Hank fans take note

[ghost of miles]

BREAKTHROUGH, the 1972 Hank Mobley/Cedar Walton date, is being re-issued by Savoy this Tuesday. Being one of those who missed the 32 Jazz version several years ago, I'm definitely excited. (Gotta have better cover art, too--one would think!) What's the IMO of Hank/Cedar fans who already have this session?

[DrJ]

I've seen basically the same cover art as used by 32Jazz being used by Savoy on some reissues (e.g. Woody Shaw's LITTLE RED'S FANTASY)...so you might be disappointed on that end, unfortunately.

Edited August 24, 2003 by DrJ

[Brad]

If you don't have this you should pick it up, just because it's one of Hank's last sessions and because the music is fantastic. Not only are Hank and Cedar notable here, but so is Charles Davis on baritone. Hank was apparently going through tough times and this shows to a certain extent in his music. The playing is intense here and this is a very good session. It's a good pickup, and if you're into Hank, a must.

[DrJ]

Agreed, an excellent date musically (and you GOTTA have at least one jazz album in your collection that features a cinder block on the cover!)

[Eric]

Hank never sounded so raw. I am pretty sure that is a good thing!

Eric

[JSngry]

As an album, it's a bit of a mess since technically it's an album by the group Artistry In Music, The 3 principals (Mobley, Davis, & Walton) each get a feature, so there's only 3 tunes that feature the entire group, and one of those, "House On Maple Street", is too short for anything really meaty to get going. It's nice, but more of a teaser than anything else.

BUT -

Walton's feature on "Love Story" is a beautifully swinging performance that totally ignores that tune's cheesiness (Don Patterson did a totally different version, also on Cobblestone, that accomplishes this same feat), and Hank's feature is "Summertime", a number that I've raved about numerous times in the past as being about as bloody a piece of music as there is (yeah, it's kinda wierd to "rave" about such an obviously painful experiece, but such are the limitations of language. Suffice it to say that if you are drawn to deeply dramatic and compelling personal expressions, this piece will stick with you, haunt you even, for quite a long time, perhaps forever).

This leaves two full-length group pieces, the title tune, and "Early Morning Stroll", and they are superb. Hank's walking a tightrope without a net here, musically and emotionally, and he gives the impression that he's going to lose his balance and go SPLAT at any, literally ANY moment, but he never does. Those who like their music "finished" will not find musch to like here, but those who like it real, no matter how frightening the consequences won't want to be without this one.

FWIW, I made a mix tape for my buddy Pete Gallio a few years ago, and included the version of "Early Morning Stroll" from BREAKTHROUGH. I gave all the tunes homemade titles, and my title for this one was "The Ultimate Hard Bop Fuck You". Pete loved the title, found it a totally accurate description, and loved the piece even more (he's one of those players whose listening is very focused on very specific things, so he had never heard it before) . As the last tune on the last Hank Mobley recording we were to hear for years to come (the Montoolieoo thing was released waaaaay after the fact, and as a CD bonus cut only), I think it's an accurate summation of what we're hearing here - Hank just before he lost it and said "Fuck You" to music and life in general. This album's certainly not a "pretty" performance, but it's damn high on the list of Truthful/Realistic Artistic Expressions of the 20th Century, if you know what I mean.

In short - GET IT!

[JohnS]

I'm going to have to dig this one out and play it again, my impressions were that this was a pretty disappointing record. Hope I'm wrong.

[Brad]

Well, I was hoping Jim would post. He always says things far better than I do. Hope that convinces those who don't have it to get it.

[John Tapscott]

I'm going to have to dig this one out and play it again, my impressions were that this was a pretty disappointing record.  Hope I'm wrong.

Agreed. I had this Lp, and sold it. I recall the whole thing seemed unsettled and really not so great in sound quality. But that was my impression many years ago. Maybe I would hear it differently today. Jim's description is very helpful.

[JSngry]

"Unsettled" is not an innacurate description, imo, but that's kinda what makes it is what it is - unsettled, but often enough frighteningly real.

Maybe it "helps" to know the history of what happened to Hank after this album, maybe that's the context one needs to really "get" it. He sounds as if he had already turned the corner to his ultimate fate, but only recently, so he's on the way to be going, not yet actually gone. Of course, if somebody isn't concerned with those things, then it may just very well sound like a session that is a bit "off" by the standards of all concerned. In one sense, I suppose it is (although the Mobley/Walton/Higgins triangle has never been more on the same page, imo, it might not a page that evrybody wants to read). There's no real "right" way to approach music, but for the type who listens for the personal stories being told, and is willing to accept that an unsettled person is indeed likely to tell some unsettled (unsettling, even) stories, this holds the potential to be some pretty gripping stuff.

