fine ellington article by scott yanow

[alocispepraluger102]

http://www.tunepiano.com/duke.htm

[Lazaro Vega]

"Ellington ranked with George Gershwin, Cole Porter, Irving Berlin and their contemporaries."

He ranked above them as a composer. The "contemporaries" would be Copeland, Bernstein and Ives, perhaps, and there he's ranking with.

[alocispepraluger102]

"Ellington ranked with George Gershwin, Cole Porter, Irving Berlin and their contemporaries."

He ranked above them as a composer. The "contemporaries" would be Copeland, Bernstein and Ives, perhaps, and there he's ranking with.

shouldn't we rank him with the world's composers, not just the americans.

somehow, i feel prokofiev, and strauss, and bartok, and milhaud, and shostakovich would consider him equals.

[Christiern]

What is "fine" about this piece? it's merely a rub-of-the-mill bio culled from other run-of-the-mill bios.

[alocispepraluger102]

What is "fine" about this piece? it's merely a rub-of-the-mill bio culled from other run-of-the-mill bios.

it is 'fine' to those like me who havent read the others. maybe i should read more before i write.

apologies.

Edited August 20, 2006 by alocispepraluger102

[Christiern]

No need to apologize, it's late now, but tomorrow I'll come up with some suggested reading for you, if you wish.

Chris

[alocispepraluger102]

No need to apologize, it's late now, but tomorrow I'll come up with some suggested reading for you, if you wish.

Chris

that will be much appreciated.

thank you.

[paul secor]

"Ellington ranked with George Gershwin, Cole Porter, Irving Berlin and their contemporaries."

He ranked above them as a composer. The "contemporaries" would be Copeland, Bernstein and Ives, perhaps, and there he's ranking with.

I think of Gershwin, Porter, et. al. as songwriters. If you're talking songwriters, there's nothing wrong with Ellington being ranked with them, imo. To be sure, Ellington was more than a songwriter.

Edited August 20, 2006 by paul secor

[The Magnificent Goldberg]

On the AAJ board, we've had two recent, more or less parallel, discussions about:

jazz composers, trying to tease out the distinction between a tune and a composition; and

Duke Ellington

General thread

http://forums.allaboutjazz.com/showthread.php?t=16088

Duke thread

http://forums.allaboutjazz.com/showthread.php?t=16116

MG

[Chuck Nessa]

Silly argument. Ellington, Porter, Gershwin, Copland, Beethoven, Bach, Manilow , etc were doing different things and comparing this stuff is futile. Duke ain't the songwriter Porter or Gershwin were (though he wanted to be). He is not a composer of Copland or Beethoven stature (though he wanted to be). What he was is a superb jazzman with compositional and "arranging" talent and he changed my life.

This stuff really bothers me. We try to build ourselves up by "being better" than others rather than doing unique things.

[alocispepraluger102]

Silly argument. Ellington, Porter, Gershwin, Copland, Beethoven, Bach, Manilow , etc were doing different things and comparing this stuff is futile. Duke ain't the songwriter Porter or Gershwin were (though he wanted to be). He is not a composer of Copland or Beethoven stature (though he wanted to be). What he was is a superb jazzman with compositional and "arranging" talent and he changed my life.

This stuff really bothers me. We try to build ourselves up by "being better" than others rather than doing unique things.

your point is very well taken. thanks for keeping us straight.

(one wonders what a duke, born and raised in vienna or paris or milan, would have given the world).

Edited August 21, 2006 by alocispepraluger102

[Christiern]

Here are four suggestions (in no particular order). I'm pretty sure that Amazon has these available at low prices.

• Duke Ellington in Person: An Intimate Memoir - Mercer Ellington
  
• The World of Duke Ellington - Stanley Dance
  
• Beyond Category: The Life and Genius of Duke Ellington - John Edward Hasse
  
• The Duke Ellington Reader - an anthology edited by Mark Tucker
  

[alocispepraluger102]

Here are four suggestions (in no particular order). I'm pretty sure that Amazon has these available at low prices.

• Duke Ellington in Person: An Intimate Memoir - Mercer Ellington
  
• The World of Duke Ellington - Stanley Dance
  
• Beyond Category: The Life and Genius of Duke Ellington - John Edward Hasse
  
• The Duke Ellington Reader - an anthology edited by Mark Tucker
  

thank you.

i will be checking my library tomorrow.

