Why I hate Miles

[connoisseur series500]

What were you doing in Africa, Lon?

You probably already mentioned it in the past, but I've forgotten. Was that because your Dad worked as a minister outside the country?

[jazzbo]

No, my father was with the Peace Corps during that time.

When LBJ became President he started up an advisory committee called "The Whitehouse Fellowhip" I believe. His goal was to have a panel of Americans from different walks of life to bounce issues off and help develop policy. His staff came up with a list of two thousand candidates for this panel, and my father was one of these. I'm not sure why his name came up. He'd been an innnercity white minister in a black neighborhood in Philly and was in his way involved in civil rights issues, he had had some articles on American history published, he had been a national forsenics champion in his college years, he did have a lot going for him that LBJ's staff might value. In a series of interviews the 2000 candidates were whittled down to 45. . . and my father was in that group. These 45 and their spouses if they had them were flown to D.C. for a dinner at the White House and to meet with the President. I was 10 and I can still remember how my parents looked when they left, all in their finest clothes . . . My father did not make the final 15 for the panel, and he didn't want to but he did enjoy being selected to be in the final 45 and meeting LBJ, being in the White House, etc. However a few days after my parents had returned the phone rang and it was the Peace Corps offering my father an associate director's position in Ethiopia. He felt that this was God calling him to serve overseas in a roundabout way, and he accepted. He was an associate director in Ethiopia for two years beginning in September 1966, and we all moved to Addis Ababa, which I loved dearly; my dad had 85 volunteers he oversaw and acted as a liaison for between the governements, etc. After two years, he was offered the position of Director of the Peace Corps program in Swaziland, the first Director there, as we (after a two months break back in America, in Ohio, staying sequentially with both sets of grandparents) arrived in M'Babane two weeks before they received their independence from Britain. We were there for three years, perhaps my happiest three years, as I loved being at the very competitive and very wonderful multi-racial school known as Waterford/Kamhlaba (they even have their own webpage now!) where I was the only American enrolled the years I attended. So at 16 I was dragged back to the US very very reluctantly. My father finally found a church in a small Ohio town near the town my parents grew up in, and I was bummed out and bored. I discovered Miles in the public library there, a copy of Filles De Kilamanjaro made me run out to the record store in Cleveland and buy Miles at Fillmore and In A Silent Way. . . well. . . the rest is my music-listening history.

Edited February 24, 2004 by jazzbo

[billyboy]

Miles is hands-down my favorite musician. I didn't always feel like this (20 years ago I had ZERO Miles lps and probably 6 or 7 Spyro Gyra lps ). In my high school and college years I was pretty much anti-jazz, and I listened to a lot of different stuff, punk, alternative, funk, classical, but not jazz.

My first exposure to Miles was, I think, Miles Ahead (not KoB!) and it knocked me out. I bought the 65-68 box set and I just didn't get it. There was nothing for me to hold on to melodically, and it annoyed me. Bitches Brew had a similar effect on me, but there was a groove that spoke to me underneath the cacophony. I picked up the Plugged Nickel box for 15 bucks and almost sold it. Once again, I could not decipher this music.

When I heard In a Silent Way, something clicked. Here was something more accessible, kind of funky, that I felt like I finally knew where Miles was going and what he was doing. Ascenseur Pour L'Echafaud was, for me, the missing link between the early Miles and the Plugged Nickel Miles. I can't explain it, but I felt the whole fabric of his music made a lot more sense and was a lot more satisfying. I heard the Plugged Nickel and 65-68 quintet boxes differently, somehow. I'm not going to say I completely 'get' them, but they're something more than noise now.

I guess this is just a roundabout way of saying that I had to work to like him, and I feel the payoff was worth the investment.

As I write this, I see I've focused more on Miles's albums rather than his personal playing style. C'est la vie.

Got to get home and grab a seat at the Plugged Nickel!

[RainyDay]

Jazzbo: Fascinating personal history. Thanks for sharing it.

[Larry Kart]

FWIW, two statements by Ron Carter about the '65-'68 quintet:

"..we (i.e. Shorter, Carter, Hancock, and Williams) had all kind of decided on our kind of groove before we joined the band. Obviously Miles saw that we had something to offer before we joined, or he wouldn't have asked us."

"Sixty percent of this was the band taking a new direction and forty percent was Miles recognizing this, and, while not being able to predict it would go a certain way, understanding that it was definitely taking a turn. I think he was happy to take a back seat and be an inspiration but not hold the reins too tight, and give the horses their head, knowing that it would work out all right."