[John Tapscott]

Maybe it "helps" to know the history of what happened to Hank after this album, maybe that's the context one needs to really "get" it. He sounds as if he had already turned the corner to his ultimate fate, but only recently, so he's on the way to be going, not yet actually gone.

I'm a big Mobley fan, but I'm not really clear about what happened to him from '72-'86 (the year he died). OK, he obviously didn't record but was he active at all musically? Did the dope finally drive him off the deep end? I gather he died alone and in poverty. I'm not trying to drag down his reputation; I'm just looking for sober facts. But no matter what, Hank will always be one of my musical heroes.

[Soulstation1]

was hank or cedar considered the leader of this session?

i went to borders yesterday to check out the cd, but didn't check in the "w"s

they might not even carry this one.

ss1

[Dan Gould]

I think they were considered co-leaders but when it came out on Dorn's label I found it under Walton.

[BruceH]

I'm with John---what exactly happened to Mobley during the last decade-and-a-half of his life? I gather that his health crumbled, but other than that I don't know anything. I don't imagine that anyone is going to come out with a major Hank biography any time soon.

[Dan Gould]

Actually, I think Bertrand or Mike Fitzgerald has spoken of someone who might be working on one, or was that Morgan?

Anyway, there's some info from a Jazztimes article that had some interesting comments from Don Sickler, the liners to A Slice of the Top have some info too, and there was also a DB interview, I want to say it was in the late 70s but maybe it was earlier than that?

To my understanding, Hank's health deteriorated a great deal, in particular he had lung problems that limited his ability to play and probably limited his playing when he could. On top of that his addictions did get the better of him as time wore on. One story that Sickler tells is sad, that he would kick the drugs but had to compensate with alcohol, but when he was clean, he was smart and incisive and showed sparks of his old playing.

(Hope I got all that right, none of it is in front of me right now. But a good indication of Hank's deterioration is in the picture that accompanied the Tete Montoliu CD where he appears on one, CD only, bonus cut. Hank looks significantly older and grayer than he had at the start of the decade.

[bertrand]

Dan,

Ian McDonald in the U.K. is indeed working on a Hank bio. He already published one on Tadd Dameron.

There are several books on Lee Morgan in the works. The one that will most likely come out first is being written by a French journalist. Based on the work he has done so far, I think it will be excellent.

Both Lee and Hank were the subject of Master's Theses at Rutgers. Jeff McMillan's thesis on Lee came out a few years ago. Sam Miller probably just finished his Hank thesis this year. I think he is about to give a lecture at the Institute of Jazz Studies (or it may already have happened?).

When is your book on Gene Harris coming out

Bertrand.

Edited August 28, 2003 by bertrand

[Rooster_Ties]

Anybody know of any Andrew Hill books in the works??

I know, probably too obscure to merit a whole book. But still, I think it'd be an interesting read, especially if Andrew contributed to fill in all those years he was doing things like teaching, playing in prisons, and even being a church musican.

Not a 1,000 page tome, mind you - but something as least as meaty as some of the Da Capo books I have, like the ones on Dolphy and Dexter Gordon, for instance.

[ghost of miles]

Ian McDonald in the U.K. is indeed working on a Hank bio. He already published one on Tadd Dameron.

This is not the same Ian M(a)cDonald who wrote REVOLUTION IN THE HEAD, is it? That's the best book about the Beatles that I've ever read. He has a new book out, too, a more general overview of popular music, but I'm not sure that it's been published in the U.S.

[sheldonm]

FYI......I just ordered the Mobley/Walton CD from CD Universe for $6.98. The upcoming RVG's are also only $8.49, that's about as cheap as you will find them. I ordered all five of the RVG's and the Mobley for $55.00, which includes shipping.

[Simon Weil]

Ian McDonald in the U.K. is indeed working on a Hank bio.  He already published one on Tadd Dameron.

This is not the same Ian M(a)cDonald who wrote REVOLUTION IN THE HEAD, is it? That's the best book about the Beatles that I've ever read. He has a new book out, too, a more general overview of popular music, but I'm not sure that it's been published in the U.S.

