Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
B. Clugston

MacArthur grants

179 posts in this topic

Interesting points, but it's also about how Classical and Jazz isn't taught properly at grade school level. Music isn't a big priority at most schools, at least in the US.

And most classical stations play "top 40" anyways. And here's one from Beethoven (or Mozart, or JSB...)

That absolutely makes sense. Until there is 100% funding for all classical and jazz stations through government sources (ha!), there's no way you're going to be able to keep a business (and that's what radio stations are) afloat playing Stockhausen, Prokofiev or Stravinsky. That's just the way of the world in George W. Bush America.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting points, but it's also about how Classical and Jazz isn't taught properly at grade school level. Music isn't a big priority at most schools, at least in the US.

Sometimes I wonder if it isn't just a ballooned chicken and egg argument--that is, that people won't listen to X because X doesn't get exposure OR that X won't get exposure because people won't listen to or fail to gravitate toward X. Agreed on the point above, as with jazzypaul's sentiments (etc.), but it's hard to lay the blame on any particular factor when the whole equation is so ingrained. I think it's precisely because everyone here comes across as correct that it's so difficult to dissect this question into the trouble components--George W. Bush world: yes, but it's also difficult not to listen to Ben Watson's Adorno rantings sometimes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be honest, I'm not really sure what my point is, and I've been too rushed this morning to think about it too deeply. But for an average Joe tuning into Colbert's show (or anyone's really) and hearing about a jazz musician who's just won a "genius" grant for music that sounds like two seagulls fucking... well what is someone like that going to think about the state of modern jazz? For the academics and "jazz elite" (not unlike us I'll add) that can be a good thing, but for most others it's probably just the kind of thing that will cement in their mind the idea that "modern" jazz is something that they don't want any part of, turning them instead back toward the Wyntons, Kenny Gs, and Glen Millers of the world.

Of course, promoting jazz to the mainstream public is not the point of a MacArthur grant, but nevertheless it might be in our best interests if these sorts of things occassionally do go to the Regina Carters of the world.

btw, don't mean to denigrate the avante-garde - some of my favorite music sounds like two seagulls fucking. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting points, but it's also about how Classical and Jazz isn't taught properly at grade school level. Music isn't a big priority at most schools, at least in the US.

And most classical stations play "top 40" anyways. And here's one from Beethoven (or Mozart, or JSB...)

That absolutely makes sense. Until there is 100% funding for all classical and jazz stations through government sources (ha!), there's no way you're going to be able to keep a business (and that's what radio stations are) afloat playing Stockhausen, Prokofiev or Stravinsky. That's just the way of the world in George W. Bush America.

It has nothing to do with living in a GWB world. Music by astists like Beethoven and Mozart tends to be more "mainstream" and "commercial" than music by Stockhausen, et al. Just as Stan Getz is "easier on the ears" to more people than Braxton is. You can't teach/force people to like what they don't like.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting points, but it's also about how Classical and Jazz isn't taught properly at grade school level.

That said, how would you teach it?

I'm no teacher and have no kids, but here's some things to thing about:

A mandatory music appreciation course at least every year. Take 'em through different styles and around the world. Maybe twice a month for grade school and one course a year for high school. This could also take form as live demonstrations once a month. Get the parents interested, invite them too.

When I was in second or third grade, very early in school, they showed us a demonstration film of all the instruments in the orchestra. And right after the film, they asked us what instruments we were interested in playing. I chose the oboe and they talked me into the clarinet. Get them while they're young!

I took lessons at school until I started private lessons on the piano, that's another story. But I'll add that when we moved back to NJ from Ohio, they had the whole class playing these horrible metal flutes. I really hated that, but it could have started some kids down a more sophisticated musical path.

I perform sometimes with a dance company. One of the dancers (English) said something about having to learn an instrument to make some kind of grade, college admision scores maybe? I'll ask her next time.

I know you can't force this down kids throats or even the parents. There's always parents and admin who are going to think music isn't that important. We always had an art class, but music was optional.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

btw, don't mean to denigrate the avante-garde - some of my favorite music sounds like two seagulls fucking. ;)

Same here. :rofl:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting points, but it's also about how Classical and Jazz isn't taught properly at grade school level. Music isn't a big priority at most schools, at least in the US.

Sometimes I wonder if it isn't just a ballooned chicken and egg argument--that is, that people won't listen to X because X doesn't get exposure OR that X won't get exposure because people won't listen to or fail to gravitate toward X. Agreed on the point above, as with jazzypaul's sentiments (etc.), but it's hard to lay the blame on any particular factor when the whole equation is so ingrained. I think it's precisely because everyone here comes across as correct that it's so difficult to dissect this question into the trouble components--George W. Bush world: yes, but it's also difficult not to listen to Ben Watson's Adorno rantings sometimes.

