Amusing mis-transcription from Jack Chambers'

[Larry Kart]

On p. 113 Chambers quotes composer and Twardzik friend Bob Zieff as follows:

"'I wasn't a bone-fried bopster, and Dick had outgrown it,' Bob Zieff told me."

Well, who hasn't been bone-fried at some point?

[AllenLowe]

thinking of getting that book, bone fried and all - how is it otherwise? (though that quote does give me pause - sounds like Google Translation) -

[Chuck Nessa]

I wouldn't count on a bunch. I will buy it though.

[Larry Kart]

thinking of getting that book, bone fried and all - how is it otherwise? (though that quote does give me pause - sounds like Google Translation) -

So-so so far. Chambers' main flaws are that sometimes he doesn't know when he doesn't know something (e.g. a reference to a piece's "harmonics" when he means its harmonies) and that he likes to make sweeping assertions (seemingly for their own sake) that are wrong and odd (e.g. Pacific Jazz's failure for 40 years to release the adventurous 1957 chamber music date that Bob Zieff scored for Chet Baker "effectively kept Baker on a musical diet of ballads for the rest of his days"). If you're writing a book about Twardzik, you should know your Chet Baker, and no one who does could say such a thing -- at least not if he were paying attention to what he was saying instead of unnecessarily pumping up the volume.

Similarly, perhaps, Chambers asserts on p.6 that when Twardzik recorded "Bess You Is My Woman Now" in 1954 "it was completely unknown as a jazz vehicle." How well known "Bess" was as a jazz vehicle when Twardzik recorded it in Oct. 1954 is something I'll try to check, but, jeebus, on p. 128 Chambers refers to Charlie Mariano's 1953 recording of "Bess," and on p. 132 adds that "Twardzik [who plays on the Mariano recording] would later record this ballad with his trio, as we have already noted...." OK.

[Dan Gould]

According to AMG, Buddy DeFranco recorded it in 1954, Harry James recorded it in 1950; Teddy Wilson in 1944.

[Bluesnik]

i have it (high time it got published!) but still haven't read it. i'll let you know when i do.

[fasstrack]

thinking of getting that book, bone fried and all - how is it otherwise? (though that quote does give me pause - sounds like Google Translation) -

So-so so far. Chambers' main flaws are that sometimes he doesn't know when he doesn't know something (e.g. a reference to a piece's "harmonics" when he means its harmonies) and that he likes to make sweeping assertions (seemingly for their own sake) that are wrong and odd (e.g. Pacific Jazz's failure for 40 years to release the adventurous 1957 chamber music date that Bob Zieff scored for Chet Baker "effectively kept Baker on a musical diet of ballads for the rest of his days"). If you're writing a book about Twardzik, you should know your Chet Baker, and no one who does could say such a thing -- at least not if he were paying attention to what he was saying instead of unnecessarily pumping up the volume.

Similarly, perhaps, Chambers asserts on p.6 that when Twardzik recorded "Bess You Is My Woman Now" in 1954 "it was completely unknown as a jazz vehicle." How well known "Bess" was as a jazz vehicle when Twardzik recorded it in Oct. 1954 is something I'll try to check, but, jeebus, on p. 128 Chambers refers to Charlie Mariano's 1953 recording of "Bess," and on p. 132 adds that "Twardzik [who plays on the Mariano recording] would later record this ballad with his trio, as we have already noted...." OK.

I wouldn't be so picky myself. I've heard some great players use 'harmonics' that way and knew what they meant. It's more expressive, actually, IMO, and fairly common among players, right or wrong. Perhaps tyhat's where he picked it up. But in a book I guess you have to be careful, as people reading may not know the difference.

[Chuck Nessa]

Words have meaning. Notes be something else.

[fasstrack]

Words have meaning. Notes be something else.

Words are very over-rated---from one who talks too much. Music speaks louder to me. I wish

I, and others, would play more and talk less. Written word is better to me for some reason. But one thing I'm sure of: it's a lot easier to talk shit about music or do post-mortems on it than play it well.

Edited April 5, 2009 by fasstrack

[Chuck Nessa]

[Big Beat Steve]

Got my copy of "Bouncin' With Bartok" last Friday and was immediately impressed as I from the start had a feeling this author did not leave a single stone unturned in exploring every facet of this short artistic life ...

I must say this is one of very few musician biographies I would have devoured in one go (if I'd had more time) immediately after starting reading it (only Terry Gibbs' "Good Vibes" managed that in recent times - on a TOTALLY different level, of course )).

So far I'm still in the chapter about R.T.'s boyhood and his family background, and as I am usually not overly impressed by whole family tree sagas worked into a bio of one particular person (in other words, some such background stories would benefit from being kept shorter) I still am not weary of that chapter as I feel it is vital in understanding his artistic background. So that's saying something...