[Guy Berger]

Silly argument. Ellington, Porter, Gershwin, Copland, Beethoven, Bach, Manilow , etc were doing different things and comparing this stuff is futile. Duke ain't the songwriter Porter or Gershwin were (though he wanted to be). He is not a composer of Copland or Beethoven stature (though he wanted to be). What he was is a superb jazzman with compositional and "arranging" talent and he changed my life.

This stuff really bothers me. We try to build ourselves up by "being better" than others rather than doing unique things.

your point is very well taken. thanks for keeping us straight.

(one wonders what a duke, born and raised in vienna or paris or milan, would have given the world).

I'm glad he was born exactly where he was.

Chuck, I couldn't have said it better than you did.

Guy

[ghost of miles]

Here are four suggestions (in no particular order). I'm pretty sure that Amazon has these available at low prices.

• Duke Ellington in Person: An Intimate Memoir - Mercer Ellington
  
• The World of Duke Ellington - Stanley Dance
  
• Beyond Category: The Life and Genius of Duke Ellington - John Edward Hasse
  
• The Duke Ellington Reader - an anthology edited by Mark Tucker
  

thank you.

i will be checking my library tomorrow.

If you get The Duke Ellington Reader, be sure to check out "The Hot Bach"--a three-part piece on Duke that ran in the New Yorker around 1944. Great portrait of Ellington at work in his prime.

[Lazaro Vega]

Silly argument. Ellington, Porter, Gershwin, Copland, Beethoven, Bach, Manilow , etc were doing different things and comparing this stuff is futile. Duke ain't the songwriter Porter or Gershwin were (though he wanted to be). He is not a composer of Copland or Beethoven stature (though he wanted to be). What he was is a superb jazzman with compositional and "arranging" talent and he changed my life.

This stuff really bothers me. We try to build ourselves up by "being better" than others rather than doing unique things.

Yeah, I bit.

[Hot Ptah]

Silly argument. Ellington, Porter, Gershwin, Copland, Beethoven, Bach, Manilow , etc were doing different things and comparing this stuff is futile. Duke ain't the songwriter Porter or Gershwin were (though he wanted to be). He is not a composer of Copland or Beethoven stature (though he wanted to be). What he was is a superb jazzman with compositional and "arranging" talent and he changed my life.

This stuff really bothers me. We try to build ourselves up by "being better" than others rather than doing unique things.

I agree completely. What also bugs me is when someone comes out to introduce a jazz concert and gives a fervent speech about how jazz is equal to classical music. A variation on this speech is that jazz is better than classical music. The person giving the speech always seems to shout, and to build to a mighty emotional climax when the jazz-classical music comparison is made. I always think, jazz and classical are not alike, and to compare the two head-on is foolish.

I have noticed that this jazz is greater than or equal to classical music speech is often given by someone raising money, or campaigning for public office.

[JSngry]

Really, if you can't appreciate something on its own terms, then what's the point? Humankind (and the stories that spring from it) is nothing if not a diverse lot, and the jostling for "position" on the "cultural" ladder is based on the assumption that some stories, and therefore some humans, are intrinsically more "worthy" than others.

I for one don't buy it, not for a second. If you know the people, you can better appreciate their stories as the unique and beautiful contributions that they are. If not, then you're going to be prone to "proving" to yourself that the people you don't know so well but still reach you are "as good as" the ones that you do know well. And if you have/want to prove that, well, isn't there an implication in there somewhere that those people aren't as good? Or at the very least, that they may well be as good, but that they need the "approval" of you and your type to be "officially" recognized as such? It's a slippery slope.

Humankind is united by certain ongoing fundamental traits and experiences. The sooner we can all learn (or at least attempt to learn) to appreciate the universiality of those traits & experiences and forget about wigging out over the specifics of how they get expressed, the closer we can get to a life without the irrational fear that leads us to "defend" against that which we all share.

There's plenty of things in life that need to be defended against, but expressions of beauty, joy, the ups and downs of "everday life", and contemplations on the mysteries of life surely shouldn't be among them, no matter who expresses them, and no matter how they go about doing it.

