johnlitweiler

Don Martin, of Mad magqazine, drew several very distinctive LP covers for Prestige - see http://learning2share.blogspot.com/2007/08/link-don-martinscience-fiction-artist.html

Sure looks like fun. I hope you get plenty time to sight-see.

2 trad players: Evan Christopher, of New Orleans, a sort of Creole Artie Shaw in sound and style. And Michel Bescont, France, with a distinctive, aggressive, almost r-&-b-ish swing on tenor sax. But Bescont has been playing a lot of clarinet lately, and anyway he is surely over 50. Thanks in large part to Larry, I've been hearing and enjoying a lot of the same Chicago folks that he likes. The youngest of them include Nick Mazzarella, an alto saxophonist who began as an Ornette disciple and who sounds more lyrical and more Mazzarella-like each time I hear him (which isn't often enough). Also 3 youngish veterans, a sensitive and articulate bassist, Anton Hatwich; Corey Wilkes, a lyrical post-Miles trumpeter on changes, modes, fusion, and very free settings; and drummer Frank Rosaly, with his care for drum-kit sounds. There are more very good ones in Chicago these days. Tyshawn Sorey, of NYC, is an inspiring drummer. Grant Stewart is, for me, the best kind of revivalist: solo structure, melodic invention are the things, Rollins and Griffin seem to be his inspirations, he recalls good songs from the bop-era repertoire.

Here's a lack of interaction. In the summer of 1962 I lived a few weeks in the old commune building at 61st and Ellis in Chicago, on the first floor. In the basement lived some young partying guys, but I don't recall hearing any music. Nevertheless, they were Paul Butterfield and some other musicians, I learned years later.

Ewell also did a Chiaroscuro LP with Buddy Tate and Herb Hall. When he recorded "Music to Listen to Don Ewell by" in Oakland in 1956, weren't Darnell Howard and Minor Hall playing a long-time engagement in Oakland with Muggsy Spanier? And /or Earl Hines? Let's all urge Delmark to reissue the rest of their Euphonic Paul Lingle material on CD. Seem like we've been waiting a long time.

I used to catch colds 4 times a year and the colds used to hang on for months. Since I started taking vitamin D3, 2 winters ago, I haven't had a cold. Amazing.

Virtuosity isn't just playing fast. Little Walter could create sounds that nobody ever heard before, for instance "Blue Lights" - at least he could do that before Chess engineers started recording him differently. Not that virtuosity was the most important thing he did. His harmonica solo versions of big-band style (some songs, too) made more sense than, for instance, classical piano reductions of symphonic works. Walter's harmonica solo records were always one of a kind. Who needs blues singers? And yet he was a strong singer, in a Muddy Waters style but Walter had a high cracked voice. I began listening to Muddy Waters' band in Chicago clubs in 1960 - Smitty's, Swingtown, Shake's, etc. The tight ensembles, the integration of elements, not Chicago, guitar), and Muddy's own intensity all came together in some of the most ecstatic, mind-blowing music I ever heard. Muddy's later bands, without Pat Hare or James Cotton or Otis Spann, always sounded weaker. No doubt some of my excitement came from my youth. Nevertheless, this early experience plus other Chicago artists, blues radio, and visiting or working at the Jazz Record Mart - mainly, hearing so much blues when blues was still a living, breathing art - made a lot of the decadent stages of the idiom (Clapton, Vaughan, etc.) sound decaffeinated. Chuck, Big Joe told good stories, too. Jim, thanks for remembering Wayne Bennett.

Did ya notice that Wynton's ensemble in "Ice Cream" is starting to sound like the Yerba Buena Jazz Band?

The first appearance of Mitchell-Bowie-Favors-Jarman was on Nessa 1, Lester's "Numbers," 1967. Later that year or in 1968 Roscoe invited Joseph to make his trio into a quartet. Joseph did, and The Roscoe Mitchell Art Ensemble Featuring Lester Bowie and Malachi Favors became The Art Ensemble - and on at least one occasion, the Joseph Jarman Quartet. There were various one-time additions to this unit in the 1960s before the four went to Paris. The Roscoe Mitchell groups of 1966-67 had different personnel at virtually every concert, and Lester Bowie was always with Roscoe's groups from IIRC March, 1966. BTW the name Roscoe Mitchell Art Ensemble showed up in about August 1966. Larry, Chuck, others, corrections welcome.

