thedwork

just finishing up Silence: Lectures And Writings by John Cage. i've got the utmost respect for his art (excuse me mr. cage for using that word...) and works. but has anyone else here who has actually plowed through this entire book - without skipping large portions due to exhaustion or annoyance - not wanted to periodically strangle him? quite often while reading this i found myself thinking exasperatedly, "Man, this guy should stick to working w/ sounds and leave the words to others." another thought i had while reading this was that, seemingly, the premise for many of these lectures and writings was to give some kind of insight into process or ideas, but often the result was obfuscation - and intentionally so. that's kind of like lying. and i know the explanation is that Cage wanted to "show" rather than "tell" - but i don't buy it. it's too semantic. it seems like a way to get out of saying words fail; or side-stepping the simple fact that you aren't up to the task of using words to describe something. and let's face it: obfuscation is easy. while clarity, generally and more often, takes more energy, craft, and time. for me there are positive and creative provcations; and then there are childish, negative provocations. as much as i admire Cage, i experienced much of this book as childish and negative. i don't begrudge anyone's buddhism or zen philosophy, but if it puts you on the road to enjoying being intentionally irritating for the sake of being irritating, i'm not for it. and i know i know, he's irritating so as to give the reader a different perspective. i don't buy it. sometimes being irritating is just that, and nothing else. not meaning to offend. and like i said, Cage is a master musician. and i have no problem w/ chance operations or indeterminacy as compositional tools. but damn... what a drag it was for me to read this thing. much better to simply experience his music.

thanks for putting that up ghost. terrific and emotional speech. good for him. Conan's has been my favorite 'late night' show for the last 10 years or so. easily. since the 'digital' changeover i haven't had tv - and haven't missed it. but when i did watch late night, Conan was always on. out of all of them, Conan's was the only one that i would truly consider comedy. all the others (some of which i like just fine) come off jokey. sure, funny plenty of the time - but jokey. a lot of the Conan stuff really had much more of a sketch comedy/almost second-city, groundlings insanity or absurdity to it. pretty regularly they really pushed. it didn't always work, but they would go for it. never, ever got that vibe from any of the other shows. all the others consistently play it very safe. i have a lot of respect for Conan and the folks who worked on his show. i obviously have no idea what Conan will do, but i wouldn't be surprised if he ends up on HBO.i could see him doing something very funny and creative there. i feel the same.

imo, that's disgusting. any musician who isn't satisfied making $140,000 a year w/ 10 weeks paid vacation should have their instrument confiscated and donated to an inner city's school band/orchestra. every member of that orchestra who is whining about how much money they're making can go to hell as far as i'm concerned. assholes.

i also like that nirvana/beatles mashup much more than the beyonce/ellington thing. the beyonce thing was kinda cute but for me more annoying than anything. as far as nirvana mashups, my favorite is definitely this one - killer: Rick Astley vs. Nirvana you guys may have already seen it, but i just got shown it a little while back. it fits so perfectly it's kinda scary...

thank you so much for responding everyone! beyond specifics, i'm just glad to know that this is a legit program that seems to be used somewhat regularly. i still haven't really used it in a situation where i'd have to be too concerned, but i hopefully will and i wanna deal w/ any "issues" before it's crunch time. hey mike. this is exactly the kinda thing i was hoping to get at. thanks for posting. when i did some reviewing for a local daily i had to save documents in "text only" format or something like that. when you initially save a document in open office is there an acronym for MS Word format? i'm gonna go check it out right now. and MS Word is somewhat universally translatable, right? or am i showing my wild computer tech ignorance here? just trying to get general stuff here. i assume issues show up on a case to case basis (meaning whoever you happen to be working w/ at the moment and what kind of systems they're using), but at the same time i assume there are some things that remain constant. thanks again for everyone who chimed in and maybe this'll be an ongoing thing. or like someone mentioned earlier, maybe that open office forum help line thingie will be helpful too. but sometimes those things aren't so user friendly...

definitely sad news. and i'm sending out my positive vibes right now! the only dvd of his in my collection is Easy Rider - Special Edition. the "making of" doc and the director commentary are both worth having. very personal and illuminating. Hopper!

work and kids? i can't think of any reasons that would trump the combination of those two for staying anywhere in the world. good for you. like i said, i haven't checked out iyer's music at all yet. but if he's gigging and recording w/ wadada leo smith and roscoe mitchell, there's gotta be something serious going on with his music.

my bad guys. i guess my flu is even worse than i thought. sincere apologies. i guess all 'new yorkers' are smug asses then? maybe that's why i got the hell outta there...

I don’t see how it could be read that way. Unless you thought “his culture” was a typo which was supposed to read “this culture.” That makes sense but whoa… that would be quite a mindboggling coincidence of context, meaning, and accidental typing. I mean, he/she wrote this immediately following: "Allen -- didn't you ever wonder why Iyer thought he had the right to be offended that you didn't realize who he was?" Again, I don't really see how you could read that comment as being about New Yorkers. Or maybe you were making a joke? Whatever I guess… not to derail the thread, but if i'm gonna read some of these threads it's not possible for me to see something like this and not comment. that seems like a very flatly racist comment. what the fuck? all indian people act and feel arrogantly superior to everyone else? it's part of their culture? wow... i haven't heard his music yet so i can't comment there... Two questions spring to mind: 1- Why are you reading so much into what I said? 2- How do you know I'M not Indian? why am i reading so much into what you wrote? well, again, i don't think i'm 'reading into it' at all. like i said before, it seems flatly racist on its face. no reading into it. just reading. how do i know you're not indian? i don't.

not to derail the thread, but if i'm gonna read some of these threads it's not possible for me to see something like this and not comment. that seems like a very flatly racist comment. what the fuck? all indian people act and feel arrogantly superior to everyone else? it's part of their culture? wow... i haven't heard his music yet so i can't comment there...

