Steve Coleman Article In NYT

[JSngry]

Not sure how much the whole "indefatigable outlier in jazz, engaged in esoteric but vital work" is meant as a come-on to the hipsters, but, ok, come on then. There's plenty of meat to be had.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/30/arts/music/steve-coleman-a-jazz-outlier-rides-a-wave-of-acclaim.html?_r=0

[Steve Reynolds]

Why anyone needs validation by the jazz mainstream is beyond me

Nate should know the reason he is playing at The Village Vanguard is that the club has finally started booking some bands other than pure mainstream musicians.

Nothing to do with 'validation by the jazz mainstream' whatever the hell that means.

[Leeway]

While we're at it (and Steve's point is right on--if I was being "validated" by the jazz "mainstream" I'd run far and fast), how about this piece of vast overstatement:

"Vijay Iyer, who once declared in JazzTimes magazine that Mr. Coleman was, for him, as important a figure as John Coltrane, someone who “has contributed an equal amount to the history of the music.”

That's a big load of BS.

[JSngry]

Validation schmalidation, work means a better chance at survival, and mainstream press increases the possibility of work.

And somebody had to do the work to get this gig, and this piece. I doubt very seriously that Ruth Gordon or whoever just woke up one day and said, oh, let's book Steve Coleman. Or that the NYT opened up the blinds and saw the sun shining with Steve Coleman's face in it.

No, Steve Coleman's got somebody doing some work on his behalf because Steve Coleman is ready for that "career move", and this is what that looks like.

It's really not complicated.

[mjazzg]

Validation or not, I think Coleman certainly deserves this chance of a wider audience just on the basis that he's ploughed his furrow pretty single-mindedly over the years, not deviating and seemingly maintaining an unshakeable independence from the vagaries of Jazz fashion.

Perhaps it's just that the planets have aligned for him again (they did too briefly at the time of his BMG France contract) and the fickle focus of Jazz fate has fallen on him or more likely the money he's got from his recent awards have allowed him to make some space and put himself in it. Whatever the reason, the exposure is a good thing and long may he benefit from it.

Oh yes, and his music's good too......

edit to add: the Iyer quote's risible which in a way is a shame because I do think Coleman's influence is there on Lehman, Iyer, Finlayson and others

edit again: in light of Hutchfan's observation below I'll moderate the 'risible'

Edited May 1, 2015 by mjazzg

[Leeway]

Validation schmalidation, work means a better chance at survival, and mainstream press increases the possibility of work.

And somebody had to do the work to get this gig, and this piece. I doubt very seriously that Ruth Gordon or whoever just woke up one day and said, oh, let's book Steve Coleman. Or that the NYT opened up the blinds and saw the sun shining with Steve Coleman's face in it.

No, Steve Coleman's got somebody doing some work on his behalf because Steve Coleman is ready for that "career move", and this is what that looks like.

It's really not complicated.

And that "career move" to the center has been, for many other jazz musicians, a move towards convention and mediocrity. Why do you think all the little fish huddle in the "main - stream"? I'm not enamored of Coleman's pet numerology systems and cultish musical organizations, but at least it tells me that there is an individual in there. Once that is co-opted (Validated) by the forces of convention, that individuality with be hard to find. Or it will become a parody of itself, bereft of real substance. God or Mammon, it's the old story.

[paul secor]

To me, the article read like a publicity piece. I guess for Mr. Coleman and his fans, that's a good thing.

[JSngry]

I've been interested in Coleman for decades now. The early work was more promise than actuality, but right towards the end of his RCA run, things started to feel like they had always implied, and from there, all good.

I don't expect to see Steve Coleman doing a Tribute To Dick Haymes any time soon, or anything like that, nor do I see him moving towards the center. The center, however, might - might - be eyeing moving towards him. Can't help that.

People who move to the mainstream and people who have the mainstream move to them are not the same people.

There's lots of old stories, and one of them is that people root for their underdogs to get heard by more people, and them, if/when that happens, they feel betrayed. Some weird stuff, that is, and "jazz fans" are typically/historically amongst the worst offenders. Sometimes I think that people love to champion the underdog because that's how they get people to listen, not to the artist, but to THEM. And then, when everybody's listening to their heroes, what have THEY got to soapbox about? That's some weird shit to see happen, and it's happened forever, it seem.