I think the sticking point here may be the word "actually." If you're using it here to mean something like "Does this mean my lust for someone is hostility instead of lust?" (whatever one thinks the dynamics of "lust" or sexual excitement in fact are) no. What Stoller is saying, if one goes along with him, is that hostility is a significant component in lust or sexual excitement, for reasons he elaborates on. Intriguing idea. Sometimes yes, but always?

Check out the late psychoanalyst Robert Stoller's IMO brilliant book "Sexual Excitement: Dynamics of Erotic Life." Baldly stated (as he admits), Stoller's theory of the origins of sexual excitement (i.e. what gets you hot, not what inspires the feelings we call "love," though of course there are connections there) is: "In the absence of special physiologic factors (such as a sudden androgen increase in either sex), and putting aside the obvious effects that result from direct stimulation of erotic body parts, it is hostility *** -- the desire, overt or hidden, to harm another person, that generates and enhances sexual excitement. The absence of hostility leads to sexual indifference or boredom. The hostility of erotism is an attempt, repeated over and over, to undo childhood traumas and frustrations, that threatened the development of one's masculinity or femininity. The same dynamics, though in different mixes and degrees, are found in almost everyone, those labeled perverse and those not so labeled. *** Stoller adds: "I prefer the word 'hostility' to 'power,' for it has a crisper connotation of harm and suffering." Stoller continues: "I came to these hypotheses as I sought -- and failed to find, as many others (including Freud) also had failed -- a line on the continuum of sexual behavior that could separate 'normal' from 'perverse.' Looking at the manifestations of sexual excitement or the enticements to it that are accepted by society at large -- as revealed in such communications as the entertainment media, advertising, books, jokes and cartoons, newspapers and journals, and pornography for the masses -- I felt that either the mechanisms to be described were not restricted to the perversions or that most people are perverse (as others of more cynical persuasion have long been saying). How you want to put it is your choice; the evidence for either statement is the same. "The following, then, are the mental factors present in perversions that I believe contribute to sexual excitement in general: hostility, mystery, risk, illusion, revenge, reversal of trauma or frustration to triumph, safety factors, and dehumanization (fetishization). And all of these are stitched together into a whole -- the surge of sexual excitement -- by secrets. (Two unpleasant thoughts: First, when one tabulates the factors that produce sexual excitement, exuberance -- pure joyous pleasure -- is for most people at the bottom of the list. Second, I would guess that only in rare people who can indefinitely contain sexual excitement and love within the same relationship do hostility and secrecy play insignificant parts in producing excitement.)" Stoller's book also includes the most detailed and IMO scrupulous account of a psychoanalysis I know of.

Dog Ear Publishing, based in Indianapolis, is the self-publisher that printed my last book. Straightforward, honest, in my opinion, though I wish I'd watched them a mite more closely - my fault - probably all self-publishers need to be watched closely by writers with a bit of publishing experience (& a copy of the UC Style Manual). That honest part is important: Dog Ear spelled out costs in front. Some outfits quote us a low price, then add on extra charges for extras. Like ink and paper. (Well, OK, not quite that bad, but be wary...) BUT my neighbor, a book designer, says that even some standard, printing-press printers like McNaughton-Gunn (in Michigan) will do self-publishing at about the same price as Dog Ear, Blurb, etc. I may use them in future. As to reprinting old writings, I'm waiting to see if Kindle or one or more of its competitors dominates the market.

