AllenLowe

I think from now on Larry will be my translator here - it beats Google Translation - but just to make it easier for 7/4, here it is in Turkish: Sürece Braille içinde değil - veya People Magazine in.

yes, I had a feeling you would know what I mean - personally I spent too many years chasing down dysfunctional jazz musicians, trying to get them to play (or at least stop hallucinating) - my complaint with Judith is that I don't get the sense that she has seen much of this up close, though I may be wrong.

thanks, yes, saw that. I have a kid who's diagnosed as Aspergers/PDD NOS, so I'm always watching these things.

as long as it's not in Braille - or in People Magazine.

I realize that this can sound obnoxious, but I am going to go with Seeline and Jsngry on this and turn to real life instead of books - how many of you here have ever had to deal with musicians with various emotional/psychological disorders? If so, do you see those disorders are merely life choices, or as difficult and destructive things? I ask this because I get the sense, re-Judith, that she has had little personal experience with the real thing, in terms of jazz musicians. Personally I could name 20 people -

there was a also a lot of self-medication going on for people to either counter the effects of what their doctors were giving them or to deal with other symptoms. Kelley is extremely good on all of that. this is another example of Judith creating straw arguments and then trying to demolish them. She's arguing with herself (as with the Jamison book that 18 people have read; of course by Seeline's logic we should not be reading about mental illness anyway but should be living it); and to say that Monk's final months of silence were a "choice" borders on incompetence. ultimately Larry's right about the great logic of Monk's work - though this is true of many creative people whose personal lives are a shambles or, at the least, quite messy. The art is the only place where they can impose order. Bill Evans was another. And if you don't think that this indicates certain mental and emotional proclivities you are either living on another planet or have never had to deal with musicians like these. try to imagine Monk without Nellie -

jsngry - I do know what you mean - but realize that for some of us it does relate to the way we internalize the music and play it. Speaking only for myself, as one who, maybe, works both sides of the fence - the music and the history - but I know other musicians like me. And it's not a question of him being damaged or not - but for us to understand the truth of the individual who created the music, which can help us understand the music from both an external and internal angle. But I find truth compelling in cases like this. so it works for some of us. and I find what you say interesting, because in many ways you are the most introspective musician I know - you never shy away from the process. You just have your own way of doing it (intellectualizing, I mean).

"I mean, I know that at one level this stuff "matters". But on another, perhaps bigger/higher/whatever one, I don't think it does. Learn the songs, play the songs, teach the songs. Find the music in them and then find that music within yourself. Then read a book about it, maybe." what higher level? Thanks for letting us know you have access; wish I did, too. so are you saying that you, unlike the people who are posting to the contrary here, have learned things that we have not, or cannot learn? There's nobody interested in the book who knows the songs or understands the music? Like Barry Harris or Randy Weston (whoops, forgot, both those guys have praised the book)? Or Robin Kelley? Guess he wasted 14 years of his life. Guess I've wasted about 35 years, because I've read more books on the subject than I can remember. If only I had known then what you know now - I'm glad you and Seeline have figured this out for us all. I guess both of you have access - and by the way, Seeline, I never realized that Jeffrey Dahmer was making a lifestyle choice.

give us a break - why do you do anything? Read any books? Talk to anybody? Just do stuff - why read about anything? It might make us think about what we do. And that's a very bad thing, oh yes. I mean, why do we read about politics and history? Let's just go out and make history. Let's run for office. Let's make policy whether we know anything about it or not. Let us get rid of written history. We just need to learn how to do everything. why do we come here? because other people say things which may interest us or teach us something? I mean we already know enough stuff already. We are each historically self sufficient. And music is just notes anyway. Has nothing to do with the person who makes it. we should just be something. Personally I'd rather live life than read about it.

well, not crazy like Jack the Ripper - or Monk. Eccentric, maybe, a little nutty, but not crazy. I think..................

Seeline - may I ask - re: Monk's last days, his long silence - do you agree with Judith that "This is not psychosis: this is choice" ? also, Jamison book or not (I haven't seen it) - I just don't know anybody anymore who subscribes to a glib, "crazy" genius theory. I'm sure there are some people out there - but I never hear it anymore in any larger journalistic way. I mean, in the jazz world - nobody calls Louis Armstrong crazy, or Duke Ellington, or Sonny Rollins.

