BTW - I use the terms "passive" & "agressive" here in a non-clinical sense. I definitely to not have the grounding to do otherwise.). It seems to me that Hank, always a contrarian (his Down Beat interview, where he mentions his love of playing counter to his company is revealing, I think) was again mixing elements - giving us a harder tone, sure, but using it in the service of a phraseology that ws becoming incresingly concentrated and reductive. If he was becoming more purely agressive, it seems to me that this harder tone would be accompanied by a more note-y vocabulary, since big tones and florid playing have been the norm of the jazz tenor almost since Day One. But even this harder tone wasn't HARD. It was just hard-er. So we're still looking at a man who's seemingly wanting to get more "in your face", but who still seems unwilling/unable to go all the way with it. I consider that "passive-agressive", since there are elements of both involved, and neither one has the clear advantage over the other. If anything, the balance remians the same, but the scale of the conflict gets bumped up a notch or two. It's the struggle between the two that makes the ride all the more gripping. You can, maybe, let your attention wander in spots of, say, SOUL STATION (why you would, is beyond me, but you could...). Something like DIPPIN', otoh, just grabs you by the nads and refuses to let go. Gives "gripping" w whole 'nother meaning, I suppose... :g

Then you say that in Breakthrough he gives us a "fuck you" as his usual defenses have failed him so that, as I understand you, he lets his music get ugly. Downright ugly, I would say. But, again, while that's a fascinating take on the album, I don't see enough evidence for it, as well as my own listening is primarily musical, not as psychological as yours.

That's cool, but I listen to music first and foremost as a story being told, and as such, pondering the pshychology of that story is inevitable for me, figuring out the whats and whys of how this stroy is being told in this way. The musical and the psychological are inseparatible for me, at least when something involves me in its story as deeply as Hank Mobley's playing usually does. When I shift to a "purely musical" POV, it's either to study the music technically, or because the music has much to admire in terms of craft, but not as much in content. That's just my way, and of course, milages do vary.

I also wonder if yours is not so much an explanation but rather a rationalization for bad music played by one of our musical heroes.

Could be, but I doubt it. REACH OUT is not very good, realtively. It's jsut kinda dull, one of those days in the studio where things just didn't get going all the way. I can listen to it, but there's no compelling story being told there for me. Same with FAR AWAY LANDS (and a few others) - nothing really special, but hey, shit happens. reeds squeak, cats can't find thir zone, they're sick (in any number of ways), and the music just doesn't happen. That's not what BREAKTHROUGH is for me, not at all. I first heard it in, I think, 1976, when I hadn't really heard too much Hank besides the things w/Miles and some '50s stuff, and I immediately felt that this was "dangerous" music, that there was no coasting or out of focus work going on, that something wasn't right. sometimes when something isn't right, ya' know, you just kinda shrug it off and mve on, but sometimes the "wrongness" pulls you in and doesn't let go. Why that is, and what does and doesn't, I couldn't begin to speculate on, at least not publicly.

But this is an album that did, and I've had almost 30 years to "get over it, as it were. No doubt, there's something personal about what I hear here and how/why it grabs me like it does, but that's true of all of us and the things we like or don't like, no? Some people really dig this album, and some really don't. Neither opinion is the "right" one, imo. But the fact that it seems to be the one, perhaps the only, album of Hank's career that stirs such genuinely strong differences of opinion amongst his truest fans ought to tell all of us that it's not "just" a "oh well, shit happens" date.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest ariceffron

GET THIS STRAIGHT I SERIOUSLY DOUBT HANK WAS USING SMAK IN THE 60S ONWARD....I KNOW HE HAD TROUBLE WITH THE LAW IN 59 OR SO AND I REALLY DONT THINK HE WAS AN ADDICT ALL THRU HIS BLUE NOTE HEYDAY, BUT I CANNNOT CONFIRM THIS OF COURSE.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fascinating discussion here, thanks everybody! Will have to spin Breakthrough again!

Cornelius: my nomination for best (which in the end is no more than personal favourite, anyway) Mobley album is "Soul Station". I never really "got" "Roll Call" so far... don't ask why, I don't know... I'm a big Mobley fan!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

my nomination for best (which in the end is no more than personal favourite, anyway) Mobley album is "Soul Station". I never really "got" "Roll Call" so far... don't ask why, I don't know... I'm a big Mobley fan!

Soul Station was the first Mobley that really made *click* with me and then Roll Call was playing for the home audience. Both are fabulous albums!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Deep, shrewd thinking, Jim, IMO. I find it hard to believe that anyone (as Cornelius does -- and, please, I'm not trying to start a fight here) could take "Breakthrough" as "downright ugly" (hard though it may be for some to take) and then more or less stop right there -- as though "downright ugly" meant "merely downright ugly" or some kind of accident or abberation -- like a record someone made while dead-drunk or gravely ill. Dislike it if you will, but this was music that Mobley found it utterly necessary to make -- and that, combined with its nature and his history as an artist, makes it one of the most fascinating artistic statements I'm aware of. Guys who get to that point usually don't send messages back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have my doubts that Mobley's playing on this date was all his own idea. After all, Cedar Walton is the leader of the date so ultimately he decided to bring Mobley into the studio. I do find it odd that he brought Davis in as a second reed player. Davis rarely recorded with Walton again. He almost seems like insurance, which, to my ears, paid off nicely.