As far as Iyler's comment goes, on the surface, yes, hyperbolic BS. But also...not without some truth either. Coleman was the one guy who has hung in and through the whole "M-Base" marketing ill-advisement to really believe in that music and the principles, not just believe in it, but invest in it, grow it, live it, and yes, it is different, it's sound, it's not just eccentricisms, it's a holistic concept of music, and yes, I hear the influence slowly getting out of the enforced shadows of the putrid Die Hard Traditionalist Machine, more and more fresher new music sounds more like Steve Coleman than it does John Coltrane, and how is that bad or wrong? Trane's been dead for damn near a half-century now, his shit's been codified beyond belief, even the last stuff, and the only challenge left to it is to do that re-creational homework. That's a whole helluva lot of work, but it ends up where it ends up. Coleman came along and started introducing all kinds of new slants on meter, harmony, intervals, layering, just a whole bunch of new ideas. I can easily see where Iyler and others looked at the options and figured, hey Coltrane, yes, God In His Heaven, for sure, but Steve Coleman, Man On The Streets RIGHT NOW, and not yet answering all his own questions, let's go here and not there. I don't know if he was the only one who was initial creative focus of that "movement", but dammmit, he's sure been the only one that acted like he was fully committed to it from jump.

Ever since the first JMT records, too many people have been listening to this stuff and thinking it simply "quirky" or "mathematical" or "fusion-" or "jazzy hip-hop", and yes, it has been of of those things, but not JUST those things. There has been an overriding vision at work, and that vision continues to grow and deepen. And now, it seems, people might be starting to see something there. What they think that is, who knows, and i it's the Mainstream Moving In, then it's a foregone conclusion that what they will convince themselves that what they are seeing validates THEM, because that's how that world rolls. But I'm thinking that Steve Coleman will be happy to take whatever money starts moving in, give the face time to whoever needs it, and go right back to writing music based on knee joints and stuff like that.

Let's face it - most people, artists and fans alike, are followers, and it's easy to play "leader" when what you're really doing is being an outstanding exponent of the advanced status quo. REAL leaders are motherfuckers like Steve Coleman who have a thing, stick with it because they know they're right, and keep developing that thing while they get looked at all funny and shit. And then one day, the status quo wakes up and needs a new thrill because they start seeing the end of their road and UH oh, we need a new contractor on this job, this road's about done all it can do an we NEED our road, you know, and then, them quirky motherfuckers start looking like Legit Heroes after all, especially if they're not dead yet.

Now, the pussies amongst these new contractors will take the money and then ask them how they want their road to go, I'm here for you, and the real heroes will take the money and keep building the road THEY were building and if anybody gets queasy, their answer will be, hey, you gave me money, you wanted a road, here it is. Use it or get the fuck off it. Well, we'll take your money away, to which the answer is, take it then, I was building this road before I had your money and I can keep building it without it.

I have no reason to believe that Steve Coleman will ever be anything other than the latter.

And hey - Roscoe Mitchell GIANTASS TRUE HERO, and let's see how many AACM At 52 articles get written. But they're getting written now, and that means mo' money mo' money mo' money, and does that make me sad or suspicious? Uh....no.

[mjazzg]

I've been interested in Coleman for decades now. The early work was more promise than actuality, but right towards the end of his RCA run, things started to feel like they had always implied, and from there, all good.

I don't expect to see Steve Coleman doing a Tribute To Dick Haymes any time soon, or anything like that, nor do I see him moving towards the center. The center, however, might - might - be eyeing moving towards him. Can't help that.

People who move to the mainstream and people who have the mainstream move to them are not the same people.

There's lots of old stories, and one of them is that people root for their underdogs to get heard by more people, and them, if/when that happens, they feel betrayed. Some weird stuff, that is, and "jazz fans" are typically/historically amongst the worst offenders. Sometimes I think that people love to champion the underdog because that's how they get people to listen, not to the artist, but to THEM. And then, when everybody's listening to their heroes, what have THEY got to soapbox about? That's some weird shit to see happen, and it's happened forever, it seem.

