robertoart

Ivo Perelman is a more worthy painter than Rolf And probably a better singer too. What about Hugh Laurie and Bruce Willis And more seriously...Slim Gaillard. Was he not an actor as well?

The Okra Eaters. Michael Douglas produce that one?

Excellent interview/radio doco on Hugh Masakela. He says some funny things about his friendship with Fela Kuti http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/intothemusic/of-home-and-heart3a-the-musical-journey-of-hugh-masekela/4782334

I wonder if Johnny Smith would have thought that?

There's also Charlie Chaplin who scored his own films. Smile tugs at the heartstrings. A bit saccharin but still beautiful. What about Hans Bennink. Surely he was bi-artal at something? That definitely looks like a 'real' painting there! You ask, "Could Rivers really play?" Well, try the YouTube clip I've posted in #3. If you can get past the ear-damaging singer (who seems more like a performance artist than a vocalist) you'll hear entirely competent, Ben Webster influenced tenor from Rivers. And he was educated at Juilliard. Yep. Rivers is an anomoly. Educated and practicing to proficiency in two distinct disciplines. Very impressive. And a bit of an old Lothario if that wiki page is anything to go by. BTW. Is that a representation of a red brassier behind Humair?

My Pussy Belongs To Daddy

My Painting lecturer was always trying to turn me on to Larry Rivers. But at the height of the Neo-Expressionist return to painting in the late Eighties, his work seemed so anal. Interestingly, my Painting lecturer who was born around 1940, was an ex-Jazz saxophone player as well, and knew I played Jazz guitar. So he probably thought I would relate to the bi-artal aspect. I remember one day asking him if he had any old Jazz records he didn't have any use for (seen as he'd given up playing ), and he said he had plenty of old Blue Note records but had already given them away . He did give me a copy of OMNI magazine though, that had an expansive interview with Anthony Braxton - waxing lyrical about his latest 'piece' that could only be correctly performed on Mars - if Alpha-centauri was correctly aligned with the fifth moon of Jupiter (or something like that ). Here is his website for all you old colour-field nostalgists http://www.craiggough.com.au/current_works.html ps. could Rivers really play? That definitely looks like a 'real' painting there!

I like that Cobblestone one. There's some very nice unaccompanied solo stuff somewhere in there, if I remember it right. MG You remembered right. I listened to this session for the very first time yesterday, after reading this thread. On Summertime Mobley plays some stuff that is on an unaccompanied solo tangent. This is very brittle stuff. I'm very glad to have been made aware of this album.

No, I really thought an interview with him (Evans), would be really interesting. I would love to read one of those younger indie/Jazz/improv guys open up as honestly and guilelessly as Perelman does. Although Ethan Iverson does do this on his blogs to a certain extant. I thought the This Is Our Music Cover, piss-take was a bit off really, and kinda underplays the cultural elements still happening in music now. I guess this would be something very peripheral to those musicians. I also really thought your Perelman interview was fantastic actually. I enjoyed reading it and his ideas/insights. And will return to it again. The molecular stuff is beautifully sincere but a bit naive and harkens back to the hippie things Hendrix used to say about a 'pure' kind of music. This is the kind of honest and visionary stuff that would be laughed out of the 'ironic' pop-culture' Contemporary Art climate. But the things about an almost 'correlationist' battle between 'man and metal' is really interesting. And he is also very insightful when he talks about the way Visual artists are more practised at using language to describe their disciplines. Perhaps also the reason most "Contemporary Artists aren't into serious and advanced music is probably because Contemporary Art has a total investment in a kind of dialectical relationship with subverting, aestheticising and critiquing Contemporary mainstream issues, through image and text, so they gravitate to music that they can relate too. Visual Artists are incredibly aware of Art-film culture and Critical Theory, but Art-music beyond anything word-based and Indie is of no interest to them mostly. If it's beyond Sonic Youth or The Velvets - or anything 'cool' instrumental/minimalist like The Necks or Dirty Three, it's too far 'distant' for them. I really do think the connection in the past between Abstract Expressionism-Colour Field and Jazz was a mostly romantic rather than real one though. And served it's purposes more for convenience, and kinda masked the huge 'divide' between the two worlds of Black American music language and 'Heroic White American Art'.

Good topic. Wyndham Lewis is definitely a 'tick'. I will be interested if there are many really significant practitioners in two creative fields. You have the Woody Allen kind of thing, ie major film maker who is proficient(ish) in trad jazz, so hardly a serious bi-artal. Then you have maybe the 'Pop-Rock crowd, who without wanting to be condescending aren't quite in the musical hemisphere of Coltrane or even Brotzmann. So you have Cpt. Beefheart who was a very very good painter, and recognised as such. Ronnie Wood Tony Bennett Anthony Quinn Tony Curtiss Paul McCartney etc etc. On a serious note, there was an Australian Trad player/painter called Dave Dalliwitz(sp?), who I have read mentioned on here. I know of plenty of well known Visual Artists/Indie musicians, ie, Mick Turner of The Dirty Three, and the connection between Rock and Art School has always been significant. But on a more advanced music - Visual Art spectrum? PS, I don't count Miles Davis' African doodles as 'significant' either.

Not if I see him first.

He's a punchy heavyweight on Breakthrough. You can hear the whole album on Spotify. Difficult pleasure.

And also...the Perelman paintings just aren't very good. They barely deserve anything more than lip service when considered beyond his personal creativity. They don't demonstrate anything like the kind of study and 'muscle' relationship that he so obviously has with his music. I doubt that anyone in this day and age really has significant things to contribute in both serious improv and serious painting in 'both' disciplines these days. Painting and Jazz/improv are two of the most demanding things. My experience with people who maintain practice in both art forms is that one will be considerably more developed and 'progressive' than the other. For instance, people with the kind of 'muscle' relationship to Painting Perelman describes, will often be competent or very good players of 'closed musical systems' like Be Bop or Trad or perhaps Classical Piano. But rarely to the musical-visionary level Perelman is. And vice versa, the 'art' of extremely dedicated and visionary musicians is usually devoid of any true robust Visual-art integrity.

A Post-Punk/Free Jazz guitarist once told me Monk peed his pants while on stage at the Sydney Opera House. I thought the guitarist (not Monk), was just being iconoclastic, but alas, it may have been true.

Actually she's either turned up to the gig with an arcane juke box or a an oversized clock. Typical bass player

Maybe you could interview him like Perelman.

What he said, plus why would you take a hard sell and make it harder by tying it to something else that was WTF for most? And fuck Ardorno/Oderono, to mash up Clem & Petey T. Funnily enough Adorno is as dense to read and achieve cognisance as seems to be the music of Evans for most people. But then again Adorno (cultural elitist though he was), was trying to think through the horrors of the Holocaust. What's driving Evans?

Just what is it with Free Jazz and Abstract Expressionism You don't have to go to Berklee to 'hear' Charlie Parker, but you do have to put some effort in. It ain't 'natural' unless you've been culturally weaned on it.

Perhaps so. But just saying his name sounds interesting.