Edited August 21, 2006 by JSngry

[RDK]

Silly argument. Ellington, Porter, Gershwin, Copland, Beethoven, Bach, Manilow , etc were doing different things and comparing this stuff is futile. Duke ain't the songwriter Porter or Gershwin were (though he wanted to be). He is not a composer of Copland or Beethoven stature (though he wanted to be). What he was is a superb jazzman with compositional and "arranging" talent and he changed my life.

This stuff really bothers me. We try to build ourselves up by "being better" than others rather than doing unique things.

I agree completely. What also bugs me is when someone comes out to introduce a jazz concert and gives a fervent speech about how jazz is equal to classical music. A variation on this speech is that jazz is better than classical music. The person giving the speech always seems to shout, and to build to a mighty emotional climax when the jazz-classical music comparison is made. I always think, jazz and classical are not alike, and to compare the two head-on is foolish.

I have noticed that this jazz is greater than or equal to classical music speech is often given by someone raising money, or campaigning for public office.

Forget classical music. How many times do you hear - on this board even - that jazz is superior to rock, pop, blues, country, folk, whatever...?

[JSngry]

And how many times do you hear - outside of this board - that jazz is unlistenable or some such rot?

Open-mindedness goes both ways. No -it goes all ways.

As in so may things, we ain't there yet.

[The Magnificent Goldberg]

As in so may things, we ain't there yet.

Indeed - no one (else) here seems to think Smooth Jazz has anything to offer...

MG

[JSngry]

Hey, don't get me wrong - there's plenty of music that I personally don't like (for any number of reasons). It's just that I don't feel "threatened" by it. Likewise, there's plenty of "lesser" music that gives me a lot of pleasure and/or stimulation (again, for various reasons), and I necessarily don't feel the need to proclaim that it's "better" or even "as good as" than anything else just to justify my enjoying it. It is what it is. What else could it be? What else should it be?

A "top-heavy" perspective is every bit as unbalanced as a "bottom-heavy" one, no? One lets you fly but runs the risk of never letting you land, and the other prevents you from ever getting off the ground. Either way, no thanks!

[RDK]

Hey, don't get me wrong - there's plenty of music that I personally don't like (for any number of reasons). It's just that I don't feel "threatened" by it. Likewise, there's plenty of "lesser" music that gives me a lot of pleasure and/or stimulation (again, for various reasons), and I necessarily don't feel the need to proclaim that it's "better" or even "as good as" than anything else just to justify my enjoying it. It is what it is. What else could it be? What else should it be?

A "top-heavy" perspective is every bit as unbalanced as a "bottom-heavy" one, no? One lets you fly but runs the risk of never letting you land, and the other prevents you from ever getting off the ground. Either way, no thanks!

Agree completely!

But Kenny G still sucks...

[Randy Twizzle]

Here's the opposite of open-minded, circa 1930. Brooks Atkinson reviewing the Ellington band's appearance in a stage show:

[John L]

Silly argument. Ellington, Porter, Gershwin, Copland, Beethoven, Bach, Manilow , etc were doing different things and comparing this stuff is futile. Duke ain't the songwriter Porter or Gershwin were (though he wanted to be). He is not a composer of Copland or Beethoven stature (though he wanted to be). What he was is a superb jazzman with compositional and "arranging" talent and he changed my life.

This stuff really bothers me. We try to build ourselves up by "being better" than others rather than doing unique things.

I agree completely. What also bugs me is when someone comes out to introduce a jazz concert and gives a fervent speech about how jazz is equal to classical music. A variation on this speech is that jazz is better than classical music. The person giving the speech always seems to shout, and to build to a mighty emotional climax when the jazz-classical music comparison is made. I always think, jazz and classical are not alike, and to compare the two head-on is foolish.

I have noticed that this jazz is greater than or equal to classical music speech is often given by someone raising money, or campaigning for public office.

Even in its more subtle form, I find this very embarrassing, embarrassing for jazz. It sounds like a cover for an inferiority complex. A number of Wynton Marsalis' comments on classical music and jazz really bother me in that respect. He talks as if he is on a mission to prove to the world that jazz can be as "serious" as classical music. He has even made statements to the effect that he only plays classical music for that reason, i.e. to gain more respect for jazz. The effect is just the opposite. Why put jazz on the defensive? It doesn't need to be. We have 100 years of jazz great music, much of it recorded. What else is needed?

Edited August 22, 2006 by John L