Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Probably there is a thread on this already, but: I recently read Lush Life (David Hajdu), a 1996 biography of Billy Strayhorn.

I thought it fleshed out Strayhorn the man quite well. My main criticisms: for me Hajdu spent too much time (at times multiple pages) on minor characters in Strayhorn's social orbit. I felt the book dragged in those passages. Also (and I don't hold the non-musician author accountable for this) I would have liked to have read a much more in-depth analysis of the nuts and bolts of what made Strayhorn such a unique composer. To Hajdu's credit there are interviews with his musical colleagues that give some insights. I think a study of Strayhorn the musician by a musician is sorely needed. He really is that important.

Where the book really succeeded for me was Hajdu's very detailed exploration on Strayhorn's complex relationship with Ellington. It is well worth reading for that alone. 

What did you, who have read it, think?

Edited by fasstrack
Link to comment
Share on other sites

fasstrack - I thought the book was very good. I enjoyed it thoroughly.  

The picture it painted of Ellington wasn't always a positive one. But I didn't think that Hadju was unfair -- unlike some other biographers have been. For example, see Terry Teachout's Ellington bio. That book made me angry because the author seemed to have such an obvious anti-Ellington bias. (And if anything James Lincoln Collier's Ellington bio is even worse.)  By way of contrast, I thought Hadju handled the "complexity" (as you say) of the Ellington/Strayhorn relationship very well.

Since I'm not a musician, I didn't miss the musicological analysis.

Overall, big thumbs up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, HutchFan said:

 The picture it painted of Ellington wasn't always a positive one. But I didn't think that Hadju was unfair -- unlike some other biographers have been. For example, see Terry Teachout's Ellington bio. That book made me angry because the author seemed to have such an obvious anti-Ellington bias. (And if anything James Lincoln Collier's Ellington bio is even worse.)  By way of contrast, I thought Hadju handled the "complexity" (as you say) of the Ellington/Strayhorn relationship very well.

I'm loath to admit that I haven't read any Ellington biographies. Browsed through J.L. Collier's, and it seemed dry as toast...

4 hours ago, HutchFan said:

Since I'm not a musician, I didn't miss the musicological analysis.

I think a separate book dealing with this, preferably by an actual musician, is overdue...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, fasstrack said:

I'm loath to admit that I haven't read any Ellington biographies. Browsed through J.L. Collier's, and it seemed dry as toast...

Honestly, I think all of them are problematic in one way or another.  The "definitive" Ellington biography hasn't been written yet.  

I was hoping that Teachout's might be the ONE.  I thought his Satchmo biography was very, very good.  But, as I said, his Ellington bio was a GIANT disappointment. It was clear that Teachout is unsympathetic toward Ellington the man, and -- more surprisingly -- he doesn't even seem to like Ellington's music (!) very much. Also, like James Lincoln Collier before him, Teachout continued to perpetuate the idea that Ellington peaked in the 1940s and spent the rest of his career in a long, slow decline. I say, "Phooey on that!" I think Ellington was composing brilliant music right up until the end.

If you did want to read about Ellington, I'd suggest a combination of books to get a full picture. Among them:

  • Mercer Ellington's remembrance of his father, Duke Ellington in Person: An Intimate Memoir -- Like Hadju's book, this doesn't always present a flattering portrait. But Mercer was probably as close to Ellington as anyone ever was. 
     
  • The World of Duke Ellington by Stanley Dance -- There's all sort of interesting stuff about Ellington's musical philosophy in this book.  Even though Dance is purportedly the author, Ellington is the real author of this book. As such, The World of DE is much more informative and interesting than Ellington's memoir Music is my Mistress.
     
  • Duke: A Portrait of Duke Ellington by Derek Jewell -- A good all-round bio, written only few years after Ellington's passing. Obviously, there are more up-to-date biographies facts-wise. But Jewell clearly understands and appreciates Ellington's music.
     
  • Beyond Category: The Life And Genius Of Duke Ellington by John Edward Hasse -- I read Hasse's biography eagerly as I was discovering Ellington's music. And unlike some other biographers, Hasse digs ALL Ellington -- early, middle, and late! 

 

1 hour ago, fasstrack said:

I think a separate book dealing with this, preferably by an actual musician, is overdue...

That makes sense! :tup 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, HutchFan said:

Honestly, I think all of them are problematic in one way or another.  The "definitive" Ellington biography hasn't been written yet.  

I was hoping that Teachout's might be the ONE.  I thought his Satchmo biography was very, very good.  But, as I said, his Ellington bio was a GIANT disappointment. It was clear that Teachout is unsympathetic toward Ellington the man, and -- more surprisingly -- he doesn't even seem to like Ellington's music (!) very much. Also, like James Lincoln Collier before him, Teachout continued to perpetuate the idea that Ellington peaked in the 1940s and spent the rest of his career in a long, slow decline. I say, "Phooey on that!" I think Ellington was composing brilliant music right up until the end.