As far as Iyler's comment goes, on the surface, yes, hyperbolic BS. But also...not without some truth either. Coleman was the one guy who has hung in and through the whole "M-Base" marketing ill-advisement to really believe in that music and the principles, not just believe in it, but invest in it, grow it, live it, and yes, it is different, it's sound, it's not just eccentricisms, it's a holistic concept of music, and yes, I hear the influence slowly getting out of the enforced shadows of the putrid Die Hard Traditionalist Machine, more and more fresher new music sounds more like Steve Coleman than it does John Coltrane, and how is that bad or wrong? Trane's been dead for damn near a half-century now, his shit's been codified beyond belief, even the last stuff, and the only challenge left to it is to do that re-creational homework. That's a whole helluva lot of work, but it ends up where it ends up. Coleman came along and started introducing all kinds of new slants on meter, harmony, intervals, layering, just a whole bunch of new ideas. I can easily see where Iyler and others looked at the options and figured, hey Coltrane, yes, God In His Heaven, for sure, but Steve Coleman, Man On The Streets RIGHT NOW, and not yet answering all his own questions, let's go here and not there. I don't know if he was the only one who was initial creative focus of that "movement", but dammmit, he's sure been the only one that acted like he was fully committed to it from jump.

Ever since the first JMT records, too many people have been listening to this stuff and thinking it simply "quirky" or "mathematical" or "fusion-" or "jazzy hip-hop", and yes, it has been of of those things, but not JUST those things. There has been an overriding vision at work, and that vision continues to grow and deepen. And now, it seems, people might be starting to see something there. What they think that is, who knows, and i it's the Mainstream Moving In, then it's a foregone conclusion that what they will convince themselves that what they are seeing validates THEM, because that's how that world rolls. But I'm thinking that Steve Coleman will be happy to take whatever money starts moving in, give the face time to whoever needs it, and go right back to writing music based on knee joints and stuff like that.

Let's face it - most people, artists and fans alike, are followers, and it's easy to play "leader" when what you're really doing is being an outstanding exponent of the advanced status quo. REAL leaders are motherfuckers like Steve Coleman who have a thing, stick with it because they know they're right, and keep developing that thing while they get looked at all funny and shit. And then one day, the status quo wakes up and needs a new thrill because they start seeing the end of their road and UH oh, we need a new contractor on this job, this road's about done all it can do an we NEED our road, you know, and then, them quirky motherfuckers start looking like Legit Heroes after all, especially if they're not dead yet.

Now, the pussies amongst these new contractors will take the money and then ask them how they want their road to go, I'm here for you, and the real heroes will take the money and keep building the road THEY were building and if anybody gets queasy, their answer will be, hey, you gave me money, you wanted a road, here it is. Use it or get the fuck off it. Well, we'll take your money away, to which the answer is, take it then, I was building this road before I had your money and I can keep building it without it.

I have no reason to believe that Steve Coleman will ever be anything other than the latter.

And hey - Roscoe Mitchell GIANTASS TRUE HERO, and let's see how many AACM At 52 articles get written. But they're getting written now, and that means mo' money mo' money mo' money, and does that make me sad or suspicious? Uh....no.

Yes.....all of the above

[JSngry]

To me, the article read like a publicity piece. I guess for Mr. Coleman and his fans, that's a good thing.

When was the last time you read anything in the NYT that was not a publicity piece for something. either a gig or a book or a record or a party or SOMETHING?

These guys do not - for reasons I would not claim to know - do not just wake up one day and say, hmmmm....Don Byas was one helluva tenor player, let me do a column about Don Byas.

Now, if somebody has a book coming out about Don Byas, or if some guy is giving a lecture about Don Byas, or if somebody has discovered a treasure trove of heretofore unknown ANYTHING about Don Byas and wants the world to know about it, then there will be that article that Don Byas was one helluva tenor player.

It is, after all, a news paper, not a collection of gentle musings. To what extent tail wags dog, I don't know, but I do find that I'm never disappointed to just assume that to be so, and wake me when I'm wrong.

[HutchFan]

While we're at it (and Steve's point is right on--if I was being "validated" by the jazz "mainstream" I'd run far and fast), how about this piece of vast overstatement:

"Vijay Iyer, who once declared in JazzTimes magazine that Mr. Coleman was, for him, as important a figure as John Coltrane, someone who “has contributed an equal amount to the history of the music.”

That's a big load of BS.

Hold on a second. Iyer didn't couch his statement about the importance of Coleman in absolute terms. It was a reference to how much Coleman meant to Iyer, not an attempt to diminish the importance of Coltrane.

Look at the quote:

Vijay Iyer, who once declared in JazzTimes magazine that Mr. Coleman was, for him, as important a figure as John Coltrane, someone who “has contributed an equal amount to the history of the music.”

I don't have any problem with that statement because he's seems to be making it from a personal point of view, not as some sort of music historian.