I don't hear Mobley doing anything on this date other than trying to play a tenor saxophone with bad lungs. He sounds out of breath, not out of ideas. Hadn't he already had at least one lung operation by this time? Or was that to follow soon afterward? I guess if hearing a favorite of yours stretch to try to make his voice be heard as he gasps for that last breath is something you like, this is for you. It really bums me out. I'd much rather hear Mobley when he could hit those notes. It's not like I hate this date, but I just feel like Mobley's discography didn't need this mediocre date. He had so many great performances.

BTW, there are many recorded instances of an artist trying his damndest to stretch beyond his physical means. Stan Getz's "People Time" is a favorite of mine. Like "Breakthrough", I hear one of my hero's trying to match his earlier playing and not making it. Unlike "Breakthrough", the failure isn't as noticeable because Getz still sounds like Getz. There are times during Mobley's solos on "Breakthrough" that I can't tell it's him.

Later,

kevin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I cut my LP of BREAKTHROUGH many years ago within a couple of years of its issue as I too heard a favorite artist playing well below form. However this discussion makes me wish I could spin it on the turntable once more. Oh well, I try to live with my "cut 'em loose" decisions, but this has been one of those stimulating discussions that tempts me to rethink this particular one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cedar Walton has worked with Charles Davis several times - in the 1970s and 1980s on Walton albums, and most recently in 2002 on Davis's album "Blue Gardenia". For someone who was not in Walton's working group - Bob Berg, Clifford Jordan, Ralph Moore - I wouldn't say it's rare at all. In fact, Mobley and Walton only ever recorded together 7 times - three times under Mobley's name. Davis and Walton recorded together 6 times - and three of those were under Walton's name. I don't disagree with the "insurance" idea, but more information would be needed so we have something more than just speculation - maybe Davis was supposed to be the only horn and someone saw Mobley at the last minute and invited him - maybe....

Mike

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In fact, Mobley and Walton only ever recorded together 7 times - three times under Mobley's name.

Mike, I'm away from the disc right now, but don't the liner notes of "Breakthrough" say that this band, minus Davis, was a "working unit" prior to making the album? I could swear I read that someplace.

Cedar's still around. Maybe someone could ask him how the whole date went down. When I saw Cedar one time, I mentioned how sad Mobley's playing made me on this date and he said something like, "Yeah, Hank was in tough shape around then". He seemed to know what I meant.

I once talked to someone who saw Mobley playing live around this time and they said that as weak as he sounded on "Breakthrough", he was weaker live. Almost inaudible. The guys' lungs were shot in the end. Does anyone know what caused this? Emphysema maybe?

Kevin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm away from the disc right now, but don't the liner notes of "Breakthrough" say that this band, minus Davis, was a "working unit" prior to making the album? I could swear I read that someplace.

i believe you're correct. this is an excerpt from doug ramsey's liner notes: "they have played clubs and concerts from new york to baltimore, and the enthusiasm of jazz resurgence would seem to indicate an active future for the group."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I once talked to someone who saw Mobley playing live around this time and they said that as weak as he sounded on "Breakthrough", he was weaker live. Almost inaudible. The guys' lungs were shot in the end. Does anyone know what caused this? Emphysema maybe?

I'm sure there must be someone with a more solid answer around here; I don't even have the album in question. But from what I remember of the liner notes, which I had a quick look at in a shop several years ago, Hank had already undergone surgery for lung cancer at that time. He was even quoted with some sad joke about that playing with a leaking horn almost killed him, or something to that effect. I'm not sure if it was the original liners/original issue, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nothing Mobley ever did would I consider "downright ugly". No way. However, "Breakthrough" just doesn't work for me. In a nutshell, the round sound is nowhere to be found. I'd be willing to bet very few people would be able to identify Mobley on this one if they didn't know what album they were listening to. And I'll say what I said earlier, with so much extraordinary Hank available, why listen to this one? Not to be insensitive to Mobley's situation at the time, but it's like watching Willie Mays stumble around in center field for the Mets at the end of his career.

Up over and out.

Edited by Dave James
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I doubt Mobley was a last-minute extra: he contributes 2 compositions (granted, previously recorded ones) as well as the intro to 'Summertime' which, if I remember correctly, is just the first part of 'Thinking Of Home'. If Mobley had not been there, they would have had to dig up a lot of extra material. It seems to me that his presence was planned all along.

One thing that always got me thinking: what state of mind were Mobley, Walton and Higgins on that day, since their friend Lee Morgan had just been murdered a couple of days before? I know I would have been too fucked-up to do anything properly. Perhaps Hank's sub-par chops just seemed irrelevant that day.

Bertrand.