If you did want to read about Ellington, I'd suggest a combination of books to get a full picture. Among them:

  • Mercer Ellington's remembrance of his father, Duke Ellington in Person: An Intimate Memoir -- Like Hadju's book, this doesn't always present a flattering portrait. But Mercer was probably as close to Ellington as anyone ever was. 
     
  • The World of Duke Ellington by Stanley Dance -- There's all sort of interesting stuff about Ellington's musical philosophy in this book.  Even though Dance is purportedly the author, Ellington is the real author of this book. As such, The World of DE is much more informative and interesting than Ellington's memoir Music is my Mistress.
     
  • Duke: A Portrait of Duke Ellington by Derek Jewell -- A good all-round bio, written only few years after Ellington's passing. Obviously, there are more up-to-date biographies facts-wise. But Jewell clearly understands and appreciates Ellington's music.
     
  • Beyond Category: The Life And Genius Of Duke Ellington by John Edward Hasse -- I read Hasse's biography eagerly as I was discovering Ellington's music. And unlike some other biographers, Hasse digs ALL Ellington -- early, middle, and late! 

 

  

Wow! Thanks for your perspicacity and thoughtful, detailed response. I'll look into this after I finish re-reading Robin Kelley's Monk bio and the new Benny Golson/James Merod autobiog collaboration (which I ordered a minute ago). 

Thanks again!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On Strayhorn, a crucial supplement to Hadju or even a first choice:

https://www.amazon.com/Something-Live-Music-Billy-Strayhorn/dp/0195124480/ref=sr_1_6?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1469738495&sr=1-6&keywords=billy+strayhorn

In particular, Van De Leur is terrific and quite detailed on how Strayhorn's music actually works, and  he also nails down exactly who wrote what between Ellington and Strayhorn, mostly by examining the autograph manuscripts but also (and this is fascinating and important) by identifying particular musical maneuvers that each man made and the other did not. Leaving aside the actual sound of the Ellington orchestra, which of course can't be left aside and which affected everything Strayhorn wrote, when this information is understood, there is little doubt as to the considerable differences between Ellington and Strayhorn's ways of writing music. IIRC, Hajdu's account of who wrote what is a fair bit more anecdotal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Larry, is the majority of van de Leur's book written for a general audience? Or is it more squarely aimed at professionals -- musicians, musicologists, and the like?

I'm sure that a lot of it will be over my head.  But how much? Some of it? Or MOST of it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Larry Kart said:

On Strayhorn, a crucial supplement to Hadju or even a first choice:

https://www.amazon.com/Something-Live-Music-Billy-Strayhorn/dp/0195124480/ref=sr_1_6?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1469738495&sr=1-6&keywords=billy+strayhorn

In particular, Van De Leur is terrific and quite detailed on how Strayhorn's music actually works, and  he also nails down exactly who wrote what between Ellington and Strayhorn, mostly by examining the autograph manuscripts but also (and this is fascinating and important) by identifying particular musical maneuvers that each man made and the other did not. Leaving aside the actual sound of the Ellington orchestra, which of course can't be left aside and which affected everything Strayhorn wrote, when this information is understood, there is little doubt as to the considerable differences between Ellington and Strayhorn's ways of writing music. IIRC, Hajdu's account of who wrote what is a fair bit more anecdotal.

Thank you, Larry! I never had heard of this. Will absolutely look into it. Thanks again...

Just ordered it!

Edited by fasstrack
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, HutchFan said:

Larry, is the majority of van de Leur's book written for a general audience? Or is it more squarely aimed at professionals -- musicians, musicologists, and the like?

I'm sure that a lot of it will be over my head.  But how much? Some of it? Or MOST of it?

