ghost of miles

Swimming against the tide of the thread here, but there are some very good things on this CD--the arrangements of "Leaving Again/In the Wee Small Hours of the Morning" and "Change Partners/There's No You," as well as the setting of Roethke's "The Waking" and KE's take on "I Like the Sunrise." One of the better vocal releases this year IMO.

Funny thing is the Yankees missed the playoffs for 13 years in a row, from 1982 through 1994. Don't know how many, if any, times they would've made it as a wildcard in those years... when they finally did get back in in '95 it was in just such a manner. (Odds are they would've won the division in '94 if the lockout hadn't ended the season, but so it goes.)

Yes--new to us in America. They're Seasons 4 & 5, which have already been broadcast in the UK, but never over here. They'll be available on DVD for the U.S. market July 17. Episodes are "Invasion," "Bad Blood," "Bleak Midwinter," and "Casualties of War." Season 6 has been filmed, but not sure when it will be broadcast--three new episodes, and then no more--series is ending.

They were (iirc) 14 games back on July 4. However, that was obviously an extraordinary year, and the Sox were still daunted (for whatever it was worth) by "the Curse." I'd agree with Dan that they've got a decent shot at the wild-card, longshot for the division. Clemens is an asset, no doubt about it, even if he is going to be a 5-6 inning pitcher. There was no curse in 1978 for the simple reason that Shaugnnesey didn't write his book until after 1986. There was no consciousness of being fated to lose, only a knowledge that it hadn't happened since 1918. Reasons why the Red Sox should be able to hold off the Yankees this time: Yankees don't have an ace named Ron Guidry. Red Sox don't have a third baseman who had to adjust the bone chips in his elbow before every pitch and still threw away 39 throws to first. Red Sox in '78 won by bashing the ball; when the offense failed, they had a tough time winning. This season they're balanced in both pitching and offense, and unlike '78 they've got a decent to excellent group of arms in the pen. That year's team had Eck plus mediocrities like Mike Torrez and El Tiante, who was at the end of the line, and Bill Lee, who was toast or pissed off his manager too often, depending on who you believe. That Yankee team was a two-time pennant winner and defending world champions. They knew how to win. This team has as many players with rings as the Red Sox do. Hey, you're implying that "the Curse" was only a psychological effect... Just doublechecked and the Yanks were 14 games out as of July 18th that year. So yeah, an extraordinary comeback, the likes of which we probably won't see again for a long time... though this is baseball, and anything not only can happen, but is likely to happen. Beyond Guidry, that Yanks staff wasn't so great... Figueroa won 20 that year, but then you get down to Jim Beattie, Tidrow, and a fast-declining Catfish Hunter. They did have both Gossage and Lyle out of the bullpen, though Lyle iirc was disgruntled over Goose's being signed and wasn't quite as effective as he'd been in '77. Still, I'd agree that this particular NY team so far hasn't shown nearly the heart of that late-1970s team... or the late-1990s team, another edition that really knew how to win in the clutch.

Bol, can't remember if we talked about this the last time we had lunch, but did you check with Jason down at Landlocked Records? He could probably answer just about any turntable/vinyl-related question you'd have.

I doubt many folks saw it, as it was going up against the finale of The Sopranos, but PBS ran new two-hour episodes of Jericho! the past two Sundays & will be broadcasting four new (to the U.S. market) epsiodes of Foyle's War over the course of the next month. Jericho is a still-new series, set in late-1950s London, starring Robert Lindsay; very noir-ish & nuanced. Foyle's War has been around longer; it's set in WWII-era Britain, with Michael Kitchen as a middle-aged detective solving crimes based on actual wartime circumstances and occurrences. Both shows are good "period" pieces, but in each case it's really the central actor (Lindsay, Kitchen) who carries the program... well worth checking out, if you're at all into this kind of TV.

That's great, Big Al--I'm glad PoD clicked for you. It's always a boost to hear that a show inspired somebody to go out and buy a jazz CD... I'm lucky that I get to do this for a living. "Andrew!" is now archived. BTW, we'll have a new website in another week or so, and I'll be able to make nearly all of the changes/additions myself, which should help a great deal.

From this B-town perspective you are indeed the Great Lazaro. Swell and Ullmann have both played here in recent years...this week is swamped with work but I'll try to tune in next Tuesday night.