Define ‘moving ahead.’ Define ‘as good as it needs to be.’ this kind of phrasing reminds me of politics. Using vague phrases like these to which everyone can attach their own different definitions merely spins the wheel in ridiculous debates like these. And for me, making an analogy that that equates society moving ahead to putting a premium on avant-garde artists comes close to pretentious. I value avant-garde artists too – very much so. But society ‘moving ahead?’ society ‘as good as it needs to be?’ for me, there are many things more important to improving our society than appreciating Von Freeman and Cecil Taylor – like dealing with poverty, endless war, corrupt government, corporate crime, racism, etc… again, I value art of all kinds. It’s in fact one of my favorite things in life. That’s why we’re all here, right? Really? Equating enjoying an excellent, if not innovative, jazz saxophone player to supporting corporate consolidation, monopolization, unfair business practices, and unethical treatment of a workforce? This is exactly what I mean when I say I think this kind of arguing borders on pretentiousness. I love music too, but come on. I don’t see anyone here saying Alexander/Redman are ‘as food as we can get.’ I also don’t see any contradiction in embracing both of them while also saying “i think ’so and so player’ is better and more forward looking in my book.”

good one!

i just downloaded this program because i heard that it works well and i don't wanna have to blow money if it's not necessary. all i need from it is basic word document functions: regular characters, copy/paste, hopefully italics/bold/underline, and that's probably about it! my main concern is how it will translate when sent to other computers - ie: will attachments be able to be read without issue? will "html" formatting translate? if anyone has experience with this 'open source' windows program, i'd be interested in hearing about how it's worked out; and specifically w/ the issue of documents/attachments translating to other computers. thanks...

proof that 'originality' alone does not always make something a worthwhile work of art

sebastian left the group, eh? good for him. whatever group he becomes part of will be lucky to have him. very creative and talented drummer. as for the whole old vs. new, innovate or die, yada yada yada discussion: giant YAWN. these threads are snowballs to hell. getting preoccupied w/ this "debate," whichever side you're on, is a waste of time and energy. listen to what you like, and play what you feel. if you're an 'innovator,' it'll come out. ain't much use forcing it. reminds me of a brief graph i wrote about this kinda thing in a review a few years ago. i'll substitute redman and alexander for the artist/record reviewed: "The media affair regarding [Redman/Alexander] is well underway. [They] may lead some critics to celebrate the arrival of the 'future of jazz,' or cause others to feel compelled to refute such claims. But the reality is not so black and white. Those who are preoccupied with finding an artist to label the 'future of jazz' can't see the trees for the forest. Innovation is sometimes incremental and often not easy to detect. It's all a continuum. We need faith that the pursuit of excellence supplies the energy to keep jazz moving forward. Innovation need not always be a 'change of the century.' It often hides in the shadows, tucked into a brilliant corner like a precocious child smiling to himself with a secret."

just wndering bev - are you referring to Redman or Alexander here?

that reads like a nice little advertisement for alexander and his group that you mention. you realize that the competition you refer to was nearly 20 years ago, right? still feeling raw over that is a bit much. let it go. plus, 4 of th 5 judges listed for that year were Benny Carter, Jimmy Heath, Frank Wess, and Jackie McLean. i think they know a little bit about playing "in the tradition" that you talk about. i prefer Redman. haven't heard too much alexander, but what i've heard didn't make an impression. very good player but not much of an impression. to my ear, Redman seems to be much more "in the moment."

I take your point about "a good amount of youngish tenor players who listened/studied [branford] intently," but has jazz come to a place where one can be "a terrific player" and be "almost recognizable"? (My emphasis.) It's been my experience over the years, and my assumption (based on that experience) that perhaps excepting figures who worked almost exclusively in ensemble settings (e.g. lead trumpeters, lead alto players, etc.) in jazz every terrific player was readily recognizable as that particular player, though of course not every readily recognizable player was terrific. yeah - oops. note the time of my edit in that posting you quoted (before your response). you must've been responding while i was fixing my mistake in my post: omitting the word "instantly" before recognizable. that's a funny coincidence. anyway, i think bran is recognizable but it may take me a few bars. hence, almost instantly. i certainly don't think he's as distinct as a hodges or rollins, but for me that doesn't discount anyone from being a possible influence or a terrific player. there are gradations... and as far as ratliff goes, he's not my favorite music writer either. he's ok. i dig chinen when it comes to the times. i like his style and attitude. also - as far as these types of top ten lists, they're silly and fun and never to be taken too seriously. but everyone here knows that...

totally agreed. branford is a terrific player and is almost instantly recognizable. and like you said, i've also known a good amount of youngish tenor players who listened/studied him intently. also, i think lots of people listened to his quartet (defunkt now, i guess?) to hear joey and tain as much as (or more than...) for bran. so there may be some unintended influence strictly through osmosis (not a joke). the two cds by him that i own and listened to quite a bit - The Beautiful Ones Are Not Yet Born (Hurst!!!) and Requiem - i feel would be welcome in any jazz listeners collection and listened to often. great music. i haven't been blown away by everything i've heard by him or his quartet, but when they're on, it's tough to beat, and i find bran becoming more and more distinctive. p.s. - i don't know anything about strickland yet

rye bread.

thanks a lot for putting this up here clifford! i'm looking forward to printing this out tomorrow and reading. Bill Dixon is the man!

i'm here to check out Bright Moments's awesome picture of Goldie!

yeah! watching her check out her mom's award speech was priceless. way cool...

yeah

yup. not the most exciting match, but some good stuff. i'm thinking wosniacki is a keeper. she'll be around making trouble for a long time. she's got a great game. if she can get a net game, she'll probably be number 1 at some point.