I noticed that "Bess You Is My Woman now" claim too and was half-tempted to check the tune indexes in accessible discographies so to see if that claim actually was true but then let it pass ... Glad to see that point's settled. At any rate, it certainly was not yet a MAJOR "standard" in 1954. (Was it at any point? )

I probably would not have noticed that misjudgment of Chet Baker, but OTOH what would one have to say about other bios if you start fine-combing things and go by THAT yardstick?

Take Count Basie's autobio (a musician I HUGELY admire so I am willing to make limitless concessions) but this one does ramble on and on and get repetitive in its narrative, and since that autobio claims to have been written "with Albert Murray" I wonder how this "ghoster-editor-tidier-up" (or whatever A. Murray's function was) could have missed those misplaced dates and slipups in the post-45 section, in particular?

And no doubt unkind things relating to this kind of details could have been said about numerous other bios too.

But maybe all this is just because I'm judging this book just as an ordinary listener and collector and not a jazz writer or musician?

Edited April 6, 2009 by Big Beat Steve

[AllenLowe]

just last night I was listening to a Ralph Burns version of Bess You Is My Woman - a 1950s Decca, Al Cohn, Marky Markowitz -

personally I like words - I like talk and action - talk helps to assure that the action makes sense. It's also, in the music field as in the literary world, an intellectual partner. Problem with jazz is not too many words but too many academics speaking those words. Just my perspective. I leave the rest to Professors Kart and Nessa (school of hard bops, I think) -

Edited April 6, 2009 by AllenLowe

[ghost of miles]

I think Chambers' assertion re: "Bess" may be pretty much on the money. The Mariano record (with Twardzik on it, correct?) was a complete obscurity in its time; when was Burns' Decca recording made? Although certain songs such as "I Loves You Porgy" had been recorded by jazz artists before the mid-1950s, the score didn't really take off as a jazz vehicle until the late 1950s, after the Hollywood movie project was announced.

Gratuitous reference on the topic: Porgy and Bess: the 1950s Jazz Revival

I read Chambers' book in just a couple of sittings after it finally came out--well worth it for anybody who's interested in Twardzik, IMO. Re: "bone-fried hipsters," we've got a few around Bloomington...endemic to college towns, I think.

Edit: oops, just noticed that it was "bone-fried BOPsters." A bit bone-fried myself, I guess...

Edited April 6, 2009 by ghost of miles

[AllenLowe]

just looked it up - yes, the Burns recording was 1958 -

well, as they sang in that other song from the show, "I loves you Porky, though you're a pig..."

Edited April 6, 2009 by AllenLowe

[fasstrack]

Got my copy of "Bouncin' With Bartok" last Friday and was immediately impressed as I from the start had a feeling this author did not leave a single stone unturned in exploring every facet of this short artistic life ...

I must say this is one of very few musician biographies I would have devoured in one go (if I'd had more time) immediately after starting reading it (only Terry Gibbs' "Good Vibes" managed that in recent times - on a TOTALLY different level, of course )).

I second that. I read it b/c Teddy Charles played a joke on both of us by telling me to 'call this # and ask for Julius Gubenko'. Little did I know what I was getting into. I played along and tried to come up with a prank myself, but just had to much respect, and besides he doesn't know me from Eve. Terry answered and after I asked in a funny voice if it was Gubenko he said 'could be'. I couldn't go any further and fessed up that crazy Teddy put me up to it. But no way I was gonna be on the phone with Terry Gibbs without paying my respects, so I took the phone upstairs and checked in with the great man. In about ten minutes Teddy, 81 any day now, raced up the stairs to tell me to watch his phone bill (he was the one telling me to call and also had a hilarious, and pretty unprintable conversation with Gibbs before I took the phone again). So I took the # and called him from home. I figured he'd have great stories about the cats. He said, sure, but read my book so we'll have something to talk about. He wouldn't even sell it to me, he's that cool, instead said to get it from the library.

I read it and we had plenty to talk about over a few conversations, long ones. He has energy and memories to spare and is a funny MF---and a hero. The book is definitely worth reading/owning for the stories. Benny Goodman, Miles, Buddy Rich, Bird, more. I wish I lived in LA so I could visit or at least go hear him. Maybe those in LA will. He's going strong at around 85.

Edited April 6, 2009 by fasstrack

[Larry Kart]

Got my copy of "Bouncin' With Bartok" last Friday and was immediately impressed as I from the start had a feeling this author did not leave a single stone unturned in exploring every facet of this short artistic life ...

I must say this is one of very few musician biographies I would have devoured in one go (if I'd had more time) immediately after starting reading it (only Terry Gibbs' "Good Vibes" managed that in recent times - on a TOTALLY different level, of course )).

