Christiern

"Anyhow, I wonder about your use of a different yardstick for WM because he's been offered greater opportunities than many others."--Eric Sorry, I worded that wrong. I didn't mean that greater opportunities deman greater performance, per se, just that, to put it plainly, Wynton does not perform as advertised. We are used to seeing highly advertised yet inferior products take the market (Microsoft comes to mind), and haven't we all been disappointed when "the best" turns out not to be? Conversely, have we not been delighted to find an off-brand of superior quality? When I first heard Wynton perform, he was an off-brand of superior quality--now he is the household name that does not live up to its performance claims. "I think we might say that a certain responsibility comes with the sort of opportunity he's been given, but to my mind he's always acted as if he were fully cognizant of that sort of responsibility, and that's all we can ask from him. (You may disagree.)"--Eric I agree, up to a point. I don't think Wynton has failed in his LC job (although I wish they had appointed someone whose scope is broader), I do think he has failed to live up to the musical promises he held some 20 years and 33 albums ago. He does a good job, but it is hampered by his limited vision of jazz. "One can't be under a moral responsibility to be aesthetically great or even wise. There's very different realms involved in each of these."--Eric I absolutely agree with you here. Aesthetics is a vague area--one man's is not another's, etc.--but I was not faulting Wynton for bruising my aesthetic sense, just noting that he often doies, and giving that as one reason for me not being enthusiastic. "In fact, I'd argue that the sense of responsibility he's under is one of the things that's held him back from fulfilling the potential many saw in him. "--Eric That's exactly the point I was trying to make when I suggested that Wynton may well be a victim of all the hoopla. I do not expect a musician to adhere to the schedule Wynton obviously follows and have the time it takes to develop as a performer. That's why I said that he might have become a noteworthy player (musically noteworthy, that is) had it not been for an all too early coronation and that it brings with it. I think it has adversely affected his personality as well as his work--the Wynton I see interviewed these days is very different from the Wynton I interviewed in the 1980s.

When I say "failed," I do not mean terrible, I just mean that they have failed to establish Wynton, musically, on a level that is commensurate with his highly-hyped image. There are good performances among them, but there are no great performances. Mind you, I am not suggesting that every musician must contribute at least one great performance--of course not--but every musician is not given the extraordinary opportunities and non-musical recognition Wynton enjoys. Because of that, I think he has to be judged by a different standard. The standard was different when he started out with Blakey, because he was young and inexperienced. Thus reviewers (myself included) bore that in mind and, considering that, he was impressive and promising. When the PR machine took over and prematurely hoisted him onto his pedestal, he was forced to meet higher expectations--but he didn't. Wynton is laughing all the way to the bank--his wallet and ego are possibly over-fed, but when the LC job is over and the spotlight finds someone else to focus on, Wynton will be able to look back on a career marked more by success than by achievement. Thus, IMO, he may well be the ultimate victim of all this. It is of course possible that Wynton never would have developed musically, even if he had had to pay his dues, as they say, but he just might have. As it is, I perceive very little creativity, no originality, and only sporadic bursts of uncontrived emotion. So, I do not consider Wynton a "hack," just a performer who is impressively skilled, technically, but never really developed a true feel for jazz. I think he often displays poor taste, at least I would say that he does things that I find esthetically offensive. Those gratuitous, exaggerated growls, for example bring to mind Diana Schuur's wretched excesses.

I can't say that I knew Boatwright, but I met him a few times. I also have clear images of him dancing with Ruth at the Copa, she with her Charo wig, he with movements that defied his figure.

Lionel got his start with Louis--but that's another story.

Ohhhhhhhhhh

Who is this "hardbop"?

"Oh, and all your disappointment and disgust hasn't colored your view, Chris?" My view is based upon what I hear, and it is not always negative, but in the case of Wynton, I do take into account the fact that he has recorded prolifically and had more opportunities to prove himself as a musicians than most musicians ever get. This was not the case when I first reviewed his performances, so I built up my hopes on the basis of what I heard--it was quite promising. Since then, Wynton's output has been extremely uneven, ranging from truly bad performances to fairly good ones--I say "fairly" good, because I have yet to hear him give a performance that knocks me out. "34 failed LPs haven't made you slightly biased against Wynton?" That many albums, most of which are insignificant, musically, and none of which is outstanding, simply underscores my feeling that Wynton is the most over-rated musician on the jazz scene. That may be construed as a bias, but it is nothing more than my opinion, formulated by many years of listening and watching musicians develop from good to extraordinary " After everything you've said about him and his music and everything else, I have a hard time believing that you listen to every new release with completely fresh ears." None of us listen with completely fresh ears, at least not after 50 years. Having that yardstick (listening experience) gives one a better perspective. IMO, Wynton has been on a idiomatic treadmill and he has all the emotion of Xerox machine--or Kenny G (take your pick). Would I like to hear him do something great? Of course I would, but I thought it was naïve to think that a mere change of label was going to give him a quality that has been missing from his 33 previous releases.