They were (iirc) 14 games back on July 4. However, that was obviously an extraordinary year, and the Sox were still daunted (for whatever it was worth) by "the Curse." I'd agree with Dan that they've got a decent shot at the wild-card, longshot for the division. Clemens is an asset, no doubt about it, even if he is going to be a 5-6 inning pitcher.

omg my mom joined facebook!!’ By MICHELLE SLATALLA NY Times I HAVE reached a curious point in life. Although I feel like the same precocious know-it-all cynic I always was, I suddenly am surrounded by younger precocious know-it-all cynics whose main purpose appears to be to remind me that I’ve lost my edge. Many of these people are teenagers. Some of them I gave birth to. One was in a breech position. And the other day, as I drove home with one of my tormenters in the passenger seat, she started laughing at the way I pronounced “Henri Cartier-Bresson.” “Ha ha ha, is that how you think his name sounds?” my daughter said. “Oh, my God. Who told you that?” It was my college photography professor. Twenty-six years ago. Rather than draw attention to my age, I tried to trick her into thinking of me as someone cool, as we said 26 years ago. “I hope you don’t think this gives you the right to make fun of me on your Facebook page,” I said. “My Facebook page?” this person asked incredulously. “My page? Is that what you think Facebook is?” Suddenly a vague memory from my childhood — the time someone else’s mother left her family, wrote a few young adult novels and ended up in a sad apartment complex on the edge of town — welled up, unbidden. I needed to banish it, along with all evidence of this humiliating conversation. But how? I vowed to fight on her turf. So last week I joined Facebook, the social network for students that opened its doors last fall to anyone with an e-mail address. The decision not only doubled its active membership to 24 million (more than 50 percent of whom are not students), but it also made it possible for parents like me to peek at our children in their online lair. At Facebook.com, I eyed the home page (“Everyone can join”) with suspicion. I doubted Facebook’s sincerity. What could a site created by a student who was born three years after I started mispronouncing “Henri Cartier-Bresson” want with me? Realizing that these were cynical, mocking thoughts cheered me — I felt edgier already — and gave me the courage to join. After I got my Profile page, the first thing I did was to search for other members — my daughter and her friends — to ask them to be my friends. Shockingly, quite a few of them — the friends, not the daughter — accepted my invitation and gave me access to their Profiles, including their interests, hobbies, school affiliations and in some cases, physical whereabouts. Meanwhile, my Profile had News Feed to inform me of every development: Michelle and Paige Ogden are now friends. Michelle is out for a run. Michelle and Jesse Bendit are now friends. Michelle is home. No word from my daughter, though. Out of the blue, I got an invitation to be a friend from one of my neighbors, Ted, who coincidentally had just joined to check out the applications that independent software developers started adding to the site last month. He showed me how to add movie reviews and snippets of music to my Profile. I invited my friends — my actual friends — to join Facebook. Some did. I sent a “poke” to one to say hello. I wrote on another’s “wall.” I tagged a photo to make it appear on my friend Tina’s Profile. In gratitude, she “poked” me. Things were going really well, when suddenly something disturbing happened. An instant-message window appeared onscreen to deliver a verdict. “wayyy creepy,” it said. “why did you make one!” Ah, there she was. “What are you talking about?” I typed innocently. “im only telling you for your own good,” my daughter typed. “Be my friend,” I typed. “You won’t get away with this,” she typed. “everyone in the whole world thinks its super creepy when adults have facebooks.” “Have facebooks? Is that what you think a Profile page is called?” I typed. She disconnected. Feeling as if I had achieved a minor victory in the name of parents of teenagers everywhere, I phoned Michael Wesch, an assistant professor of cultural anthropology at Kansas State University whose research focuses on social networks, to offer him some real-life data to work with. But although he didn’t go so far as to say he disapproved of my parenting skills, Professor Wesch reminded me that what Facebook’s younger users really are doing is exploring their identities, which they may not want to parade in front of their parents. “Can’t I explore my identity, too?” I asked. “Why does everything fun have to be for them?” He pointed out that there are a number of other social networks — sober, grown-up places like Linkedin.com (for making business contacts) and Care2.com (for social activists) and Webbiographies.com (for amateur genealogists) — where I could cavort without offending my daughter. “There is a really good social network for older people, too,” Professor Wesch said. “It caters to the older generation with an automatic feed of news that relates to older generations and a number of features tailored to the way people in that generation would interact.” “What’s it called?” I asked. “I can’t remember the name of it,” he said. “Exactly,” I said. “I’m staying where it’s fun.” But after receiving a follow-up threat from my daughter (“unfriend paige right now. im serious. i dont care if they request you. say no. i will be soo mad if you dont unfriend paige right now. actually”), I started worrying that allowing parents in would backfire on Facebook. If the presence of people like me alienated Facebook’s core younger group, would they flee? And if so, whom would I annoy? “I can’t really comment on your family dynamics,” said Brandee Barker, a Facebook spokeswoman. “But I can say that more than 50 percent of Facebook users are outside of college now. As our original demographic gets older, we want to be able to include their social networks.” “Maybe I should lay off my daughter,” I said. “Facebook is all about being a reflection of real-world relationships,” she said. “The same thing you’re experiencing with your daughter online is a reflection of how you’re not a part of her social network in real life.” “I thought you weren’t going to comment on my family dynamics,” I said. To try to cheer me up, Ms. Barker said, “I’m 36, so I’m O.K. with being friends with my mom on Facebook because I don’t think she’s weird anymore.” I had only 20 years to wait. I checked my Profile. My daughter was now my friend. Well, sort of. She had set her privacy settings to grant me only bare-bones access to her profile. She also sent a message: “stop worrying you’ll end up writing a young adult novel in an empty apartment because even some extremely old creepsters write real novels” “I’m glad we’re friends,” I wrote. “oh thank god I was starting to worry,” she wrote. I hope she wasn’t being cynical. E-mail: slatalla@nytimes.com

