Dr. Rat

I love it.... I agree with Jim about the fun part. One of the problems of jazz lovers is the fact we tend to take the music too seriously. I agree that I do not enjoy performers who seem to go from one quote to the next with little thought in between. But a well placed quote can bring a smile to my face anytime. Most listeners never want an artist to "phone in" a performance. We want the artist to express his/her emotion. Fortunately for all of us, many jazz artist are not sad all the time. Some even like to laugh and poke fun at themselves. Lighten up. Well there's funny and then there's the "Take my wife" joke. I don't object to funny. I never do a show that doesn't have something like Slim & Slam or Fats Waller or Babs Gonzalez in it. But some stuff is just gratuitous or obvious. And, I must say, a lot of the quoting I've heard is just that. This brings to mind Grateful Dead fans I've seen who try to guess where a jam is going next before anyone else does, and then they pat themselves on the back for hearing the hints in the melodic line or whatever. I've never been very good at associating melodic lines with song names, so maybe I just feel left out--I don't know. But truthfully, funny isn't usually the effect that's accomplished. Perhaps providing opportunity for self-congratulation? --eric

and filing the paperwork to legally change his name to Constantina. So how's the dog? --eric

I never thought I knew "April in Portugal" -- but it must be the source of Mickey Katz's "Pesach in Portugal" (speaking of silly)... Here we enter the realm of silly but mighty fine. --eric

yeah well, that's a bit hard eh? The guy gets falsely accused and is not invited to defend himself. I got where he was coming from eventually. Like I said, there is some egg on my face. I don't agree with him at all, but that's just me. I can see where Jim is coming from, too. Check out the guy's last comment after I asked him if he had heard any BN vinyl. The simple fact is, CDs have high-end up the wizzoo. The LPs of the BN sides sound completely different (and better to me), especially the organ sides. That's why it's better to listen to the CDs on the radio. Because then your high-end goes out the window rather than up the wizzo. --eric

it's not even for free? I bet the meese in heat drink it all. What good beer? --eric

Well, you and I have had a few back-and-forths that really got me thinking--including the Coltrane thread--so I owe you nothing but thanks. I can see how my posts would have read very differently in the context you spell out. But if I might suggest a different approach to that situation: directly bringing it up. My between-the-line reading was that there was some PMing going on about the thread (I don't know if this is true, just my own paranoia) and that the lack of (overused word, sorry) transparency was a problem. Another thing I was thinking of was that all of the ballyhoo surrounding Deep and the false deep and the other guy who left when deep got canned . . . that this also made everybody a lot more attendent to "maintaining community" than to the thorny and sometimes not-well-written and always badly typed effusings of me. --eric

I can imagine a younger me saying something like that. I think a lot of people (still)look at black art as primitive art, and when it does something to show that it ain't (putting a bit of sheen on the recording or being undeniably sophisticated), well people pull back from it and think it's "inauthentic." I know when I was neck deep into Jamaican music when I was younger, this would summarize my response to a lot of more sophisticated or "modernized" reggae. Somebody turned me on the LKJ at some point and things started to get a whole lot more complicated. Then I decided I liked complicated. --eric

Hey Jim, Could you give an example of Desmond's quoting. I'd definitely be interested in hearing about that! I didn't really think of Desmond in this context, but I suppose I should have. --eric

Oddly enough, I recently picked this book up used from a faculty member here who dumps a lot of used books just outside our studios. And, my English mentors were both Chicago guys--one was smart and went to Wake Forest as an undergrad. The other wasn't nearly as smart and was born into the place (he's Richard McKeon's son). But I've always had a lot of respect for Chicago. It surprises me that the world headquaters for the middle-brow should ahve let itself become a place where undergraduates are/were neglected. My dad, in a way, was a Chicago man, too: he taught himself out of the Encyclopedia Britannica! --eric

My opinion is that generally speaking this is a technique that gets abused and is of little interest to listeners. It can be done well when the soloist makes allusions to another piece or works a different melody subtly into the frameweork within which s/he is working, but suddenly jumping into "Pop Goes the Weasel" or whatever is what I think of as a stupid musician trick. It requires skill and knowledge, but, aestehtically, it's on the level of dogs walking on their hind legs. --eric Edited so as to appear to be English.

