Brad Posted March 1, 2012 Report Share Posted March 1, 2012 Its unbelievably asinine to believe that he can somehow change the language into something he's coined. Its unbelievably asinine raised to the 100th power to walk away from a U-press contract over it. IMHO of course. That wasn't the only reason. The other(s) being? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fasstrack Posted March 1, 2012 Report Share Posted March 1, 2012 Well, I think he shot himself in the foot then, by passing on the university press. I'm sure he could have gotten his concerns in the introduction. He's also deluded if he thinks his humble effort will have any effect on common usage. In addition, it's a bad move vis a vis jazz scholarship, as he would have had plenty of university library sales of a physical book. Wow. This guy really didn't like it. 'When you die at the Palace---you really die at the Palace'... Mel Brooks as stand-up philosopher. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fasstrack Posted March 1, 2012 Report Share Posted March 1, 2012 As has been mentioned above, you can download a free app for whatever device you want to use (e.g., tablet, computer, phone). Even more reason to buy a book, or---better yet---get a well-marked one from that venerable and still-living institution, the library. You know, that place where those thirsty for knowledge can ask questions of human beings who went to school to learn to answer those kinds of questions. (But usually are asked where the bathroom is...). Just my opinion----and I admit to being an old fart. Worse yet I'm proud of it... No Kindle for me,kind sir. Unless it's a flame in my heart---for an unattached brunette w/a good Dunn & Bradstreet..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Gould Posted March 1, 2012 Report Share Posted March 1, 2012 The problem Joel is that the title only exists in electronic form. So its Kindle, or a Kindle Ap for your PC or wireless device if you want to read this apprently definitive Powell biography. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSngry Posted March 1, 2012 Report Share Posted March 1, 2012 As has been mentioned above, you can download a free app for whatever device you want to use (e.g., tablet, computer, phone). Even more reason to buy a book, or---better yet---get a well-marked one from that venerable and still-living institution, the library. You know, that place where those thirsty for knowledge can ask questions of human beings who went to school to learn to answer those kinds of questions. You meant that's not what the Organissimo board is for? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fasstrack Posted March 1, 2012 Report Share Posted March 1, 2012 The problem Joel is that the title only exists in electronic form. So its Kindle, or a Kindle Ap for your PC or wireless device if you want to read this apprently definitive Powell biography. Shit. I shouldda seen that one coming. Money always wins in the good old United States of Hustle. As has been mentioned above, you can download a free app for whatever device you want to use (e.g., tablet, computer, phone). Even more reason to buy a book, or---better yet---get a well-marked one from that venerable and still-living institution, the library. You know, that place where those thirsty for knowledge can ask questions of human beings who went to school to learn to answer those kinds of questions. You meant that's not what the Organissimo board is for? I joined to meet women. And---as usual---the endeavor's been a smash success..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSngry Posted March 1, 2012 Report Share Posted March 1, 2012 If you want to meet women, go to a hockey game. I kid you not - the most Faboolus Babes I've ever seen in my life were at Dallas Stars games. Don't know how things are for the NY Rangers, but I'm just sayin'...swinging sticks, flying pucks, fights, toothless mouths on rugged faces, guys drawing blood from each other, it seems to attract some very, shall we say..."visceral" women. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Kart Posted March 1, 2012 Report Share Posted March 1, 2012 Its unbelievably asinine to believe that he can somehow change the language into something he's coined. Its unbelievably asinine raised to the 100th power to walk away from a U-press contract over it. IMHO of course. That wasn't the only reason. The other(s) being? Pullman is a very testy person who got very angry in the face of some arguably less-than-ideal behavior. Also, I don't believe that he grasped and/or accepted that the editorial machinery at an academic press necessarily grinds more slowly and in what one might regard as a more niggling manner than it does at most commercial publishers. Disclaimer: I steered him to that academic press, and his editor there is a longtime friend of mine. Nonetheless, I think my view of what happened is reasonably objective. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete C Posted March 1, 2012 Report Share Posted March 1, 2012 (edited) Decorum bids me to be silent on the topic. Now I know I can trust you with my secrets. I don't know if he ran into any of this, but one thing about peer review for university presses is that sometimes the reviewers' own agendas end up painting authors into corners they'd rather not be in. Oops--I guess you decided to not be totally silent... Edited March 1, 2012 by Pete C Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSngry Posted March 1, 2012 Report Share Posted March 1, 2012 Send him to a hockey game! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Kart Posted March 1, 2012 Report Share Posted March 1, 2012 P.S. At one point several years ago, at Pullman's request, I read his entire manuscript in its then-current form (for a modest fee) and made a number of editorial suggestions. Whether those were adopted by him, I don't know. In any case, the manuscript I read was excellent IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Face of the Bass Posted March 1, 2012 Report Share Posted March 1, 2012 (edited) From what I've read so far it has the makings of a very good biography. I just wish it had had more editorial intervention to cut out the neologisms and some of the extraneous material that gets in the way of the flow of the narrative. But the research is top notch and much of the writing is very good. Edited March 1, 2012 by Face of the Bass Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete C Posted March 1, 2012 Report Share Posted March 1, 2012 Yes, pretty good, jargon-free writing. George Lewis's book would have been much better without all the academese. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul secor Posted March 1, 2012 Report Share Posted March 1, 2012 Yes, pretty good, jargon-free writing. George Lewis's book would have been much better without all the academese. I agree. But I wonder if Mr. Lewis felt that the academic jargon was necessary for his book to be accepted by the academic community. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete C Posted March 1, 2012 Report Share Posted March 1, 2012 Yes, pretty good, jargon-free writing. George Lewis's book would have been much better without all the academese. I agree. But I wonder if Mr. Lewis felt that the academic jargon was necessary for his book to be accepted by the academic community. I suspect he's comfortable in that language. I've been in that world, and I just don't get why clear writing is so looked down upon. Academics really love their shibboleths, and I've often heard the, IMO, baseless claim that certain concepts require opaque language. I say, bullshit. My experience with university presses (for a book of 19th century cultural history, based on my dissertation, that ultimately was never published) was that they wanted me to be less clear and more "theoretical." I had interest from Smithsonian, which worked on a different model, however I was a casualty of a greatly scaled back publishing program. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Niko Posted March 1, 2012 Report Share Posted March 1, 2012 concerning the neologisms my problem with afram and euram is that they're particularly ugly new words... i mean no person is literally black or white (ie take a black/white sheet of paper, hold it to your face, not the same color), everybody knows that - if he had chosen african-american and european-american (not much difference in an ebook) or yellow and green (much prettier words) that would have improved the reading experience for me, but after all i don't really care (plus, this whole thing is most evident on the first few pages when pullman tells the social history of powell's ancestors)... concerning the academic writing, it could have been a bit more academic for me, ie, when it says something like Johnny Griffin visited Powell every day in October plus a footnote to a Griffin interview, i would have preferred the statement that Griffin said he visited Powell every day, but then the footnote is there so i can add that myself... can't say I am 300% impressed by the book but i have read about half of it so far, learned a lot, bought the complete verve box for 6 euros (pure luck) and am a totally happy customer of peter pullman... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete C Posted March 1, 2012 Report Share Posted March 1, 2012 The Verve box has some of Bud's best and worst playing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fer Urbina Posted March 1, 2012 Report Share Posted March 1, 2012 I think it was Chris Albertson who put it best a few pages back in this thread. Whatever you read in the Bud Powell bio is >exactly< what Pullman wanted you to read. That goes for the neologisms, the punctuation, the syntax, etc. I've had a few unsolvable but friendly disagreements with Pullman regarding all those points (some of them explained in the preface of the book). Our takes on grammar, common use of language and what comes first (and how, when, and why) couldn't be more different (and I had to remind myself that 1) he's more experienced than I am, 2) English is not my first language). I also think that he's fighting too many battles in >one< book, but at the end of the day it's his baby. I guess it's not just a biography of Bud Powell, but Peter Pullman's biography of Bud Powell. A man of integrity for sure. I mean, for Pete's sake (no pun intended) he went to court to get access to Powell's medical records! F Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Face of the Bass Posted March 2, 2012 Report Share Posted March 2, 2012 I think it