I think that view of how things went is accurate up to a point (i.e. to some degree and up to a certain time) but with "Filles" and especially "In a Silent Way." Miles has moved to the front seat and taken a tight hold on the reins. Yes, I know that much of this music sounds "loose," but it's loose within boundaries that Miles has drawn.

[PHILLYQ]

I recall Herbie Hancock speaking about a concert they were playing when HH came to a wrong chord. HH said something to the effect that Miles laid something on top of that wrong chord that made it sound 'right'. I think that saya a lot about Miles' playing, that his focus was on the music sounding right and not on empty displays of chops.

[Dr. Rat]

I was wondering . . . this all got started focussing on Miles as a player, rather than as a bandleader or a public figure,

What have we to say about Miles as a player, as an improvisor, as a direct maker of music?

What make sus love him, hate him, or be indifferent to him in this capacity . . . or is that not what he's really about?

--eric

[mikeweil]

do you get the idea that much of what is written or said is simply credited to him out of awe.

I guess so. His ego needed food-a-plenty, of many a kind: cars, women, musicians, funny stuff for the nose (to use an expression from a live Rahsaan Roland Kirk record), and, most of all: money. He used, as we all know by now, many a composition of other people, some were given to him, e.g. John Lewis' Milestones, others he downright stole: Eddie Vinson's Four and Tune-Up, Mundell Lowe's Solar, the parts Bill Evans wrote for Kind of Blue ...

He was proud of the guys in his band end envied them at the same time. Same probably applies to his relationship to his influences.

I see his life and music as a constant search for himself - the photos in the Jack Johnson box clearly confirm this. He liked to provoke and needed it to define himself, was probably never really satisfied with his music. The spontaneity of his bands is seen as a typical jazz thing, but on the other hand he never indulged in rehaesring as much as Ahmad Jamal, whose trio was much more together in certain ways.

I find it hard to write about Miles. His personality is so multi-faceted and complex and encompasses so much of the social and musical scene he was part of that one single statement will always do him wrong. (Besides, my attempt to contribute to this thread was torpedoed by two browser crashes and the board being down during the last two days ... )

There was a time when I was fascinated by his music: When Bitches Brew came out the title track was broadcast in full length several times over local radio stations, which was a rarity! I listened, curiously, bought the album, took it in many times; Live-Evil hit me even harder, I once caught myself playing along and doing the same things as Airto, although I didn't pay any attention to him. But I liked these electric bands always better when he didn't play, he sounded a little predictable to me.

The jazz scene would be different without him, that's common sense. But he made it hard for anybody to love him, the way he was. He wanted love it seems to me, but enforced obedience, in a way, or admiration, and that drives many a person away from him. The talk about personal demons is in order here. But without these demons he probably wouldn't have achieved anything important and wouldn't be as fascinating.

[mikeweil]

What makes us love him, hate him, or be indifferent to him in this capacity . . . or is that not what he's really about?

I think it is impossible to separate the man from the music. More than with anybody else. The character traits that made him nasty show in his music, the contradictions.

[Dr. Rat]

What makes us love him, hate him, or be indifferent to him in this capacity . . . or is that not what he's really about?

I think it is impossible to separate the man from the music. More than with anybody else. The character traits that made him nasty show in his music, the contradictions.

I suppose you are right. I am the last person to argue to the contrary in any absolute sense.

But I would say that behaving in the world (being a bastard) and behaving through your trumpet are importantly different--the media may encourage very different sides of ones self. Certainly both manefestations (bastard, maker of trumpet noises) arise out of the same person and context, but I think they distinct enough to merit individual attention--they may in the end be very differnt looking facets of the same whole.

--eric

Edited February 25, 2004 by WNMC

[neveronfriday]

couw,

I've been watching this thread. Some quick takes:

a) A friendship practically ended when I insisted on what you stated - that Miles was not the player everyone made him out to be. This friend (and he was a good friend, no matter what people might think about a friendship ending over such a lame discussion) was in more ways than one quite attached to Davis (quite a known trumpeter himself).

B) I saw Miles live 8 or 9 times. No matter what I thought of him, his live performances were absolutely mesmerizing, which, in my mind, accounts for the fascination surrounding him. I had the chance to talk to him several times, usually early in the mornings at one Copenhagen club he liked to frequent (and that I worked at), and all I can say, despite his sometimes irritating comportment around audiences, is that he was a fascinating person with an almost magnetic charisma. Despite his sometimes very ambiguous (to say the least) image, he actually did spend time concentrating on and debating with people who, from his vantage point, must have been lower life forms (I sold drinks, provided for some entertainment and played some (very little) jazz) ... I liked the man ... very much. Never had a negative moment I can recall.