I think you're looking for the SPORTS discussion -

uh...7/4 - don't wanna scare you, but this was BEFORE the internet -

anything with Tommy Ladnier - kinda like a N.O. reunion. If you're an LP guy pick up some of the French Black and Whites. Lotsa good stuff with Mezz, Hines, et al.

Schlessinger has apparently written a book debunking the "crazy genius" theory, I don't know, but we used to clash a bit over on the ** list (would write Jazz Research but don't want to get in trouble). First of all, I don't think that many people subscribe to the theory anymore; but I would add that some of the most hyper-creative people I've known have had eccentric tendencies, to say the least, and often much more than that. I think it's a trait of people who see the world a bit differently, as Monk obviously did. There is definitely a different kind of vision there, and, not surprisingly, it affects aspects of personality (though cause and effect are probably skewed). Beyond that I leave it to Dr. Judith, who should spend a year living with a Monk-ish personality and than report back on all of his charming quirks.

yes, whatever. The only people who think this stuff is just garden variety eccentricity are the ones who have not had to deal with it up close. If I lived with someone who did not speak for months at a time, I would consider it to be something more than a personal choice.

problem is that she starts with a reasonable premise (the difficulty of distant diagnosis) and comes to an idiotic conclusion, per Monk's last days: "This is not psychosis: this is choice" once again I will cite Barry Harris, who lived with Monk for those last years - and who's very loving depiction of Monk's last days was filled with an understanding that something was seriously wrong - "he would start a conversation, stop it, and than continue it months later, in the same place, as though no time had passed." so she is making her own distant diagnosis - I would beware of Schlessinger, who reminds me of that very popular 1960s-70s shrink (sorry, can't remember his name) who took a relativist position of mental illness, that it was really a reaction to society and not indicative of personal psychosis. Anyone who has ever lived with or dealt with such a person knows otherwise, and even Monk's family, fond as they clearly were of him, obviously (on the evidence of this book) know otherwise.

Volume 1: Day of Niagra (1965) (and that's John Cale, Tony Conrad, La Monte Young for you would-be cult followers) this is a CD - the label is: Tungsten. CD is like new - and I think it's relatively rare - for good reason. $15 shipped in the continental US of A. My paypal is alowe5@maine.rr.com

well, Ella sang it basically the same way every time - so that doesn't bother me so much. But she's on the edge there, it's very revealing, but maybe too revealing - of course I could live with that, too except for the basic sound - unlike with Billie Holiday who (with some real exceptions) manages to make it through.

well, I'm late and too lazy to read through, but my favorite is Structurally Sound - maybe because it's the second LP I ever owned (the first was Worktime by Rollins; I either had incredible taste at age 14, or these were the only two jazz records I could find in Massapequa) - also like the session with Frank Strozier - Booker is the greatest ever. More soul than a barrel of Lou Donaldsons -

I do always think of Adams, his eyes rolled upwards, hitting the high ones with Mingus -

yeah, just listened to that 1956 Stars Fell - she's just too far gone for me at this point, vocally speaking. Her singing was always a very fine balance between vulnerability and sheer woundedness - at this she just sounds, to me, to have lost the balance. Though I will grant that many other people who, as I do, like the early Wiley, still like her in the 1950s. It just pushes me away -

the Neloms band was one I saw a lot, because I became friends with Bob - some good stuff, though Bob said that Ford was becoming more and more difficult as he got better known (they finally kicked him out when Richmond continued the band after Mingus' death, when he began missing planes, etc) , and Walrath could play but always seemed inconsistent - but they were really hitting a peak of popularity, at the very least, playing to stadiums in Europe, making real money, when Mingus got sick. But who knows, if Mingus had maintained his health and just been allowed to compose, there was probably plenty still happening.

well, it was fine until it took over her voice -

I think Mingus still had it but that his bands were less than what they had been - which is not to say that he did not have great musicians, only that they were not as good, IMHO, at playing his music as some of the other groups had been. In terms of interpretation, he did better with an earlier generation that was closer to his own.