Moose- Before we get too deep on this one, I'd like to make a few things clear: first, I like it here, I have a lot of fun here, I like the people here, and certainly I have never had any problems with any of the folks who regularly post to Funny Rat. Like other, I recognize the value of hanging out and disussing things with folks with whom you share a great degree of "common ground." That's what this entire board is, I figure, only with a bit more generality and a bit less "common ground." I am trying to get at some sensitive issues here, I suppose, so my expression has been kinda awkward. I brought up my own thread because I think it brings certain tendencies to light. I am not looking for sympathy, and I wasn't scarred by the experience or anything. That thread was a lot of fun, and my thanks to those who particpated at the end was sincere. BUT, I do think that occasionally folks try too hard to get at the people behind posts rather than deal with the words and ideas that get written. "Bialek factor" as in the physicist William Bialek? Tell me more! --eric

These are some interesting comments. I wonder sometimes why some things get dropped and others get picked up. I'm relatively new--I'm not a BN refugee--but I've always liked this place better than the alternatives. But I have noticed that there are rifts here (Funny Rat being one of them). Pace, Chaney, I'm not saying that anyone is excluding anyone else, but I am saying that what we see is that Funny Rat is dominated by five posters or so. Also, there's a rift between "intellectualizers" and non. And there's a pretty deep insider/outsider rift that gets rolling in several different permutations: musicians/non-musician; Blue Noter/non-Bner; acknowledged expert/schmo. The place where this seems to break down is the political forum, where allegiences are worn on sleeves. Otherwise, I sense a lot of reticense around here on topics musical. I offer this is an example: Coltrane & Aesthetics thread I was really surprised by the amount of hostility this thread met with (I expected some--it was an old issue--but not one that I had never seen discussed in an interesting manner). And I was really happy with the discussion that finally came forth--I learned from it--but I have to say the amount of ad hominem and motive-questioning crap was . . . odd in a board supposedly dedicated to discussion. What does this point up? That a lot more of this board is wrapped up in "How's the weather" sort of socializing that we'd like to admit? That there's an immediate hostility to anyone who questions the consensus we all like to beleive is under the surface here (i.e. to anyone who brings something up that really inspires what one might call discussion)? I think there's a certain strangeness to the way people use the media that we run up against. The same one that makes PJ O'Rourke wonder why conservatives listen to Rush Limbaugh. I Agree With Me. I think this is a tendency we've got to work against, because it's the natiral tendency, and it makes the board a lot less interesting than it would be otherwise. Just my thoughts, --eric

See what I'm saying! Biological basis or not we end up arguing! --eric

Is it just me that thought their second disc was a complete bore? Is it just me that began thinking "You know a foursquare rock pounder and a pianist with definite classical proclivities is a bad recipe for a jazz trio." Not that I'm against anyone doing something different along this direction, but if you play something like New York Electric Piano next to these guys, don't they sound a little, ummmm, empty? --eric

I've just been rereading the whole thread, and I don't have an axe to grind here. But it would seem to me that the problem here arises out of the Funny Rat thread. A lot of the people who are voting in support of the AG forum are contratsing what that would be like in contrast to everything being "buried" in the Funny Rat thread. But I think there is a middle way here that would be better that either alternative, that is, as Michael Fitzgerald and Jsngry and several other folks are suggesting, that what gets posted in Funny Rat get posted in the appropraite general fora. There does seem to be a great deal of attachment to the like-minded socializing Funny Rat makes possible, but I think the proposal is that at least some of the post volume in Funny Rat can be sacrificed in the interest of a more general airing of the discussion. I think this end can be accomplished best via the middle way. I think when we have someone like Jsngry saying he loves the music discussed in Funny Rat but rarely visits the thread, we're missing opportunities. --eric

yeah! and they smell too! It aint so bad if you wash them once a week. --eric

That's easy enough to do. (I count 52 -- certain thread crappers included. B-) ) Д.Д. 787 king ubu 620 John B 493 Chaney 329 J.A.W. 240 couw 87 Gary 79 Nate Dorward 78 P.L.M 68 Geoff 59 gnhrtg 59 Matthew 43 Clunky 41 brownie 29 7/4 26 jon abbey 19 David Ayers 18 Late 17 alankin 16 clifford_thornton 16 Chuck Nessa 12 EKE BBB 10 rockefeller center 10 catesta 4 Jazzmoose 4 AmirBagachelles 4 alejo 4 ghost of miles 3 WD45 3 jgthomas 3 Jim Dye 2 .:.impossible 2 Joe Christmas 2 shrugs 2 David Gitin 2 Swinger 2 Steve Reynolds 2 JSngry 1 Big Wheel 1 Peter 1 Adam 1 jazzbo 1 Claude 1 Leeway 1 mgraham333 1 randyhersom 1 DavidM 1 KOB 1 Rob C 1 Brandon Burke 1 dangme 1 Craig23 1 I'll have to refer you to my post(s) above as to both the origin and purpose (or non-purpose) of the Funny Rat. Just for a recap: What would be the advantages of having an AG section as opposed to interested folk just posting album reviews and notices and what-all in the already existing sections (Artists, New Releases, Re-issues, Miscellaneous Music, etc.) ? Also, the numbers on the funny rat thread are pretty interesting -- posting is very much dominated by a very few people: Look at the steep dropoff between J.A.W. and cuow. That's a factor of three. I do feel that some of the stuff in the funny rat thread needs outing in the general areas of the board.