Ben Ratliff rarely if ever hears the flaws in Wynton's recordings--he is clearly biased in WM's favor.

I have now heard it. Quite honestly, it has pleasant moments, but it is mostly uneventful and there is not a single chorus of excitement. The two vocals add nothing except to link a couple of BN artists to Wynton. The Bobby Ferrin track is particularly boring, and I guess that term sums up this whole effort for me. I have not found much of interest in Wynton's earlier music, although some of his work with Blakey was certainly promising--he simply has not progressed, on the contrary. I have heard his supporters blame Columbia for Wynton's failures to rise to a musical level commensurate with his PR (although they will never admit that he hasn't)--the new BN, they said, would really show how great he is when in the right environment. Well, if 33 albums is insufficient opportunity to express what's in you, I could not see why a 34th should make any difference--imo, it doesn't.

Duke's sister, Ruth Ellington Boatwright has passed away. She was 89, I believe, and quite a character. I had the pleasure of knowing Ruth and--although we had not been in touch for some time--I shall miss the knowledge that she's around, doing bizarre things.

Sad news. He passed on Sunday, of a heart attack.

I think it is interesting that they are bringing John Waters into the cast. This is still a great series, IMO.

Makes sense to me!

I don' know if it is from a book, but this is where I found it.

Good recommendation, Harold.

Born: May 18, 1892 in McCall, LA Died: Oct 30, 1969 in San Francisco, CA Genres: Jazz Styles: New Orleans Jazz, Classic Jazz One of the first important bassists (along with Steve Brown, Bill Johnson, and Wellman Braud), Pops Foster had the longest career and he kept the tradition of slap bass solos alive into the late '60s. Foster was playing in bands around New Orleans as early as 1906. He played tuba with Fate Marable's group on riverboats (1918-1921) and was with Kid Ory's band in California. Foster was in St. Louis in the mid-'20s, working with Charlie Creath and Dewey Jackson. After he arrived in New York in 1928, Foster played with King Oliver and then joined the great Luis Russell Orchestra, where his thumping bass really propelled the ensembles. Foster stayed with Russell during the long period (1935-1940) when the orchestra was really the backup group for Louis Armstrong. After that stint ended, Foster was in demand during the New Orleans revival period, freelancing with many bands, including Art Hodes, Mezz Mezzrow, Sidney Bechet (1945), and Bob Wilber. He toured Europe with Sammy Price during 1955-1956, played with Earl Hines in San Francisco (1956-1961), and then spent 1963-1964 with Elmer Snowden's trio. He also wrote his autobiography, which was published posthumously in 1971. I recorded Pops with various group in 1961, when he was a member of Earl Hines' band (which I also recorded). Here's photo I took of him and Little Brother Montgomery back then:

This will tell you what Grove won't In 1954 Artie Shaw made his last public appearance as an instrumentalist when he put together a new Gramercy 5 made up of such superb modern musicians as pianist Hank Jones, guitarist Tal Farlow, bassist Tommy Potter, et al. The most comprehensive sampling of that group (as well as a number of others, going all the way back to 1936 and on up through this final set of records) can be heard on a four record album, now a rare item, released in 1984 by Book of the Month Records, entitled: Artie Shaw: A Legacy, which has also received rave reviews. Some of this music was re-issued on two double CD's by MusicMasters as Artie Shaw: The Last Recordings, Rare and Unreleased, and Artie Shaw: More Last Recordings, The Final Sessions. Artie Shaw packed his clarinet away once and for all in 1954. In 1955 he left the United States and built a spectacular house on the brow of a mountain on the coast of Northeast Spain, where he lived for five years. On his return to America in 1960 he settled in a small town named Lakeville, in northwestern Connecticut, where he continued his writing, and in 1964 finished a second book (consisting of three novellas) entitled I Love You, I Hate You, Drop Dead! In 1973, he moved back to California again, finally ending up in 1978 in Newbury Park, a small town about 40 miles west of Los Angeles, situated in what he refers to as "Southern California pickup-truck country." Since then, aside from a brief venture into film distribution (1954 to 1956), and a number of appearances on television and radio talk shows, Artie Shaw has had very little to do with music or show business. He still gives occasional interviews on television, radio, and newspapers and lectures all over the United States. He still conducts seminars on literature, art, and the evolution of what is now known as the Big Band Era. He has given lectures at Yale University, the University of Pennsylvania, the University of Southern California, the University of California at Santa Barbara, the California State University at Northridge, and Memphis State University. He has received Honorary Doctorates at California Lutheran University and the University of Arizona. His home contains a library of more than 15,000 volumes, including a large collection of reference works on a wide variety of subjects ranging from Anthropology to Zen. Artie Shaw has been a nationally ranked precision marksman, an expert fly-fisherman, and for the past two decades has been working on the first volume of a fictional trilogy, dealing with the life of a young jazz musician of the 1920's and 30's whose story he hopes to take on up into the 1960's. Shaw's own life is the subject of a fine feature-length documentary by a Canadian film-maker. Artie Shaw: Time Is All You've Got is a painstakingly thorough examination of Shaw as he is today and as the leader of some of his great bands, including an appearance from one of his two earlier motion pictures, Second Chorus (1940). (Scenes from his other motion picture, Dancing Coed (1939), were not included in the documentary due to prohibitive cost.) In a review of the film at Los Angeles's Filmex Film Festival in the summer of 1985, Variety commented: "A riveting look back at both the big band era and one of its burning lights." The film has received glowing reviews wherever it has been shown -- Los Angeles, Santa Barbara, Minneapolis, Toronto, Boston, and on Cinemax -- as well as in England, where it ran twice on BBC. It has also appeared at Film Festivals in Belgium, Switzerland, Australia, and Spain (where it took first prize in the documentary category). In 1986 it opened the San Francisco Film Festival, and in 1987 the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences awarded it the Oscar for Best Documentary Feature of 1986. On first meeting Artie Shaw, young Wynton Marsalis remarked, "This man's got some history." Shaw is regarded by many as the finest and most innovative of all jazz clarinetists, a leader of several of the greatest musical aggregations ever assembled, and one of the most adventurous and accomplished figures in American music. As Artie Shaw goes on into his nineties, he has also developed a crusty humor, as evidenced by an epitaph for himself he wrote for Who's Who in America a few years ago at the request of the editors: "He did the best he could with the material at hand." However, at a recent lecture to the music students of the University of Southern California, when someone mentioned having read it, Shaw said, "Yeah, but I've been thinking it over and I've decided it ought to be shorter, to make it more elegant." And after a brief pause, "I've cut it down to two words: 'Go away.'"

Neither the judge nor anyone else (like the prison system) will want to make a decision that smacks of favoritism. I think she'll get a few years in a prison that has no golf course or outdoor swimming pool. Some people think that would be "a good thing." A billionaire who gives her private secretary a cake for Christmas? No wonder people aren't weeping.

My macs send all SPAM to a special folder. I could he it sent directly to my trash basket, but not all mass mailings are SPAM, so I do the final filtering myself--very simple. If Windows does not already have such an option in place, give them time--they are generally 2 or 3 years behind the Mac.

Yes, if you want to include volumes of useless books. How can use as a reference a book of unreliable information? Many publishers probably do use students for the preliminary work, but unless that work is thoroughly checked and corrected, the result is worthless. I assume that you think nearly all reference books are worthless.

Apropos books riddled with factual errors, I have not read Sidran's Talking Jazz, but, several years ago, I reviewed his Black Jazz for, I think, The Saturday Review. It read like a cut and paste school paper and was so full of avoidable errors that I had to wonder why it was published. Perhaps Sidran has learned something about jazz in the meantime, but that earlier book was pitiful. BTW, he became so incensed by my review that he wrote me a two-page, single-spaced letter that whined and cried "foull," but did not dispute any of my findings.

That may be how some reference books get written, but not all--nor is it excusable, IMO. I have contributed to a number of reference books over the years, as have most of my knowledgeable colleagues. If the publisher wants to do it right, he/she will either pay the extra cost or abandon the project--of all things, a reference book should not reflect ignorance.

I'm glad you brought that up, Larry--The Grove is riddled with factual errors and uninformed opinions. Works of such scope will inevitably contain errors, but the Grove is way over any reasonable allowance. I worked on the new Encyclopedia and know how hard Ira strove to avoid errors--still, there are a few, but probably not as many as there used to be when Leonard was in charge.

Larry, I also prefer Shaw's playing, much as I like Goodman's approach. BTW, Years ago, when I was a member of the NY Jazz Museum board, I recall a meeting at which we discovered that founder Howard Fisher had misused a grant from Seagram. It was earmarked for musicians' fees to keep the Sunday afternoon concerts going, but Howard had spent it elsewhere, his contention being that "musicians will play for nothing, anyway." When Howard said that, Artie exploded and gave him a lecture that I am sure he still remembers. He explained how he, Artie, was one of relatively few musicians who had made a beyond decent living by playing jazz--he really stood up for his fellow musicians, and I respect him for that.

This, of course, was among Artie's greatest performances....