Summary: I think Eric (below) hinted at what constitutes some of that fascination:

I was wondering . . . this all got started focussing on Miles as a player, rather than as a bandleader or a public figure,

To watch Miles lead the pack with the wink of an eye, the sway of a hip or the simple movement of a finger was amazing, and I always felt that Miles live was where it was at. I had some of the most enjoyable moments at Miles' live concerts, and that despite my not really being all that taken by his playing. Man ... wonderful memories.

Paradoxical or schizophrenic? Perhaps. But there was only one Miles Davis, unique and controversial, but I loved it when I was there.

Loved it.

Cheers!

[Larry Kart]

Should really do a week or two of solid listening before opening my yap here, but I'd say that Miles the trumpet player and Miles the musician (or musical thinker) have not always been the same thing (not to mention Miles the actual or would-be Magus, or what you will -- a case certainly can be made that there were times when that to some extent extra-musical side of Miles was shaping his musical choices, also to some extent). Back to the trumpet player and the musician not always being in the same place, one of the things that makes that Birdland 1951 material so fascinating is that I think you can hear the two things coming together in his playing as they haven't really before--i.e. Miles has a concept, a way he wants the music as a whole to go, that was realized a fair bit before, in some of his Birth of the Cool solos (plues the overall sound of that band), but he didn't at that time have quite enough control of his horn (and/or enough of a concept of the way he wanted to wield his horn if he could--he was doing some pioneer concept work in both realms) to bring it all off. Now, in '51, it's definitely beginning to happen, and it's like you not only can hear it happening but also hear what a kick it is for Miles that his horn concept, his music concept, and his control of the horn are all coming together. (Off the top of my head again, I'd say that the mingled concepts were to get a kind of Pres-like, long-lined lyrical, saxophonish flow going, with an almost French horn-like, shaded mellowness of timbre always available -- nothing automatically brassy or sharply accented, which is what the horn virtually demands of a lot of players under certain conditions.)

That wholeness of Miles' trumpet/overall music concepts lasts a fair amount of time (the "When Lights Are Low" solo on "Cookin'" is a great example -- wonderful "song-writing" that's inseparable from his singing trumpet concept/execution), but I guess you could date the dawn of another stage of Miles, and/or a possible partial separation of his music and trumpet concepts, with all the Harmon mute-into-the-mike playing that dawned in that period. That is, of course, a trumpet sound in one sense -- a trumpet is what's being used -- but isn't it more a "sound" sound, so to speak, even the first intimations of Miles the Magus in its highly dramatized, almost cinematic intimacy? Can't push this further at the moment, and maybe I should have done all that re-listening first, but I wonder what a Miles maven like JimS thinks.

[jazzbo]

How about the Miles depicted in THIS tale from the old BNBB? Is he someone you would love or hate? B)

Meeting the Magus at the Crossroads. . . and other BN BB Fantasies

[Dr. Rat]

"I see you're reading The Grasshopper Lies Heavy," he said. "I hear it on many lips, but pressure of business prevents my own attention." Rising, he went to pick it up, carefully consulting their expressions; they seemed to acknowledge this gesture of sociality, and so he proceeded. "A mystery? Excuse my abysmal ignorance." He turned the pages.

"Not a mystery," Paul said. "On contrary, interesting form of fiction possibly within genre of science fiction."

"Oh no," Betty disagreed. "No science in it. Nor set in future. Science fiction deals with future, in particular future where science has advanced over now. Book fits neither premise."

"But," Paul said, "it deals with alternate present. Many well-known science fiction novels of that sort." To Robert he explained, "Pardon my insistence in this, but as my wife knows, I was for a long time a science fiction enthusiast. I began that hobby early in my life; I was merely twelve. It was during the early days of the war."

"I see," Robert Childan said, with politeness.

"Care to borrow Grasshopper?" Paul asked. "We will soon be through, no doubt within day or so. My office being downtown not far from your esteemed store, I could happily drop it off at lunchtime." He was silent, and then -- possibly, Childan thought, due to a signal from Betty -- continued, "You and I, Robert, could eat lunch together, on that occasion."