[mjazzg]

While we're at it (and Steve's point is right on--if I was being "validated" by the jazz "mainstream" I'd run far and fast), how about this piece of vast overstatement:

"Vijay Iyer, who once declared in JazzTimes magazine that Mr. Coleman was, for him, as important a figure as John Coltrane, someone who “has contributed an equal amount to the history of the music.”

That's a big load of BS.

Hold on a second. Iyer didn't couch his statement about the importance of Coleman in absolute terms. It was a reference to how much Coleman meant to Iyer, not an attempt to diminish the importance of Coltrane.

Look at the quote:

Vijay Iyer, who once declared in JazzTimes magazine that Mr. Coleman was, for him, as important a figure as John Coltrane, someone who “has contributed an equal amount to the history of the music.”

I don't have any problem with that statement because he's seems to be making it from a personal point of view, not as some sort of music historian.

Thanks for pointing that out. I missed it on first reading it. I'll amend moderate my earlier comment that his quote was 'risible'. In the context you identify I think it's indeed valid although I'm still unsure about the "an equal amount to the history of the music" as the history that includes Coleman hasn't been fully written yet

Edited May 1, 2015 by mjazzg

[jcam_44]

I figured this was Pi Recordings doing and not Steve's. Either way I'm a fan of his music, his system, his energy and him as a human being, from the communication I've had with him.

[JSngry]

Oh, so Pi is the one seeking mainstream validation, eh?

Can't wait to hear that Mike Ladd/Kanye joint.

Welllll....that might actually be interesting, although not necessarily healthy...

[AllenLowe]

Coleman is a fine alto player; I do find his compositional style open to parody, however.

[JSngry]

I do find his compositional style open to parody, however.

Gonna have to ask...what isn't?

[Leeway]

I'm not letting Vijay "Hyperbole" Iyer off the hook yet. That quote is every bit as insufferable and overblown as it appears on first and last readings:

"Vijay Iyer, who once declared in JazzTimes magazine that Mr. Coleman was, for him, as important a figure as John Coltrane, someone who “has contributed an equal amount to the history of the music.”

Vijay needs to get his weights and measures re-scaled. Not sure how he measured out an "equal amount" (like cat food?) but, please, I don't care if JC came 50 years ago, Coleman doesn't come close to weighing measure with Coltrane (although he shares 3 letters!).

Vijay is swimming in the guppy tank. Every molly must look like a shark to him. Plus the comment is immensely self-serving. If SC is equal to JC, well, that must mean that Vijay is right there with Cecil. And Finlayson--good grief, he must be another Miles! How did we miss it? Risible indeed.

[JSngry]

I'm not letting Vijay "Hyperbole" Iyer off the hook yet. That quote is every bit as insufferable and overblown as it appears on first and last readings:

"Vijay Iyer, who once declared in JazzTimes magazine that Mr. Coleman was, for him, as important a figure as John Coltrane, someone who “has contributed an equal amount to the history of the music.”

Vijay needs to get his weights and measures re-scaled. Not sure how he measured out an "equal amount" (like cat food?) but, please, I don't care if JC came 50 years ago, Coleman doesn't come close to weighing measure with Coltrane (although he shares 3 letters!).

Vijay is swimming in the guppy tank. Every molly must look like a shark to him. Plus the comment is immensely self-serving. If SC is equal to JC, well, that must mean that Vijay is right there with Cecil. And Finlayson--good grief, he must be another Miles! How did we miss it? Risible indeed.

You might want to send Mr. Iyler a personal advisement that he's mis-developed his entire musical concept, is completely misdirected about music in general, and just talks too damn much for his own good. He seems to be a warm, personable guy still in the embryonic stage of his career, and I'm sure he'll appreciate the personal interest.

Or, I suppose one could also consider the possibility that Coleman's continued development has involved some fundamental reshaping of a lot of the structural elements of "jazz" in ways that people who don't really care for them would have neither an inclination nor a need to appreciate.

All things considered, though, Id opt for the first approach, since it leads to the possibility of the actual saving of an actual human's very soul. Think BIG!

[Steve Reynolds]

I dunno

One thing I'll do is get the latest Steve Coleman disc that many here that I highly respect are raving about. I am intrigued that you all really like Steve Coleman so much. My experience is very limited although my listening efforts of 15 years ago were pretty thorough yet fruitless.....

