patricia

Good grief, Chris!! Did you rent some of that extra head-fur?? You had hair where most people don't even have places for hair. I'm impressed!! B-) At the same time that you were top-heavy, I affected the Mia Farrow look, going to my father's barber to get the back just right. As a matter of fact, the year I got married, my hair was so short that it dried in about five minutes. It was about two inches long on the top and barbered [short back and sides]. That was coupled with four inch gold hoop earrings, every day, although nobody had more than one hole in each ear. I also wore a LOT of eye-makeup. My wedding dress, in 1969, was a mid-thigh mini, with bell sleeves, that was a real wedding dress, white brocade, with flowers in my very short hair, instead of a veil and satin chunky-heeled shoes to match. I looked like a little kid, toes turned slightly inward in the wedding portraits. My girls are facinated by them, thinking, until they saw them that I always dressed the way that I do now [silk shirts, pressed jeans, tailored pants, suits..................like that].

Real goldfish, Noj??? COOL!!

I almost forgot to ask about Chris' shoes. I wonder if they were platforms. I fell off a pair, walking down a slight grade, spraining an ankle, during that period. "Famolare" platforms [they had a script "f" on the side of the heel] were particularly hazardous. Each shoe weighed about a pound and the heel was about 4" above the sidewalk. That in itself would have been OK. I'm used to wearing regular high-heels, but the rest of the shoe's sole was about 2" above the sidewalk, so it was difficult to judge where the sole of one's foot was, in relation to the sidewalk.

Holy man, Chris!!! You look downright conservative, compared to some of the '70's "looks" I remember. Polyester knit, right??? Just like wearing a sauna. Were your pants poly too?? And, tell me. Is that an ANKH????

I believe that there was, but she re-titled it "Bette Davis Eyes" and that re-worked song was a huge hit. For some reason "Sammy Davis' Glass Eye" didn't quite catch on. Something about the cadence...................or something. Can't understand it.

EVERYBODY can look good, if they just look in the mirror, briefly, before they sally forth. I sometimes wonder if some people ever look at themselves in a full-length mirror, before they leave the house. I know that most of the time we are not going out to wow the world with our sartorial style, but when I see what some people wear, right in front of an unsuspecting populance, I just cringe. It takes the same amount of time to look like an attractive, regular person as it does to look like a person who just doesn't give a hoot. Be kind to those who have to look at you, however briefly. How hard is that to do??

Sammy Davis Jr. was a hell-damner of an entertainer, before he became the lap-dog to the Rat Pack. He had so much natural talent that it was almost scary. Then, he let himself become a caracature and that was just sad. I voted for the real one he lost. I actually liked him when he wore an eyepatch. It seemed to me that when he started wearing the tinted shades, he was well into his really irritating "super cool" phase. He still had loads of the right stuff, but seemed to be trying too hard.

No, you did not mention that you are "very single", but any intrigued ladies, I'm sure, will have made a mental note. Clean hair is essential, always. Baseball caps are not inherently evil. I just don't like them, even though both my daughters, from time to time, wear them and they look quite fetching on them. I remain firm in my opposition to track pants though and the fanny-pack is the single, IMO, WORST thing that any man can have on their body, unless they are riding a bicycle and it is on their butt, simply as a convenience. Worn to the front it looks, as my youngest daughter would say, "like some sort of colostomy bag". So, remember that, next time you consider using one. Her words, not mine. The alternative is a shoulder bag or the inside pockets of your jacket. I speak only from an aesthetic standpoint, so you decide.

Love ya anyway, Noj, but even you have to admit that a ballcap is not the most alluring hat that a grown man can choose. As for the "unwashed hair camoflage" defence, well, that's just gross. Now, whenever I see a man in a baseball cap, I'll think that he has dirty, greasy hair. But, if you insist on wearing a ballcap, at least wear the beak to the front. That plastic thing on the forehead is a HUGE turnoff!!! BTW, a bald spot, unless it is accompanied by a "comb-over" is not the worst thing that can happen to a man. I would rather see a man just go with his diminishing hair than spread twenty-seven remaining hairs over the spot. Stuff happens with guy's hair and women are really turned off by comb-overs, at least all the women I know. Just let your head be itself. Trust me. Also, track pants should be burned in an adjacent bonfire, unless you are actually engaged in an athletic activitiy, especially if you are also sporting a "fanny pack". I wonder whether men dressed in a baggy sweatshirt, track pants, baseball cap, "favourite" sneakers and a fanny pack know how really unattractive they look. What's wrong with jeans and a sweatshirt, worn with reasonably clean sneakers as casual, comfortable attire??

Pile all the baseball caps, except those worn by men who actually play baseball, in a giant mound and have a ceremonial blaze.................marshmallows provided, free of charge. Why do men insist on wearing a little boy's cap??? Do NOT bring back the over-sized, feather-festooned fedoras favoured by business managers of ladies of the night. BRING BACK COOL HATS, SUCH AS THE FEDORA AND THE PORK-PIE AND THE BLOCKED DRIVER'S CAP [the one worn by men in Ferraris and M.G.s. and Hef in his prime.] The late sixties and all of the seventies was the WORST fashion period for men's fashion. Striped polyester bellbottoms anyone??

"Soft" - Bill Doggett

A friend of mine has copped tons of vintage jazz by keeping his eye on the obituary columns and, after letting a decent amount of time go by, contacting the widow about the jazz albums that he knows the deceased had. I was shocked at the time, at my friend's admitting that he was committing what I considered almost a grave robbery, but he has a lot more original jazz on vinyl than I ever will. I felt physically ill when I read the first post on this thread. Holy man!! Isn't it at least a captiol crime to STAPLE vintage jazz??? If it isn't, it should be.