This is also a symptom of the culture war, which has been raging on for ages. High art, low art and so on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That Colbert is fucking funny!

Thanks for posting it... and hey, Colbert and Kareem didn't sound half bad!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Colbert can go fuck himself. He's not funny, he's like Dennis Miller with one ball missing.

The "problem" is a simple one - most people are unable to confront a reality beyond the end of their oen nose, and most people who are are unable to relate to those who can't. And neither are particularly willing to peacefully and lovingly coexist with the parallel universes that the other resides in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Colbert can go fuck himself. He's not funny, he's like Dennis Miller with one ball missing.

The "problem" is a simple one - most people are unable to confront a reality beyond the end of their oen nose, and most people who are are unable to relate to those who can't. And neither are particularly willing to peacefully and lovingly coexist with the parallel universes that the other resides in.

Is it really a problem or is it just the way things have been since time began? As for Colbert, that was funny! If you can't laugh at yourself...

As for music education, I don't think it even has to be jazz and/or classical. Just any kind of education in music in general (the way it works, rhythm, melody, harmony, etc.) would be beneficial. In fact, I think the biggest problem with what music education there still is in schools is that they don't go into why stuff works. "Here's the sheet music, play it." It's like paint-by-numbers. EXPLAIN it to kids, and then they'll be able to better judge the stuff they hear on the radio... "Wait a minute... this tune only has four bars just repeated over and over. That's bad songwriting!"

Maybe it's wishful thinking...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At the NY Philharmonic we just did Bocelli....about 5% of people that we called said he sucked, another 1% wanted their money back, and the other 94% said it was the greatest night of their life.

It's impossible to control these things. No amount of advertising or promotion can get people to spend thir money for things they don't want. If that were true, we'd all be driving Edsels by now. (And I speak as someone who in my wasted youth worked for the ad agency that brought you Absolut Vodka. The bottle design was great, but the Vodka was even better!)

As for Regina Carter, if you cancel a gig and keep the deposit and don't pay your agent commission as per contract, you get sued.

My only reservation about Zorn getting the grant is that he is already a multimillionaire...he still has the first dollar he earned as a professional musician and it's in a brokerage account collecting interest...don't let him fool you...the giveaway is the photo of himself that he submitted, when he was in his twenties. And no, he won't put a penny into the Stone...it has to succeed on it's own, but I give him credit for that , he's absolutely right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Colbert can go fuck himself. He's not funny, he's like Dennis Miller with one ball missing.

The "problem" is a simple one - most people are unable to confront a reality beyond the end of their oen nose, and most people who are are unable to relate to those who can't. And neither are particularly willing to peacefully and lovingly coexist with the parallel universes that the other resides in.

Is it really a problem or is it just the way things have been since time began? As for Colbert, that was funny! If you can't laugh at yourself...

Yes, that's the way it's always been. Thus "problem" instead of problem.

As for Colbert, I've never found him funny. Ever.

And if it turns out that he's really a Zorn-whoever fan, then I can buy into the whole "laughing at yourself" buisness. Otherwise, I'm not amused.

But then again, I've never found him funny.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

However the "taste of Colbert" falls, I have never thought him funny.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes. Do you think it is good satire?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I do, or else I wouldn't watch him. If you've ever watched Bill O'Reilly, that's basically who he's modeled this character after and I think he's suceeded in taking a ridiculous figure like O'Reilly and making him even more so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I do, or else I wouldn't watch him. If you've ever watched Bill O'Reilly, that's basically who he's modeled this character after and I think he's suceeded in taking a ridiculous figure like O'Reilly and making him even more so.

I do understand that. I just think you give him too much credit 'cause you are on his side.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Colbert and/or his writers are very funny and on point. Although once every 2-3 weeks is enough for me. Maybe it's my old age, but about once a month I watch O'Reilly and actually like him. I rarely watch TV, except for the Weather and of course, Turner Classic Movies. and the hippest show of them all, RENO 911!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm with Chuck. Taking easy shots at easy targets isn't funny in and of itself, especially if you're "preaching to the choir".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Until Yannow or Clem post on Colbert, I really don't know what to think about him.

Edited by Randy Twizzle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Zorn is a perfect target - he's rich and powerful and isolated and a celeb - it's when comedians go after the weak and powerless that I object - which is part of the reason I got tired of Howard Stern - though he liked to compare himself to Lenny Bruce, Stern's MO was just the opposite; he went after people who rarely fought back, whereas Bruce (as with Colbert) went fter the powerful -

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

YUP! If anyone bothered to see Colbert on Charlie Rose, the man is super hip!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Which one do you think is hip :mellow: ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Colbert on Charlie Rouse?

Were either of them in Ra's band?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Colbert on Charlie Rouse?

I'm told there are photographs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.