I did see him play a short solo set @ Anthony Braxton's 65th birthday celebration concert @ Le Poisson Rouge a few years back and was thoroughly underwhelmed. I was thinking "in this spot - and that is all you got?!?!?"

I mean a little bit later, John Zorn, Dave Douglas, Marlilyn Crispell, Mark Dresser & Gerry Hemingway blew the roof off the place - so I was again not prompted to investigate further despite all the fancy stuff that's been written about him over the years

One more shot forthcoming

As far as Iyer, Finlaysen and some of the others in the circle, they all have struck me as one rung below the dudes and dudettes of similar generations who make the walls shake.

[erwbol]

This thread is a good example of what most discussions of music here end up being. Very entertaining and I do enjoy reading, so please continue, but I'll stick, hopefully understandably so, to posting about CD releases and sound quality, information that helps me build a more satisfying music library.

[colinmce]

It wouldn't be a NYT article without mentioning Vijay Iyer and Ambrose Akinmusire. Chinen is a fucking joke. I'm taking the hard line on this one.

[JSngry]

But seriously...

I am neither the biggest fan nor detractor of Iyler. Pretty much depends on how I'm feeling at any given moment. But I do give him credit for moving. Not all do.

And no matter what you might think/feel about Coleman's overall musical world, you'd have to be deaf and/or willfully ignorant to not hear how it's creeping into the general esthetic amongst younger-ish players. which is only logical, really. The old linear math has been a dead end for decades now, and the not-quite-as-old omni-planar window opening is needing some further clarification now that the novelty's worn off. A refined, events-specific omni-planar logic is not only inevitable, it's attractive, irresistable, perhaps, although not immediately, and not for people still enjoying those other rides (and no, I do not discourage the enjoyment of any ride). But in time, math don't lie, physics don't lie. Hello, gravity.

People who are wondering what the hell Steve Coleman has to do with Bird, well, hey, that. And as far as what Steve Coleman has to do with AACM, well, hey, that. Not about defining a "new" math, but RE-defining THE math. People who don't believe in math, sorry, you're SOL on this one. People who jsut resist it, hey, I can feel you on taht one, but...good luck riding it out to the end. At some point...

Not that this is the only "truth" out there now, but it is A truth, and no, wishing it away or denying it won't change the math any.

As for walls shaking, yeah, ok, oooohhh SCARY. But when it times to come home, I'm thinking you'll want to end up someplace where the walls are intact. That earthquake shit is cool, but then what?

That's the question nobody asks - then what? But Steve Coleman has been asking it, and he has found some answers. So, fuck the NYT, but pay attention to Steve Coleman.

[colinmce]

FWIW I have no beef with Iyer or Coleman though I'm largely unfamiliar with both of their music. Which of the more recent Coleman records might you recommend?

[JSngry]

I found Lucidarium to be a real WTF? experience, in the good way.

For the older stuff, the Hot Brass series the first time I felt that his concepts had been fully internalized by his band, and when that stated happening, it went from being "theoretically" "interesting" to being some for real shit, ya' know? One of the few times, maybe the only time, in my adult life that I've actually heard that much evolution of that much concept in real time, which got me thinking, still thinking, actually, about how much of what we think of as "instinct" is actually learned/internalized mathematical/neurological processes.

In a very broad way, I'd liken it to the development of Tristano and his original crew, and although Tristano didn't have hip-hop in his mix, he did have "Melancholy Baby", so...it seems that the math has to entail all of the stimuli of the world with which one intends to influence, otherwise there's no transcendence, just avoidance, which is a whole 'nother thing. Neither better nor worse, just different.

[Steve Reynolds]

Pay attention to Steve Coleman?

To what extent? Instead of?

Seems to me I can think of numerous less discussed musicians who deserve a whole bunch of attention.

For NYC musicians. I start with Mat Maneri. Kris Davis. Taylor Ho Bynum. Mary Halvorsen. Tony Malaby. Ingrid Laubrock. Mark Helias. Tom Rainey. Gerald Cleaver. Sylvie Courvoisier. Mark Dresser. ETC.

Next, we can let the Chicago home boys start a nice list of wall shakers....

Should I demand you start paying attention to them, Jim?

Since when is Steve Coleman some kind of iconic master innovator/improvisor that demans to be heard?

Now I will demand you start paying attention to Mark Sanders and John Edwards.

Well no I won't but maybe my point is being made.

Why is Steve Coleman so special that I must NOT sleep on him, but Mat Maneri is OK to ignore?!?!?