JSngry

Doc West J.C. Heard Putter Smith Wendell Culley Charnett Moffet Giuseppi Logan Arno Marsh Jackie Kelso

Alphonse Mouzon Joe Ford Terrell Stafford Marchel Ivery Fathead Newman Arnette Cobb Tyrone Washington Tab Smith

Aurell Ray Ran Blake Kaiser Marshall Eloe Omoe Red Garland Argonne Thornton Corky Corcoran Babe Russin Skeets Herfurt

Kenwood Dennard

Porter Kilbert Specs Wright Carmen Leggio

Prince Robinson Tubby Hayes Don Rendell Marzette Watts Dupree Bolton Elmo Hope Freeman Lee

Peanuts Hucko

Thornell Schwartz Wade Legge Hymie Schertzer Fats Navarro Cedar Walton Harold Betters Pops Poopadeaux Joseph Orange Shafi Hadi Booker Ervin Baby Face Willette Leo Morris Mordecai "Three Fingers" Brown Marvin Cabell Cedric Lawson Max Roach

Here's a start on remedying that: http://classicshowbiz.blogspot.com/2008/07/godfrey-cambridge-show-live-at-hotel.html#uds-search-results

For making fruit salad, yeah. I hope when your having your colonoscopy you'll be thinking about fruit salad. Hope your doctor isn't. I don't know about all that, but I'm pretty sure that the next time I eat fruit salad, I'll not be thinking about the doctor who gave me my colonoscopy, at least not until they get some hot redhead to administer it. Know anybody in the area?

The best rock book ever is Rock Dreams, and it's (almost) all paintings.

For making fruit salad, yeah.

It's not a meltdown, it's the way he is now. I told you when we signed him that it was questionable in my mind what contribution he would be able to make. He's a stopgap 5th starter at best, and 2-1 so far. Colby Lewis & Derek Holland both get back off the DL, it'll be interesting to see how they use him. Somebody's got to take Scott Feldamn's place unless/until Feliz gets back (I don't think he's going to be rushed, and I'm glad about that), and it may or may not be Oswalt. Rumors are flying about Greinke coming in as a rental, but...who knows? I hate not having five dependable starters, but that a, uh..."Good Team Problem", so I'll keep my angst (mostly) to myself.

I'm with him, too, until my car breaks down in the desert. Then I want some of that shaped by information stuff. When that happens, not even the best-written Grant Green biography imaginable will help you. Nor do I. But it didn't. It would have been very nice indeed, but, it didn't. And so, deal with it. And if it does happen, deal with that too.

Facts are empirical, feelings are not. It is entirely possible to have a warm emotion in spite of some sloppy facts. That's why "truth" and "facts" don't always go hand-in-hand all the way down the aisle (thank god!). I know that bugs the hell out of die-hard Newtonians, but life itself is only partially Newtonian.

It "requires" neither, Larry, just as it is not "required" to get all scoldy about the weirdnesses. If I'm in a business meeting or a classroom learning situation, I expect to be corrected at every appropriate juncture. If I'm standing out in the front yard listening to my neighbor tell me stories about their summer vacation, I don't really give a damn if they think the Grand Canyon was in New Mexico, I can still get the gist of the matter from their tone and the overall coherency of the narrative. If the author of the Green bio were telling me stories about her summer vacation, I'd have no problem with the book. But it may be the only Green bio were going to get, and it does sit there on the shelves of libraries, where people who aren't as hip to what's up with Green and jazz in general as you and Freelancer are will or may take it for the simple truth. Again if I feel, as I get further into the book, that it's soulfulness and its sloppiness are inseparable, then so be it -- life can be like that. But I'm saying, again, that you and Freelancer are protected against its sloppiness/weirdnesses because of what you already know; that one of the reasons, or so it seems to me, to get "all scoldy" about such matters is that are lots of other readers without such knowledge who will be confused or misled; and, finally, that it just ain't that hard to get the whole fish in the boat if you take the trouble to try. Coulda, shoulda, woulda, yeah yeah yeah, blah blah blah, oh well. It is what it is. I hear people moaning about how it's the WORST JAZZ BOOK EVER WRITTEN, never mind that in spite of all its "technical shortcomings" when all is said and done, you get a pretty damn vivid picture of what kind of a person Grant Green was and what kind of life he led, so how is it THE WORST? That sounds like Pissybitch Problems to me. Besides - where is it written that if you're going to write what is probably going to be the only biography of a jazz figure that we're going to get that you should submit your efforts to some Executive Jazz Expert Review Committee For Final Approval. That notion right there makes me want to vomit up every Martin Williams article I've ever read. The purpose of the book, the author of the book, the result that is the book itself, none of these things seem to really be involved in, aware of, or concerned about Conventional Jazz Critical Orthodoxy. I can live with a lot of Stevie Russells and doing impressions off in the corner if it gets me a portrait of Grant Green that rings truer than one that the Conventional Jazz Critical Orthodoxy would get me, and frankly, I think it's a no-brainer that this book does that much, even if there's plenty of other things that it doesn't do. In the end, Grant Green was a neighborhood kind of guy who liked getting high, making records, and playing club dates in the hood. If there's a book that could convey that better than this one, bring it on. And if there's a book that could get all the facts right and miss out on that essential truth, it's just a matter of time before it gets written (and likely lauded by The Usual Suspects).

Yes, because a calll to national political action and a "told story" of discovering a family member's life story are exactly the same thing. Yet more proof...

It "requires" neither, Larry, just as it is not "required" to get all scoldy about the weirdnesses. If I'm in a business meeting or a classroom learning situation, I expect to be corrected at every appropriate juncture. If I'm standing out in the front yard listening to my neighbor tell me stories about their summer vacation, I don't really give a damn if they think the Grand Canyon was in New Mexico, I can still get the gist of the matter from their tone and the overall coherency of the narrative.

Thank to your Indians stepping up against the Angels, a 19-2 blowout might as well been a 1-0 cliffhanger for all the difference it made in the standings. Go Tribe!!!

This is my story, this is my song. Thank you for singing it loudly and clearly.

But what complaining about piffling minutia.does is establish a Newtonian hierarchy based on what should be in order TO be. The decisions of the judges are final, unless nobody gives a fuck what they think, in which case there's great fun to be had by just being and not trying to be.. It drives them crazy when you do that, though, as their eminence is no longer even tangentially relevant. They will spend a day telling you what is wrong, but can't muster a few seconds to tell you why it's bad (because it's not bad, that's why, it just didn't go trough the White Filter to get here, and that's a bit forward, doncha know?