OK, but what do we find in our experience as to standards of beauty. Do we find that we all think the same things are beautiful, or do we find that we all think the same faces are beautiful? Resounding no. Now if we are all programmed to think the same things are beautiful and we end up, in vivo, thinking different things are beautiful, what's happened to our biological programming? In short, so what? Will evolutionary psychology ever tire of issuing research reports like this? Perhaps there is a gene they've got that makes them make assertions which, in their modest form (there are some standards of beauty that are inherent to us) are more or less known to everyone already and in their strong form (we basically all think the same thngs are beautiful) are absurdly contrafactual. I await the latest studies. --eric

I'm with Mr. Fitzgerald. --eric

Interesting stuff, Eric ... I think there are definitely some fans/snobs who DO want to position jazz as advanced music for advanced musicians (or at least "advanced listeners") and consider that listener-oriented standards end up rewarding Kenny G-types. I can see the rocks on that side of our passage. We don't want the ship of jazz to break up on the schoals of Kenny G. Even if the streets there are paved with gold. But, I think there might be rocks on the other side, too. And we rarely see anyone trot out the too-elitist shibboleth the way the too-populist Kenny G gets trotted out. I was sort of thinking along these lines when I read the Wayne Shorter intervie win the Atlantic a few months back. Shorter is a great musicians, and a fine composer. He makes some fairly challenging music (though he's gotten trashed for being too populist as well). On this particular issue I suppose I'm on the Shorter side rather than the Kart side--I think critics often start to set standards which are heavily determined by idiom and style and they seem incapable of experiencing a piece of music outside of those idiomatic expectations (vroom!). But then I read this: And I think to myself, well, those idiomatic expectations are the handle the audience has on the music, that's the common ground. Isn't it OK for them to be disappointed that Shorter refuses to work from the expecetd fram of reference? After, they're not critics. Are they required to come over and listen to the music the way Shorter wants them to. Or is the obligation on the side of the performer, the one getting paid, rather than paying? And, finally, I read this: And I think to myself, here's a guy in the medium of music who is refusing to meet not only the expectations of the run-of-mill music listener, but also those of a fairly sophisticated, idiomatically-aware jazz audience, demanding that they come to him, more or less. And what does this man read? What books does he hold up as examples of edgy writing? Well-done but technically simple genre fiction! The sort of fiction that abides by (or at least nods to) idiomatic expectations practically every step of the way! The equivalent of Jimmy Smith--not even. And having read Dune, he wants us to tell us about "the incomprehensible mystery of it all!" There was something galling about this to me. Something that made me think jazz musicians ought to be thinking much more seriously about the consumption end of art--about how they consume art as non-experts, and applying some of their observations to how they produce jazz. --eric

Well, with all that ideological, military and dynastic action, I suppose its hard to get to the economics unless you make a special point of it. I'm thinking Braudel does a decent job on this score? --eric

I've probably always enjoyed Henderson's playing less than most everyone I talk jazz with--most of these folks being musicians. But my first question would be, aside from the technical standpoint (an innovative technique being of possible use to other musicians) what difference does it make whether Henderson (or Shaw or anyone) is innovative. Why is this such a quality to be sought after and valued. Would a musician rather be "innovative" than "beautiful" or "listenable" or "impressive," etc. I suppose the "innovative" might get you the esteem of you colleagues, but is that what jazz fandom is: music by advanced musicians for advanced musicians, others can come along and enjoy if they like? I'm not throwing accusations around, just a feeling I've got that the standards we apply to past musicians and, more importantly, to young contemporary musicians are kinda narrow and musician-oriented rather than listener-oriented. --eric

Chipotle tabasco sauce: This stuff disappears around my hous ein like 3 days. You'd be amazed how many things taste better with roasted red jalapenos on them. --eric

I'd strongly urge all you canned kidney bean users out there to strongly consider switching to dried pintos, they don't take that long to cook, and I do think they make it all better! --eric

Since hunting season is also right around the corner (i don't hunt, btw, I just eat!) I wanted to post this excellent Mark Miller recipe for Venison & Black bean chili. But you can wing it easy enough: Cumin--a rounded tablespoon or so, or more if you're game, pan roasted and ground. About a pound of ground venison, fried up before hand in something nice--olive oil, and some chopped small onions and a lot of garlic. Black beans, cooked with bay leaf and some hot peppers toward the end A can of chipotles in adobo a few anchos, toasted over the burner and skinned & seeded. Mexican oregano -- I suppose it's just powdered oregano--also roasted (careful, you'll choke the cat) Salt Edit to add: can of diced tomatoes and small can of paste. It's good. I'll post the real recipe tamale. --eric