Some maybe but not most. You can read passages from the book using Amazon's "Look inside" feature.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you guys aware of a group of jazz fans that hold the classic Ellington saxophone section (Hodges, Procope, Gonzalves, Hamilton, Carney) in low esteem, contempt, even, because of there alleged lack of intonation? Somebody told me a joke a few years ago about Jesus going into Hell to rescue everybody except the Ellington saxophone section because their intonation made them the perfect soundtrack for the new residents that would be coming in later today, and I was seriously all WFT? BITCH, who told you that one, and the linage of the joke was given to me, and a shockingly long and "respected" lineage it was (in terms of local attributions, but very well-worked/well-paid local players from a time when that kind of work could be had). I mean, I was stunned, never heard anything like that before, either as a joke or in the music, that band was loose as hell sometimes, but as far as pitch goes, this A-440 shit works in sounds for which it was designed, but there are no breaks in wave rates, that shit is infinite, life is not a piano (and for that matter, a piano is only as it's tuned) so....deal with that, haters. I've heard "out of tune" and I've heard "pitch with color" and really, not sure why somebody doesn't get that. Those guys played side by side most nights of most years and they all knew their instruments. Even allowing for off-night and drunk/high nights and all those nights, it sounded that way because they wanted it to sound that way, you gonna tell me that Harry Carney drove Duke all the fuck over America and didn't know how that music was supposed to sound? He's the bottom of the band, all the overtones build off of him, hey, if you talk to me about "intonation", talk to me about overtones and resonances and the choices within, don't talk to me about A-440 like it's the only way that A can exist, I reject that, reject it and rebuke it, and have god AND science on my side.

And the guy who told me the joke kinda got indignant about it when I told him dude, that was one fucked joke, one thing led to another and he started going all birther and shit. I tell you, some people scare me with what they use to get to their special places, and I get really scared when they think I want to go there with them, what am I doing wrong?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, JSngry said:

Are you guys aware of a group of jazz fans that hold the classic Ellington saxophone section (Hodges, Procope, Gonzalves, Hamilton, Carney) in low esteem, contempt, even, because of there alleged lack of intonation? Somebody told me a joke a few years ago about Jesus going into Hell to rescue everybody except the Ellington saxophone section because their intonation made them the perfect soundtrack for the new residents that would be coming in later today, and I was seriously all WFT? BITCH, who told you that one, and the linage of the joke was given to me, and a shockingly long and "respected" lineage it was (in terms of local attributions, but very well-worked/well-paid local players from a time when that kind of work could be had). I mean, I was stunned, never heard anything like that before, either as a joke or in the music, that band was loose as hell sometimes, but as far as pitch goes, this A-440 shit works in sounds for which it was designed, but there are no breaks in wave rates, that shit is infinite, life is not a piano (and for that matter, a piano is only as it's tuned) so....deal with that, haters. I've heard "out of tune" and I've heard "pitch with color" and really, not sure why somebody doesn't get that. Those guys played side by side most nights of most years and they all knew their instruments. Even allowing for off-night and drunk/high nights and all those nights, it sounded that way because they wanted it to sound that way, you gonna tell me that Harry Carney drove Duke all the fuck over America and didn't know how that music was supposed to sound? He's the bottom of the band, all the overtones build off of him, hey, if you talk to me about "intonation", talk to me about overtones and resonances and the choices within, don't talk to me about A-440 like it's the only way that A can exist, I reject that, reject it and rebuke it, and have god AND science on my side.

And the guy who told me the joke kinda got indignant about it when I told him dude, that was one fucked joke, one thing led to another and he started going all birther and shit. I tell you, some people scare me with what they use to get to their special places, and I get really scared when they think I want to go there with them, what am I doing wrong?

Dude, there are a bunch of experiences you've related where I can 'wish I'd been there' but that ain't one of them.  And I deal with crazy every damn day.  I'd have been tempted to just hit him, and quick.  Life's far too short to humour that kinda delusional uncomprehending shit.  but thanks for sharing...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was also tempted to hit him, but he was the drummer and it wasn't my gig. But I soon ended up getting fired from that gig for bad behavior, which was sort of the intent behind the bad behavior. Now, that was a night when you'd have wanted to been there, trust me.

But apart from that, ok, I'm heard people talk shit about that band being ragged, and let's face it, sometimes it was, and fair enough. But the sax section's intonation, specifically? Hellish? Never heard that before, all that color and it's just sloppy playing, no, no, hell no, neither my gut nor my head can allow for that, opinion is one thing, foundational principles of reality something else.

I guess the point is that not everybody loves Ellington, but some people are really weird about it..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, JSngry said:

Are you guys aware of a group of jazz fans that hold the classic Ellington saxophone section (Hodges, Procope, Gonzalves, Hamilton, Carney) in low esteem, contempt, even, because of there alleged lack of intonation? Somebody told me a joke a few years ago about Jesus going into Hell to rescue everybody except the Ellington saxophone section because their intonation made them the perfect soundtrack for the new residents that would be coming in later today, and I was seriously all WFT? BITCH, who told you that one, and the linage of the joke was given to me, and a shockingly long and "respected" lineage it was (in terms of local attributions, but very well-worked/well-paid local players from a time when that kind of work could be had). I mean, I was stunned, never heard anything like that before, either as a joke or in the music, that band was loose as hell sometimes, but as far as pitch goes, this A-440 shit works in sounds for which it was designed, but there are no breaks in wave rates, that shit is infinite, life is not a piano (and for that matter, a piano is only as it's tuned) so....deal with that, haters. I've heard "out of tune" and I've heard "pitch with color" and really, not sure why somebody doesn't get that. Those guys played side by side most nights of most years and they all knew their instruments. Even allowing for off-night and drunk/high nights and all those nights, it sounded that way because they wanted it to sound that way, you gonna tell me that Harry Carney drove Duke all the fuck over America and didn't know how that music was supposed to sound? He's the bottom of the band, all the overtones build off of him, hey, if you talk to me about "intonation", talk to me about overtones and resonances and the choices within, don't talk to me about A-440 like it's the only way that A can exist, I reject that, reject it and rebuke it, and have god AND science on my side.