I agree with the first paragraph, don't agree with the second. "Blowin' Hot and Cool" is a very specific book and part of a very specific movement, the so-called "New Jazz Studies." The problems I have with the book and with much of this movement seem to me to have little do with criticism in general or even (gulp!) with academics in general. But what the hell -- party at Jim's house! Just to perhaps clarify my second point. I see no problem with arguing that the book represents academic overreach of a special kind connected to "New Jazz Studies." What's disingenuous to me is basing a complaint on the presumption of a power grab when -- in what others might term a similar action -- a person puts himself in a position of deciding what is and what is not a proper line of inquiry based on a self-proclaimed deeper understanding of jazz values. Which is not to say that board members here do not in fact have that deeper understanding ... What "others might term [this] a similar action"? It all (or mostly) comes down to people. I know who John is, I know (this sounds pretentious) what his values and understanding are, as does anyone who has read his good-sized body of work, which has been available to the public over a long period of time. Whether or not he proclaims it himself, he does have that deeper understanding, has shown that he does many times over. If there are "others" who think that he has to start over from square one and prove who he is anew because they don't know who he is, that's their problem; they need to do some homework. I'm not questioning John's authority or credentials by any means. The work speaks for itself and I've been a great admirer for many years. I was just trying to get at the issue of who, if anyone, should have the power of prior restraint to put some topics off limits. My answer is no one, because you start to run into "Free speech for me but not for thee." I don't agree with John here that the nature and history of jazz criticism is irrelevant to jazz and jazz appreciation. It was/is a music that reached and moved (reaches and moves) a broad audience in important ways; and who wrote what about the music when and (within reasonable limits of investigation/speculation) why is part of the story -- peripheral perhaps, but not without interest. But while no one should have the power of prior restraint about what topics are worth talking about, that doesn't absolve us from the task of recognizing b.s. and power operations for what they are when, as sometimes happens, they become egregious. Free speech in the don't stop him/her from speaking sense is one thing; but some people (not you) seem to think that free speech means that all speech is or ought to be equal in value. Larry, of course the nature and history of jazz criticism, and of jazz scholarship, too, are important. But these are not the subjects that Gennari wrote about.

Because today's battles are about ownership, and ownership is all about defining, not spotlighting and encouraging. This is what happens when enough people die. Pretty soon critical mass is reached and even the still-living are up for grabs. Exactly. One of the most awful things about tyrannies, I reckon, is not only that one has to submit by and large to the sheer power of those in power but also that one must accept (if and when this becomes an issue) the tyranny's typically detailed false supporting claims that the power the tyrant has come to exercise is rational and righteous. They want both your bodies and your souls. Well said, gents. Gennari's book about jazz-criticism history is all about power and he doesn't notice or care that there are values in this music we love. He wrote about a peripheral subject, irrelevant to jazz and to jazz appreciation. Sometimes the power-obsessed jazz academics seem like too many hogs fighting over a too-small trough with not enough swill to go around. OTOH Hersch seems to have picked a genuinely worthwhile subject to write about, even though others have already researched it--I hope the rest of it isn't as awful as Allen's excerpt. Jim, at least when revisionists impose their programs/propaganda upon the still-living, the still-living can fight back. As George Lewis did in his AACM history. Fortunately, we have nothing to fear from the likes of Gennari. The most sophisticated tyrants get our souls by nourishing our bodies and distracting our attention (bread and circuses) from their violence against freedom. As in present-day China. That's why Rick Perry is such a trip, the times are right for an American demagogue.

Allen, which academic excreted that one?

Thanks, Greg. (1) Does the Canadian system provide health care for all citizens? (2) Do the higher taxes cost the citizen more or less money than the private insurance companies charge in the U.S.? (3) Does the Canadian system refuse to pay this or that doctor's charges, the way U.S. private insurance companies do (seemingly at random)?

Allen, Xlento! (as Hank Mobley might say).

Looks like the semi-desert of UT, CO, AZ, NM. "Unseen life" indeed. What is the surface temperature there?

Pres or Jelly Roll Morton

According to my old 1969 edition of Rust: The Original New Orleans Jazz Band, with Durante and Achille Baquet, recorded six sides as early as 1918-9. The same band recorded one song, Why Cry Blues, as Jimmy Durante's Jazz Band in 1920. Durante played with various combinations of Sam Lanin Band musicians on records. Rust lists 2 dates with Bailey's Lucky 7 (1921), 4 dates with Ladd's Black Aces, and 8 sessions with Lanin's Southern Serenaders (1921-2) (2 sides were reissued on Black Swan, surprisingly enough, under the name Henderson's Dance Orchestra - Black Swan claimed all their records were by African-Americans).

I met Bill Russell while visiting the Hogan Archives in New Orleans in 1981 - Bill was sorta the host there, then. It was a festival week in April. He sd, "Where are you from?" I sd, "Chicago." The rest of our conversation was his memories of the times he heard Art Tatum play at a club on Randolph Street. When Ross Russell was writing his biography of Raymond Chandler he asked me for a photo of Chandler's birthplace, here on the south side.

An enjoyable soundie - thanks, B. Goren. Who is the sweet tenor player?

well do i remember how lorne "gump" worsley used to torture the Blackhawks when he played for Montreal

His relentless bumpety-bump swing when he plays with Lester Young or Ben Webster, for instance, still bugs me. But there's some Peterson I like.