So far I'm still in the chapter about R.T.'s boyhood and his family background, and as I am usually not overly impressed by whole family tree sagas worked into a bio of one particular person (in other words, some such background stories would benefit from being kept shorter) I still am not weary of that chapter as I feel it is vital in understanding his artistic background. So that's saying something...

I noticed that "Bess You Is My Woman now" claim too and was half-tempted to check the tune indexes in accessible discographies so to see if that claim actually was true but then let it pass ... Glad to see that point's settled. At any rate, it certainly was not yet a MAJOR "standard" in 1954. (Was it at any point? )

I probably would not have noticed that misjudgment of Chet Baker, but OTOH what would one have to say about other bios if you start fine-combing things and go by THAT yardstick?

Take Count Basie's autobio (a musician I HUGELY admire so I am willing to make limitless concessions) but this one does ramble on and on and get repetitive in its narrative, and since that autobio claims to have been written "with Albert Murray" I wonder how this "ghoster-editor-tidier-up" (or whatever A. Murray's function was) could have missed those misplaced dates and slipups in the post-45 section, in particular?

And no doubt unkind things relating to this kind of details could have been said about numerous other bios too.

But maybe all this is just because I'm judging this book just as an ordinary listener and collector and not a jazz writer or musician?

Your experience with the Basie autobio points to one of the problems I have with Chambers' book so far. Many facts or assertions in a book by/about a figure as widely known as Basie are easily checked, and you, already being knowledgable about Basie, found many errors. But if Basie had been as obscure a figure as Twardzik, where would you have been? And how many of those errors would then have become part of the body of "common knowledge" about Basie, cited again and gain from that source?

Again, what bothers me about Chambers is that he seems to me to have a taste for recklessly making sweeping assertions (I put it that way because not all sweeping assertions are reckless, and because Chamber's taste for making them strikes me as a personal quirk, a need to periodically "pump up the volume"). If I'm right about this, much in this book that may well be dubious is going to enter the body of "common knowledge" about Twardzik in an unchecked and largely uncheckable manner. Seems to me that might be as bad a thing as someone playing the wrong first change on the bridge of "Sophisticated Lady."

[AllenLowe]

that settles it, than - Chambers will be the one to write my Authorized Biography.

[JSngry]

I figured he'd have great stories about the cats. He said, sure, but read my book so we'll have something to talk about. He wouldn't even sell it to me, he's that cool, instead said to get it from the library.

Now that's a pro move!

[Big Beat Steve]

Your experience with the Basie autobio points to one of the problems I have with Chambers' book so far. Many facts or assertions in a book by/about a figure as widely known as Basie are easily checked, and you, already being knowledgable about Basie, found many errors. But if Basie had been as obscure a figure as Twardzik, where would you have been? And how many of those errors would then have become part of the body of "common knowledge" about Basie, cited again and gain from that source?

Again, what bothers me about Chambers is that he seems to me to have a taste for recklessly making sweeping assertions (I put it that way because not all sweeping assertions are reckless, and because Chamber's taste for making them strikes me as a personal quirk, a need to periodically "pump up the volume"). If I'm right about this, much in this book that may well be dubious is going to enter the body of "common knowledge" about Twardzik in an unchecked and largely uncheckable manner. Seems to me that might be as bad a thing as someone playing the wrong first change on the bridge of "Sophisticated Lady."

I see your point, and thanks for making me sensitive to that point while I read on ...

At any rate, I am fully aware this bio is a case of piecing together scarce snippets of info on an obscure figure, and I do take such writings with a grain of salt anyway when it comes to detail assessments and conclusions. But I cannot imagine he got all the assessments and all the basic facts wrong that give a a broad picture of Richard Twardzik and his fellow musicians from those circles (a broad picture for sure, yet much more detailed than what you would have found elsewhere, even after you discount possible misinterpretations). In short, whatever detail faults there may be I dont think this overshadows and invalidates the entire opus.

And again, I guess a lot is open to debate if you trace a person's life long after he and most of those who would have been able to give first-hand information are dead and gone. I understand Levinson's Tommy Dorsey bio has its share of factual errors and misinterpretations too. A poster on another board (who definitely seemed to know what he was talking about) said so in no uncertain terms yet refused to post the errors on that public forum. Pity ... I've read that book with great interest (though I'm not the biggest TD fan in the world) and would have appreciated the corrections to clear up whatever there would have been to clear up.

[AllenLowe]

the book sounds like a 200 page Wikipedia entry -

[Quasimado]

For those interested in Twardzik the jazz musician (naturally excluding anybody who has written or hopes to write a book about anything) it's a pretty informative read.

Q