And the guy who told me the joke kinda got indignant about it when I told him dude, that was one fucked joke, one thing led to another and he started going all birther and shit. I tell you, some people scare me with what they use to get to their special places, and I get really scared when they think I want to go there with them, what am I doing wrong?

A notable musician who went on record (I think in a Leonard Feather Blindfold Test) about the supposedly bad intonation of the Ellington sax section (plus IIRC their supposed general lack of unanimity) was Jack Teagarden.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Hajdu book shone a welcome light on Strayhorn but he was wrong to imply that Ellington never gave Strays  credit.  I have many, many concert recordings where  Ellington names Strayhorn as the composer of  the numbers he wrote. I like Hajdu's writings, but he's not one to let nuance get in the way of a good story. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, I've heard that talk about Ellington's sax section.  Somebody jive like Rob McConnell putting them down.  Whatever.  

To me, this is proof that we all experience music differently. Music really does "happen" in the ear of the behearer.  It's not an objective thing; the real action is in our minds. That's only reasonable explanation when people say these sorts of things -- because, from where I'm sitting, bad-mouthing the Ellington sax section is 100% pure CRAZY talk.  It's sorta like saying Leo Tolstoy was a shitty writer or Raquel Welch was a homely woman or the Grand Canyon is underwhelming.  

What???

Not liking Carney and Hodges and Procope and Hamilton and Gonsalves is incomprehensible to me.

Of course, I didn't always feel this way about Ellington. I just listened and listened, and then one day I heard it.  And it was like a kaleidoscopic carnival, angels singing, joyous shouting, riotous, slippery colors, somehow like life itself.

I guess McConnell and Big Tea never heard that.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know about the intonation of Ellington's sax section. I don't have perfect pitch and only hear what I hear. I do know that I love to listen to Duke's sax section and that there are probably a lot of bands with "perfection" intonation (whatever that might be) that I wouldn't want want  to listen to for thirty seconds. Rob McConnell's bands might be some of those. I'll stick with what works for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sections are not a monolithic thing, there is no one "right" sound. On the opposite end of duke's section, I've loved Goodman's (Toots Mondello, unsung hero!) & Miller's, the latter being a definitive example of a section that played "perfectly" in every way. Normally that would be uncomfortable to me, but they played perfectly with a personality, the way they played made that music sound like Miller wanted it to sound, and I appreciate that, and at times even enjoy it. So for me, it's not about wright v. wrong, it's about are you bringing the story of the music. And to not get that Duke's bands, especially his sax section, was very much doing that...I have to wonder where the disconnect is. "not liking it" and "not getting it" aren't the same thing. I like things that I don't get and I get things that I don't really like. And even that famous Dead Canadian Piano Player who I can get really viscerally dislike-y about, the only "hell" I could conceive him as being a soundtrack for would be my own private, personal one. Certainly not for the entirety of humanity of and for all time. I mean, c'mon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, it's a matter of habits/tastes/preferences etc. After all, one could say that the sound of the Ellington sax section is by and large an extension of Sidney Bechet's throbbing timbre(s) on soprano -- this via Ellington's acknowledged early love for Bechet and the fact that Johnny Hodges stemmed from/loved Bechet -- and you have a sax section ideal that was based on the presence of a great many jostling overtones alongside the much less so inclined work of players like Otto Hardwicke, the whole a virtual musical equivalent to a Delacroix oil painting. That this was Ellington's reed-instrument ideal ought to go without saying. Part of the non-problem problem may be that, as the Bechet connection suggests, this was a sound and a sound-ideal that has (a la the Art Ensemble mantra) a definite "Ancient to the Future" strain to it, and the ancient side of it, I think, is what puts some arguably prissy ears on edge.

P.S. A key factor in that reed sound BTW is that Ellington almost always had two quite disparate-in-sound clarinetists -- a Bigard-Procope liquid New Orleans-style player and a relatively pure toned Jimmy Hamilton type. To state the obvious, this was no accident -- Ancient and Future, so to speak, in one basket. And don't forget Carney's occasional ensemble clarinet work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...