Edited by bertrand
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think I may have mentioned this before, but I did see Mobley (with Philly Joe) at the Tin Palace ("Your host, Stanley Crouch"), around this time, and it was impossibly sad -- he was virtually inaudible and quite uncoordinated. I remember thinking at the time that if I were a member of the band and knew what kind of shape Mobley was in, I wouldn't have let it happen. "Breakthrough," however, was not like that IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find that Mobley's sound on 'Breakthrough' has some similarity to his playing on 'Thinking of Home'. Some of the same sense of reflection/sadness also pervades through the earlier Blue Note.

Reading this thread got me to dig out an excellent essay titled 'Hank Mobley in Europe 1968 - 70' by Simon Spillett in the Jan 2004 issue of 'Jazz Journal'. This has a paragraph on the 'Breakthrough'. It mentions that the group was co-led with Cedar Walton and was called 'Artistry In Music'.

There is also mention in the article of dental problems during this period in addition to the respiratory problems that are evident on the session.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mike, I'm away from the disc right now, but don't the liner notes of "Breakthrough" say that this band, minus Davis, was a "working unit" prior to making the album? I could swear I read that someplace.

From the LP liner:

The five members of this all-star group are among the busiest in jazz today. They have joined together in a cooperative venture called Artistry of Music (the cover has Artistry in Music, my note). They have played clubs and concerts from new york to baltimore, and the enthusiasm of jazz resurgence would seem to indicate an active future for the group. .............. The members of this band have made a committment to remain together as a permanent unit, taking individual engagements only when necessary.

In a way this was an early stage of Eastern Rebellion. Seems that Mobley couldn't make it due to his health condition. Clifford Jordan joined, followed by George Coleman, Bob Berg, and Ralph Moore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Reading this thread got me to dig out an excellent essay titled 'Hank Mobley in Europe 1968 - 70' by Simon Spillett in the Jan 2004 issue of 'Jazz Journal'.

I'd be very interested in what else this article had to say about Hank during this period. I think I've heard on this board that Hank found the pickings pretty slim when he went to Europe, but I'd like to know more about this era.

any chance we can prevail upon you to transcribe the article for us like Jim did himself not too long ago? ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As already mentioned, Artistry In Music was a working group (or was trying to be). The origianl Cobblestone album cover (never used again afaik) had an Artistry In Music logo (of sorts) as well as the more common Cedar Walton/Hank Moble Quintet billing. In fact, the Artistry In Music group was mentioned in Mobley's Down Beat interview. This was definitely Hank's gig from the git-go.

I'm fairly confident that there had been no lung operations at the time of BREAKTHROUGH. The first public mention of such health woes that I'm aware of was in John Litwieler's 1979 liner notes to the LT-Series issue of A SLICE OF THE TOP, as part of a litany of how "the 1970s have not been kind to him". Seeing as how Breakthrough was recorded in February of 1972, and how Hank had been playing somewhat regularly up until then, a lung operation prior to 1972 seems highly unlikely to me. Plus, I don't really hear any breath issues whatsoever in his playing. If I hear anything, it's a man who might well have been pretty damn drunk and on the edge.

By many accounts, Hank was already drinking very heavily for a few years prior to this, often with less than comfortable results. The private recordings from his European tour that I've been priviliged to hear contain many examples of this. There are more than a few moments that border on the bizarre. Bizarre, but totally involving, becasue the tension is just so damn intense. You really don't know if he's going to make it or not, yet he always does, somehow. Genuine psychodrama. This is also what I hear on BREAKTHROUGH - a man who may or may not make it, but one who ultimately does, "prettily" or not being besides the point. Like Larry said, guys who get to that point usually don't send messages back, and after this, he didn't (that later, ill-fated audition for Steeplechase aside).

Bertrand - that's a very interesting point about the proximity of the date of Lee's murder and the recording of this set. Never put that together. Cedar & Billy both, as well as Hank, seem to be really consumed by some demons that they're trying to exorcise. Cedar's comping, in particular, is in spots very unusual for him, dissonant and very percussive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jim, I think I hear the Mobley that you're talking about on the Wynton Kelly two-fer from the Left Bank Jazz Society date. I've been spinning this date a lot lately. This is where I hear Mobley stretching beyond his normal style, like he does a bit on "Third Season". However, unlike on the "Breakthrough" date, he doesn't seem to chop off each riff with a gasp that sounds like he's out of steam. The chopped off riffs are there, but they are agressively bitten off and spit out. As I said, Cedar is still with us, maybe someone can ask him if Hank was a little loaded. He most certainly wasn't high, if we are to believe his quotes in John Litweiler's 1973 DownBeat interview.

I still think comparing the solos on "Breakthrough" with the solos on something like "Live at the Left Bank" give the impression that Hank couldn't sustain the notes. Out of breath, drunk, whatever... maybe even on purpose. I still don't consider this a high spot for my favorite tenorman.

Bertrand, that's a very interesting observation about Lee's death. That had to reverberate with these guys. They played on so many dates together during the previous 15 years. It had to be tough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...