Best birthday wishes to you, Mr. B.

This week on Night Lights it’s “Andrew!” as we mark the passing of jazz great Andrew Hill with a program featuring his early and mid-1960s Blue Note recordings. Hill, who died at the age of 75 on April 20, 2007, was a highly original pianist and composer who recorded a string of stunning albums for Blue Note in the short span of eight months, constructing his own musical universe, much like Blue Note predecessors Thelonious Monk and Herbie Nichols. His compositions, which employed asymmetry, repeated phrases, and artful use of space, were challenging to play, but at Blue Note he found musicians who could rise to the level of his inventiveness. We’ll hear music from the LP many considered Hill’s masterpiece, Point of Departure, as well as Black Fire, Judgment, Andrew!, and Bobby Hutcherson’s album Dialogue. “Andrew!” airs Saturday, June 9 at 11:05 p.m. EST on WFIU and at 9 p.m. Central Time on WNIN-Evansville. It airs Sunday evening at 10 p.m. EST on Michigan's Blue Lake Public Radio as well. The program will be posted by Tuesday morning in the Night Lights archives. You can read (and hear) more about Andrew Hill here, and you can also see a video of his last performance at Trinity Church on March 29, 2007. Here, too, are appreciations of Hill’s music by bassist and musical colleague Richard Davis and Los Angeles jazz DJ and musician Kellen Yamanaka.

Wow--I had just pulled out the Bear Family box a couple of weeks ago for another listen, and you're exactly right, Allen. Anybody who has an appreciation for such music should really seek out the BF set... RIP.

Breaking news from Atrios.

This is the info from Johnny Hodges' birth certificate, posted by Paul Combs at the New England jazz site:

The publisher's note at the beginning of the 2007 paperback states: And I now have it on very good authority that Hodges was born in 1907--so this year is his centenary.

Just wanted to mention that the very good Blindman Blues Forum, which is moderated by Organissimo poster Tom1960, has added a jazz section. I know some other Organissimo posters have joined, and I just registered the other day. Looks like a great place! (Not to take anything away from Org, which remains far & away the best jazz discussion board on the Net. )

Thanks for posting that, Michael--I'll send the link to some Bloomingtonians.

Hadn't checked the AMG one yet--thanks much, J.A.W. I may e-mail our old MIA friend Mike Fitzgerald and see what he recommends re: making a final determination.

Yep, as does the new edition. Grove (and yes, I know it's unreliable) says 1907.

Living Era seems to think it's this year.

Hey folks, is it a Hodges centennary this year or not? Various books/resources list his birthdate as either July 25, 1906, or July 25, 1907... any Ellingtonian experts out there who know for sure?

Great backstory on that piece, Larry--thanks for sharing it with us.

Here's another--I came across this on vinyl in the station library a year or two back & posted about it--then actually listened to it, and yikes...

OTOH those album titles at least speak a certain honesty.