Simon Weil

Scorsese did do The Last Waltz, which is a good film. Simon Weil

Evidence of the vibe thing. Yeah, well, next time I discover how to nail down smoke...But I sure as hell notice when there's a woman instrumentalist in a Jazz (or Rock, come to that) band. But women instrumentals in a classical orchestra or as star soloists - completely unremarkable. All I can do is tell you of my experience on Jazzgrrls (the internet women in Jazz discussion group). My feeling is that women there are kind of are beaten down in respect of hoping for any change in Jazz (for women). I don't feel they want to try, to initiate, because in their own personal, individual experiences, they get kicked to shit if they try. I don't know this, I intuit it - but there you go. If you contrast that with discussions about women in Jazz I've had here and elsewhere, I get the sense of a degree of fear and apprehension - and it is quite a lot of fear and doesn't feel entirely rational. So... I conclude that these things are related. Simon Weil

Right, but what I'm pointing out is that the supposedly ideologically free West, Germans chose not to repeal that law. In the East they were compelled to do a whole bunch of things in line with true socialism . I'm suggesting that the tardiness of the West in repealing that law says something about German society, which may be have been masked by the ideological strictures in the East - and that this may be a possible explanation of why you get the same, low, level of female representation in orchestras from East and West Germany. Or maybe not... Simon Weil

The Status of Women In German Orchestras: A Report Based on Practical Experience, by Abbie Conant. http://www.osborne-conant.org/status.htm OK, on German orchestras, the first thing to be said is that Germany is a special case. As is not commonly known, one of the things that the Nazis did was remove women, very largely, from society. Kinde, kirche, kuche [children, church, cooking] was the litany. This was enacted as law and that law was not repealed until the early 60s. This tells you something about Germany, that the institutionalized anti-feminism of the Nazis was not unpalatable to Germans - who even after Hitler was safely dead did not repeal this law. Women in Germany remain disadvantaged in comparison to the rest of Europe (and, presumably, the States). So, basically, you'd expect less women in German orchestras. There is nowhere near 25% women in Major US Jazz groups. Not even 11%..So... Simon Weil

Chuck, Moose, (and now Jim), I think there's more "give" than people realise. If you go there, things happen. Simon Weil

OK, I'll make a sort of political statement. I think there is a particular sort of societal interplay that exists between men and revolves around a structured competition in which everything can get quite aggressive, and indeed is required to do so. People go at it hammer and tongs. But, within that, there is a realisation that this is some sort of game - a testoterone-driven game. And this is particulary suited to men because of the way we are constituted. To me, that is a core element of society. But it's hard for women to join. Not because they are any less tough than men, on the contrary. It's because their toughness does not apply particularly well to this somewhat ritualistic form of game. So, the point is, men can go on playing those sorts of games in Jazz, and block women out. Just as they can in the rest of society. But is it good for Jazz, good for Society? Simon Weil

OK, if it's directed at me, my line was "Jazz needs more women". Because: 1) Jazz playing on a high level has always been dominated by men. If we had more women, we'd have more talent. .... OK... 1- We already have enough "talent". What we need is more, as you called it, "high level" talent, and that's not a function of gender. If the argument is that having more women active in jazz increases the chances of finding that high-level talent, then I agree. But if it's that there's this VAST untapped pool of superior female talent, then I ain't buying it. High level talent is high level precisely because it's rare. Do we need more Geri Allens? Hell yeah. Are we right to assume that more females will display the talent of Geri Allen than will the same number of men? Hell no.... I am on the Jazzgrrls list and I remember this one discussion where a woman teacher mused that there seemed more females playing jazz at the school band level than males - and where did they go? So I drew the conclusion that she felt women were put off. This is before talent even enters into it. Just put off. She talked about "being tough enough", like women were put off by rather testosterone driven hard-nosed competition - so that, implicitly, otherwise talented women got put off by the vibe in Jazz. There are more female instrumentalists, stars, in classical music - where, I suggest, the vibe is quite different. Not a good thing, in my opinion. Simon Weil

OK, if it's directed at me, my line was "Jazz needs more women". Because: 1) Jazz playing on a high level has always been dominated by men. If we had more women, we'd have more talent. 2) The "Jazz fan" is archetypally male. If we had more female fans, we'd have more fans. Ergo Jazz would have more financial etc resources. 3) I am pissed off with testoterone. In general, the more places that women feel at home in within Jazz, the more are liable to commit in a meaningful way. If they do it here, that's part of the way there. 4) Anyway, I just think women get a raw deal in society. Simon Weil

I think Jazz needs more women. Not just here, everywhere. One thing to be said about this place, since we've gotten rid of Greg, the testoterone level (esp in the political forum) has noticeably dropped. The gentleman's club, well yes, with the accent on gentle (at least some of the time and hopefully so). Actually I think this place is rather liable to welcoming to women. IF they can get past the babe thread... Simon Weil

Oh, God...It's like this. In Germany the vocal opposition to Hitler didn't exist after a certain point. Partly because people didn't really have those doubts and second thoughts you refer to - they didn't know, as we do now, where those (Nazi) things led. So that's fine and I accept that. But what we have now is people who know where things lead, protest about it, and then do nothing really. That's a new Liberal approach which I see from the 80s on in the West. The lack of proper liberal response to the slide to semi-fascist stuff in the US since 9/11 is an example. I also think Liberal Jews need to get their act together about Israel. Simon Weil

Yes, and if I do I arrive at the same or similar conclusion as you do. I was trying to address the dichotomy in the reactions that Riefenstahl provokes. The problems or second thoughts the Germans have now were completely absent then. Even outside Germany, it seems, there was hardly any opposition to this glorification. I think we (as in humanity) can learn a lot from that. Yeah, I think that's a valid point at least in theory. The reason I make this rather ungenerous response is that I am kind of sardonic about the range of positions that Post-Nazi liberals can avail themselves of in doing nothing, while yet professing to be against evil. Bitterly yours, Simon Weil