The record company owns the recording, as well as the distribution rights, if they own the recording and distribution rights, because the artist signs the rights over, as a condition the recording company states in the contract the artist is offered. More often than not, the artist is so elated to have been offered a contract at all, that they don't read it. After all, what they want to do is make the recording in order to have it sold, they hope world-wide and heard. For the most part, musicians are not business people, any more than other artists are. As soon as they sign the contract, the terms come into effect, much like any other contract. Tons of artists from earlier times have fallen victim to predatory "agents" and others who would exploit them. The biographies of not just jazz artists, but artists from every spectrum are rife with horror stories of recording companies, art exhibitors and book publishers who became much more wealthy than the artist did, as a result of the artists' work creating the wealth and the "agent" owning the rights to both the work product and the money it generated, due to the artist's ignorance of legal matters. That's why it's called the music "BUSINESS"

All that is very true. Paris was the mecca for artists of every kind and they are very appreciative of their artists and their art. An interesting bit of trivia about another artist who moved to Paris and never went back to the States, the legendary Josephine Baker. She was not a jazz artist, but was a superstar of her time. My mother lived in London, in the thirties and early forties and she actually sat down and talked to Ms Baker, during Ms Baker's break at the Moulon Rouge in Paris. Mother used to go to Paris regularly, loved art and music and was totally fluent in French. She told me that Baker stayed in Paris, because they treated her the same way as they treated any other artist, no better, no worse. That's all she ever wanted and I suspect that that is all that jazz artists, like Miles Davis, Bud Powell and the others wanted as well. So, no surprise that they were attracted to Paris.

I still remember that in the sixties, even guys who never listened to jazz had a copy of "Kind Of Blue". Such was the appeal that Miles had and still does. "Sketches Of Spain" is my favourite Miles, with his "Porgy and Bess" running a close second. A genius, by anyone's standards.

Whew, I guess. It reminds me of the TV coverage of the earthquake, a few years back in San Francisco. The devastation was what we saw. My brother went to SF, a few days later, as planned and yes, there was huge damage to the marina and other places in the city, but the city was still there. You can't show pictures of nothing happening. Of course the pictures are going to be of the flooded areas and not the not-flooded areas. I had visions of all of our guys and their families, pearched on their roofs.

I couldn't get on for days. Then I was watching the news here and there were pictures of the roofs of people's houses. How bad is this?? Holy man!! Is Lansing affected by the flooding??

One little bright light though is that while we are listening to our entire collections of CD's and records, however we decide to do it, we can, simultaneously read all the books on our shelves in a similar manner. Good thing that none of us have lives.

doubleM: I'm glad that you are not ruling out getting to know this woman better. Life is about growth and interaction. I would shudder if you saw my CD collection from just a few short years ago. (Yes, I own Kenny G Live, but it has been residing under the legs of one of my dressers for quite a few years) But people grow and change; maybe she just needs to be exposed to something different. That is the loveliness of life... sharing ourselves and our experiences w/others. To simply assume that since she likes more contemporary music which might be "light" for your taste that she has poor taste in other areas of life is, um, a little shallow. (I say this w/affection--I just hate to see people miss out on things in life due to preconceived notions ). Generalizations of any type just kinda bug me... (see my above post). I think she has the basis for potentially truly falling in love with your kind of music. Give it a shot and see how you can influence her. PS LOVE your drawings! I don't know, Rachel. For some reason, the music I listen to is not something that I would want the permanent man in my life to just tolerate, as somebody said. Jazz is a genuine passion in my life and the idea that the man who is the love of my life would be somewhere else in the house, perhaps listening to "smooth jazz" or something that I abhor, would make me sad. If I couldn't share the love of jazz with the one I love, then they wouldn't really be my soulmate. Just tolerating my jazz, without sharing the love I have for it, wouldn't be enough. BTW, Hardbopjazz, "Walk On The Wild Side", by Jimmy Smith was one of the very first jazz records I listened to, voluntarily. It blew me away!!! Then came Brubecks's "Take Five" and Moe Kauffman's"Swingin' Shepherd Blues". There's hope for your wife.

Jimmy Smith's "Walk On The Wild Side" Theloneous Monk's "Japanese Folk Song"

ah..... stereotypes. How about "some women don't understand ...." or how about... what part about your wife not liking jazz did you not know before the nuptials? Thank you Maren. In my experience, it's me who is the addict. Also, whether it's the man or the woman who is the jazz addict, he/she should have known that while in the courting ritual stage. Much as questions about religion, money, sex, children, location of abode and careers should be aired, so should musical preferences. We always think that someone we love should learn to love the music we love, but a country music, hard rock or classical music aficinado won't necessarily love jazz..........................ever. We weigh those things and decide whether we want them around enough to overlook this glaring flaw.

Oh, and I forgot to mention this. When you listen to one of your LP's or CD's, no fair just listening to one or two of the tracks, even if you only bought the record or CD because they were on it. I am guilty of this, more than I care to admit. When you consider all the thought that was presumably given to the flow of the selections on a collection, it seems only right that we should respect that, at least once and listen to it from the first track to the last, in sequence. I know that if I do that, the record, or CD has a whole different feel to it, at least for me.

Good idea and a fine modification. Otherwise the less-listened to ones are truly orphans. You bought them for a reason, so they should at least get a chance to have their time in your ears and in your heart.

Here's a method which might work, as well as any. Start at the "A" 's, play one. Move to the "B" 's, play one, "C" 's etc. Then at least if you die after the twentieth round or so, alphabetically, the ones at the end of the alphabet have a chance. [and, if this is our biggest problem, we're all Lady Luck's own tot.]

That's OK EKE BBB. The one you did get is FINE, as are the others, as usual. Thank you.