"Thank you," Robert said. It was all he could say. Lunch, in one of the downtown businessmen's fashionable restaurants. He and this stylish modem high-place young Japanese. It was too much; he felt his gaze blur. But he went on examining the book and nodding. "Yes," he said, "this does look interesting. I would very much like to read it. I try to keep up with what's being discussed." Was that proper to say? Admission that his interest lay in book's modishness. Perhaps that was low-place. He did not know, and yet he felt that it was. "One cannot judge by book being best seller," he said. "We all know that. Many best sellers are terrible trash. This, however --" He faltered.

Betty said, "Most true. Average taste really deplorable."

"As in music," Paul said. "No interest in authentic American folk jazz, as example. Robert, are you fond of say Bunk Johnson and Kid Ory and the like? Early Dixieland jazz? I have record library of old such music, original Genet recordings."

Robert said, "Afraid I know little about Negro music." They did not look exactly pleased at his remark. "I prefer classical. Bach and Beethoven." Surely that was acceptable. He felt now a bit of resentment. Was he supposed to deny the great masters of European music, the timeless classics in favor of New Orleans jazz from the honky-tonks and bistros of the Negro quarter?

"Perhaps if I play selection by New Orleans Rhythm Kings," Paul began, starting from the room, but Betty gave him a warning look. He hesitated, shrugged.

"Dinner almost ready," she said.

Returning, Paul once more seated himself. A little sulkily, Robert thought, he murmured, "Jazz from New Orleans most authentic American folk music there is. Originated on this continent. All else came from Europe, such as corny English-style lute ballads."

"This is perpetual argument between us," Betty said, smiling at Robert. "I do not share his love of original jazz."

Still holding the copy of The Grasshopper Lies Heavy, Robert said, "What sort of alternate present does this book describe?"

Betty, after a moment, said, "One in which Germany and Japan lost the war."

They were all silent.

"Time to eat," Betty said, sliding to her feet. "Please come, two hungry gentleman businessmen." She cajoled Robert and Paul to the dining table, already set with white tablecloth, silver, china, huge rough napkins in what Robert recognized as Early American bone napkin rings. The silver, too, was sterling silver American. The cups and saucers were Royal Albert, deep blue and yellow. Very exceptional; he could not help glancing at them with professional admiration.

The plates were not American. They appeared to be Japanese; he could not tell, it being beyond his field.

"That is Imari porcelain." Paul said, perceiving his interest. "From Arita. Considered a first-place product. Japan."

They seated themselves.

"Coffee?" Betty asked Robert.

"Yes," he said. "Thanks."

"Toward end of meal," she said, going to get the serving cart.

--eric

Edited February 25, 2004 by WNMC

[Pete C]

I'm not going to read all that fine print, but just what are you quoting?

[Dr. Rat]

I'm not going to read all that fine print, but just what are you quoting?

It's Philip Dick's Man in the High Castle. It's been on my mind a lot lately because of several discussions hereabouts.

The science fiction posts just drove me over the edge.

I'll edit so it's a bit bigger,

--eric

[7/4]

The Man In The High Castle by Philip K. Dick

[.:.impossible]

I haven't had time to read this entire thread, but I thought I'd jot down a quick opinion. Judging by the amount of pages on this one, it seems to be pretty popular. Hopefully, I'll get around to reading what everyone else has to say soon.

I never really thought about why I like Miles Davis. I never really thought about why I like artichoke hearts. That is probably why I will never be a critic. There is no innate necessity for me to justify my likes and dislikes to myself. Now that I'm posed with the question, however...

Seems to me, what I like most about Miles is that he came out of the same bop school that everyone else his age came out of. Somewhere along the line, he decided his voice was lost in this sameness. He continued to develop a style for decades, without compromise. Over time, his trumpet became unmistakeable. I think he made damn sure that he was unmistakeable.

His playing, especially later on in the 1960s and 70s, was unpredictable. He drew from a non-traditional quiver of technique. His chops weren't easily notated on staff paper. He continued to create a style of playing that was uncoppable.

I like him on principal. He is original. He was well-recorded as pushing the limit. He epitomizes that element of jazz music. Not only that, I like the sounds that come out of his horn, whether it is open, harmon-stemless, or wah~ and delay.

I am a curious listener. I am drawn to the less common sounds of the electric guitar. I want to know what a no-input mixing board can sound like. I don't think there is one way to play jazz trumpet.