I do not agree with you completely here. As I wrote above, I think her works not only glorify the evil of the nazi ideology, but some deeply ingrained German ideals. Many of those are still held high these days. It is her refusion to separate the two that make many feel uncomfortable with a perfectly healthy sense of beauty the people have. Well I see artistic sensibility as something not divisible. You do a work of art and it incorporates all that's around and within you on some level. That's how it achieves its cohesiveness and integrity as a work of art, because you achieve integrity of self-expression with your own particular circumstances. But if you then have a person creating a work of art fused in an intrinsic way with surrounding evil, that can only imply that that person's sensibility itself achieves integrity in the presence of evil - and for evil. A person's sensibility can also achieve integrity in the presence of evil, but working against it. One might even suggest that Jazz (taken as a whole) was like that, as a form that projected a self-image of blacks that fought the evil of racism and segregation. Couw, I think you need to separate what R did from the problems of Germans now. Simon Weil

You need a very particular sensibility to make a work of art that successfully glorifies evil. In so doing you partake of evil yourself, unconsciously or not. That's it. End Story. Simon Weil

I like "Till we have faces" a lot too. Metheny plays well on this, in a chunky aggressive style - kind of half "out". Simon Weil

Yes indeed, kudos to Joe. It's a fine interview. Simon Weil

Thanks, Lawrence. I have snaffled a copy- instantaneously. It does have "Rebound" track 3 on the CD. For me, the Robertson record which works best is "Falling in Flat Space". That is a quiet, understated sort of record - and quite scary. It has power like that - power in a different way to the thing he achieves in concert (or the gigs we saw, anyway) - but power. Might be thisOne Final Note Interview by Joe Milazzo (who posts here as Joe). The Bud Powell record has that happy/sad sensibility too, but not so charged. Simon Weil

Well I couldn't tell you if Robertson was doing that or some other thing, but the one time I've seen the guy live (with Tim Berne 5 years ago), he was just astounding. He has amazing technical control and a fully worked-out artistic sensibility which produced solos of a happy/sad clown quality. I've got most of his solo records and he never seems to come close to that verve/presence - so, on that, I agree with Lawrence. But, my God, if you could ever get that down on disc... Simon Weil

http://search.ft.com/search/article.html?i...arch&state=Form Slightly different angle. Simon Weil

They do get lots of people visiting. Nils told me it was over 1 million hits a month a few years ago. And the site is much, much bigger now. When the dust has settled, doubtless they'll tell us. Simon Weil

Here's an email I got from Mike Ricci: Don't know what the tech difficulties are, but anyway not trolls. Simon Weil

http://www.jazzservices.org.uk Is a massive website for things Jazz in the UK. If you hit the "gigs" button on the entry page, the "gigs by region" button on the page after that, and the "London" button on the page after that, quite a full listing comes up. A bit long to post... Simon Weil

Right, this is where I was going with my comments about Burns. That series presented Jazz as essentially a past music. It was also, in my opinion, boring. To me, that's where the leading edge of Jazz - at least in its public face - has been for the last 20 years. Stylish but rather boring, worthy music living in the past. In that its public image has been Wynton Marsalis. Simon Weil

I assumed you meant ALL jazz here. I now see you meant NEW jazz. There's probably more old jazz on sale than there's ever been. But the majors have given up on all but the most commercial in the new. Which is my point. The price drop at Universal is only good news if you are in the market for purchasing lots of back catalogue. It's going to make it harder for the wonderful little companies who continue to put out the new. I was really trying to convey the idea that the majors have, in some important sense, lost faith in Jazz. That is expressed in them moving from boosting new artists to boosting back catalogue. But in the back of my mind is also the idea that, of all the "Jazz" sales in the last few years "Smooth" played a large part - so that, although "Jazz" as a whole "held its own", "Jazz" as most people would understand it went backwards. This is distinct from the fall in music sales as a whole - and is despite Ken Burns' Jazz which was supposed to bring people back to the music - and didn't. If one looks at Ken Burns' series as an attempt at marketing Jazz which failed (which is true on some level, surely), the industry conclusion might easily be: this is not a music that is going to increase its market share any time soon. In other words Burns might have worked out as bad for Jazz. Now I'm just guessing, but my feeling is that the sales of Jazz going backwards in that way has resulted in wholesalers dumping stocks (because they've decided that's a permanent thing) - and labels (i.e. manufacturers as opposed to wholesalers) deciding to retrench in some major way. That is they're going to bring down prices - which they hope will bring up sales; cut out developing new artists; and concentrate on selling what they know people will buy, reissues. Altogether it's a conservative "old news" strategy (but, of course, I'm guessing). Simon Weil

Well, yes and no. The days of the big labels putting out new hard bop records by young, relatively talented young lions is over. For example, Verve wouldn't release any Harper Brothers records in this era. You have to be either a big name (Wayne or Herbie or Brecker) or have some crossover appeal, for the most part. Or be a vocalist. Still, while you may not see as large of a jazz section in stores today, from what people in the business tell me, the jazz imprints at the major labels are holding their own, in many cases far better than their pop counterparts. There's money to be made in jazz, even for the big guys, they just can't go out and start signing Marlon Jordans and Javon Jacksons to multi record deals anymore. That sounds altogether plausible. I think "holding their own" is a phrase that tells a story, though. It does speak of rather lowered expectations. Oh c'mon Bev. That's kinda the point. It's old music. Once it was new music - You know thirty years ago (in the case of Jack Johnson). "Jazz is old news". Geddit? Simon Weil

I'm guessing the industry views Jazz as old news. Simon Weil