was Chris Albertson who put it best a few pages back in this thread. Whatever you read in the Bud Powell bio is >exactly< what Pullman wanted you to read. That goes for the neologisms, the punctuation, the syntax, etc. I've had a few unsolvable but friendly disagreements with Pullman regarding all those points (some of them explained in the preface of the book). Our takes on grammar, common use of language and what comes first (and how, when, and why) couldn't be more different (and I had to remind myself that 1) he's more experienced than I am, 2) English is not my first language). I also think that he's fighting too many battles in >one< book, but at the end of the day it's his baby. I guess it's not just a biography of Bud Powell, but Peter Pullman's biography of Bud Powell. A man of integrity for sure. I mean, for Pete's sake (no pun intended) he went to court to get access to Powell's medical records! F I just want all that research and passion that he put into the topic to come through more clearly in his writing, which is why I wish he had allowed for greater editorial intervention. I get that he has strong opinions on his writing, but as a writer and editor myself I find myself trying to "clean up" parts of the book as I'm reading it, which makes it more difficult for me to really immerse myself in the writing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gheorghe Posted March 5, 2012 Report Share Posted March 5, 2012 well, I know there are different opions about his writing style. Just let me say I´m glad I got the book and I enjoy reading it. My English is a mixture of half forgotten high school stuff, cultivated by reading liner notes, jazz biographies and talkin to musicians, about the music..... It´s a great thing for me to read this book, I´ve already read 3 books about Bud, first the Francis Paudras book in the original french version that came out 1986, than another book, which kinda disapointed me, and the great Carl Smith book about all of Bud´s recordings). And of course, Ira Gitler in his book "Jazz Masters of the Forties" has a chapter about Bud Powell. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brad Posted March 5, 2012 Report Share Posted March 5, 2012 Well put by FOB. Any book, no matter how good, need an editor and/or reads by colleagues in the field. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fer Urbina Posted March 5, 2012 Report Share Posted March 5, 2012 Well put by FOB. Any book, no matter how good, need an editor and/or reads by colleagues in the field. As far as I know, colleagues in the field have read the manuscript, and FWIW Pullman has been a copy-editor or proofreader (can't remember which right now) for many years. As I said, I don't agree with many things regarding his writing, but I've certainly seen worse and, to be fair, and especially regarding Bud Powell, the quality of the information he's unearthed goes a very long way to compensate literary considerations. At least for me. F Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gheorghe Posted March 12, 2012 Report Share Posted March 12, 2012 Until now everything okay with this book, but one thing seems strange to me: Mr. Pullman writes, that Bud made only one recordings sessions in 1947, the side with Bird, but I was sure, and discographies confirm this fact, that the first trio sides were done in january 1947 (the Roost sides). Mr. Pullman mentiones them after the 1949 Mercury sides and before the first Blue Note sides from august 1949. Does he assume, that Bud made the first Roost sides in 1949 instead of ´47 ??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fer Urbina Posted March 12, 2012 Report Share Posted March 12, 2012 Until now everything okay with this book, but one thing seems strange to me: Mr. Pullman writes, that Bud made only one recordings sessions in 1947, the side with Bird, but I was sure, and discographies confirm this fact, that the first trio sides were done in january 1947 (the Roost sides). Mr. Pullman mentiones them after the 1949 Mercury sides and before the first Blue Note sides from august 1949. Does he assume, that Bud made the first Roost sides in 1949 instead of ´47 ??? He doesn't boast about it, but yes, Pullman has uncovered that the Roost recordings were made in 1949, actually after the first Mercury session. F Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gheorghe Posted March 13, 2012 Report Share Posted March 13, 2012 Until now everything okay with this book, but one thing seems strange to me: Mr. Pullman writes, that Bud made only one recordings sessions in 1947, the side with Bird, but I was sure, and discographies confirm this fact, that the first trio sides were done in january 1947 (the Roost sides). Mr. Pullman mentiones them after the 1949 Mercury sides and before the first Blue Note sides from august 1949. Does he assume, that Bud made the first Roost sides in 1949 instead of ´47 ??? He doesn't boast about it, but yes, Pullman has uncovered that the Roost recordings were made in 1949, actually after the first Mercury session. F Thank you! I really almost grew up believing that Bud made those sides in 1947. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_forumlogo.png.a607ef20a6e0c299ab2aa6443aa1f32e.png)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.