It is refreshing to hear a musician with such a strong voice NOT play the trumpet with bravado. He could make tiny notes and he could make gigantic notes, and he could string them together, or smear them across the bandstand. He was agile and inspirational to those who don't fall in line with the status quo.

I can understand now someone doesn't like Miles Davis. I can understand why someone doesn't like Albert Ayler. I'm all ears.

[Pete C]

I am a curious listener. I am drawn to the less common sounds of the electric guitar. I want to know what a no-input mixing board can sound like. I don't think there is one way to play jazz trumpet.

Only recently did I get over my resistance to the electronic processing Miles did to his trumpet in the 70s. Now I see it as another way of Miles playing Miles, and another unique instrumental color.

[connoisseur series500]

Jazzbo: Fascinating personal history. Thanks for sharing it.

Yes, indeed.

I just got back to the board after the crash and just saw your post. Very interesting upbringing. Swaziland and Ethiopia are very different places.

I now forgive you for all your eccentricities, Lon!

[JSngry]

(Off the top of my head again, I'd say that the mingled concepts were to get  a kind of Pres-like, long-lined lyrical, saxophonish flow going, with an almost French horn-like, shaded mellowness of timbre always available -- nothing automatically  brassy or sharply accented, which is what the horn virtually demands of a lot of players under certain conditions.....but I guess you could date the dawn of another stage of Miles, and/or a possible partial separation of his music and trumpet concepts, with all the Harmon mute-into-the-mike playing that dawned in that period. That is, of course, a trumpet sound  in one sense -- a trumpet is what's being used -- but isn't it more a "sound" sound, so to speak, even the first intimations of Miles the Magus in its highly dramatized, almost cinematic intimacy? ....but I wonder what a Miles maven like JimS thinks.

I think it's interesting that the criticisms, misgivings, whatever that many people have about Miles' trumpet playing (lack of "traditional" technique, a tone that is "anti" the norm for the instrument, solos that, when transcribd, seem to be made of nothing too deeply grounded in the changes, "sloppy" technique, etc.) are quite similar to those levelled against Lester Young, as are the praises and reasons for admiration, that's what I think!

Thing is, tenor has a built in sensuality to it, and trumpet is a MANLY instrument. Archie Shepp might have called the horn a phallic symbol, and properly so, but the axe is intrinsically hermaphroditic in both shape, tonal potential, and social character. Not so the trumpet, the descendant of the bugle, and, further back, the ram's horn, the instrument used to issue clarion calls for MEN to go to battle, to signal MEN that it's time to spring into action or end the day, to let MEN know that royalty is approaching, etc. And men have been bred and conditioned for centuries to be MEN, with absolutely NO room for uncertainty, ambiguity, or anything even remotely intimating that one's grasp of/on EVERYTHING concrete is anything but enthusiastically firm. "Playing between the cracks" of manly timespacesound might lead somebody to think that you'll play between some other manly cracks, and sound for the sake of sound implies a passivity to "let it be" that goes contrary to the traditionally manly "making it happen". A brave man has the confidence to go there anyway, becasue the only truth is found in resolving ambiguities, either through action or internal digestion. Real men don't DO that, especially Gabriel(s).

If you were blindfolded and otherwise cut off from your senses, would you be able to tell who was sucking your dick? If you could be certain that you would never, EVER find out, would you even care? If it takes you less than one second to answer that last question negatively, you're probably not a Miles fan, and if you can ever answer it 1000% definitively one way ior the other without actually knowing from experience, you're DEFINITELY not a Miles fan. But if you have to admit to yourself that you just don't know...

This ain't all about anonymous dick sucking. It's not even a little about anonymous dick sucking. It's not AT ALL about anonymous dick sucking. But it made you think, didn't it.

Think about that. You all think about that.

Edited February 26, 2004 by JSngry

[jazzbo]

Ah, "The Grasshopper Lies Heavy." My favorite book that never was!

Life in the Black Iron Prison is no fun!

[7/4]

Ah, "The Grasshopper Lies Heavy." My favorite book that never was!

Life in the Black Iron Prison is no fun!

Is this why Sngry is talking 'bout Dick?

[jazzbo]

Well, let's put it this way. . . that would be an easy out. Would that be the Jim way? B)

[TedR]

This ain't all about anonymous dick sucking. It's not even a little about anonymous dick sucking. It's not AT ALL about anonymous dick sucking. But it made you think, didn't it.

Think about that. You all think about that.

So maybe I'm a Miles fan and maybe I'm not. I don't know anymore. I'm just so very confused.