Doesn't look like it:

Ian MacDonald, a journalist and editor for 35 years, is the secretary of the Sheffield (U.K.) Jazz Society and author of Tadd—the life and legacy of Tadley Ewing Dameron. It includes a forward by Benny Golson and is published by Jahbero Press (ISBN 0 9533778 0 6) and distributed by Cadence (North America), Norbert Ruecker (Germany) and Cadillac Jazz Distribution (UK). For more information, email Jahbero@aol.com or write Jahbero Press, 38 Wadbrough Road, Sheffield S11 8RG, England. Copies of photos of Dameron may be obtained directly from Val Wilmer at 10 Snyder Road, London N16 7UG. Send a SASE for details.

http://jazzinstituteofchicago.org/index.as...le/dameron2.asp

And:

Ian MacDonald The author of the acclaimed Beatles book REVOLUTION IN THE HEAD, and of the collection THE PEOPLE'S MUSIC, both published by Pimlico, MacDonald was Assistant Editor of NME in the early '70s and contributes regularly to Uncut

http://www.rocksbackpages.com/writers/macdonaldi.html

But the're both MacDonald.

Simon Weil

[Michael Fitzgerald]

In no way is Andrew Hill too obscure to merit a whole book. This is a guy with a fifty year career who is *still* going strong and has contributed significantly to the music.

If someone did a 130 page book (like the Dolphy) on Hill, I'd be upset. To do it right he deserves 400 or more pages. Dolphy does too, of course.

I've been going through two recent acquisitions. First is the Paul Bley book (175 pages) and although there are a lot of good stories, there are things that are *completely* missing - like any mention of "Footloose" the groundbreaking Savoy session he did. There are also a lot of questionable things, but those need to be researched further to straighten them out. The second is the Sonny Rollins book by Eric Nisenson (215 pages), which is appalling. If it weren't for the quotes by Rollins (and a few other primary sources), this would have no redeeming qualities. It's almost as bad as the P.O.S. that is the Clifford Brown book by Catalano. Same kind of poor research, pathetic wrongliness in details, same kind of really bad writing - repetitive and trite. But anyway, the entire 1930-1975 period is covered (poorly) by 195 pages and then the final chapter covers 25 years (poorly, as well). A giant like Sonny Rollins deserves so much better (and bigger). Something on the magnitude of what John Szwed did for Sun Ra - and even that (475 pages) glossed over a lot of the last 20 years.

I haven't read the MacDonald Dameron book and have no idea if it's a quality item. Hope that it is and that he will do a good job with Mobley.

Mike

[Simon Weil]

I've been going through two recent acquisitions. First is the Paul Bley book (175 pages) and although there are a lot of good stories, there are things that are *completely* missing - like any mention of "Footloose" the groundbreaking Savoy session he did. There are also a lot of questionable things, but those need to be researched further to straighten them out...

I enjoyed the Bley book. It seemed like an "entertainment" to me - like definitely not the full monty but still worth reading. It's so easy to read, you probably don't notice all the stuff in there. But at the same time, the guy is obviously canny and, in a certain way, is not giving anything away. So the general "light" feel of the book definitely made me feel I wasn't getting the whole truth. That is, from the style point of view, I'm coming to a parallel conclusion to Mike's.

If you want to give someone who's interested in the birth of the avant-garde a present, this is an enjoyable book.

And you don't (or I didn't) feel cheated.

Simon Weil

[ghost of miles]

The second is the Sonny Rollins book by Eric Nisenson (215 pages), which is appalling. If it weren't for the quotes by Rollins (and a few other primary sources), this would have no redeeming qualities. It's almost as bad as the P.O.S. that is the Clifford Brown book by Catalano. Same kind of poor research, pathetic wrongliness in details, same kind of really bad writing - repetitive and trite. But anyway, the entire 1930-1975 period is covered (poorly) by 195 pages and then the final chapter covers 25 years (poorly, as well). A giant like Sonny Rollins deserves so much better (and bigger).

Nisenson's book BLUE: THE MURDER OF JAZZ is one of the worst books I've ever read about jazz. Opinionated and wrongheaded throughout. I've pretty much avoided him ever since, although I still have a copy of his Coltrane bio (ASCENSION), which was pretty much a regurgitation of others' previous work.

[JSngry]

I felt that Bley's book was really "in his voice", that he wrote with the same spirit and in the same manner which he plays. Sly, oblique, etc. Maybe not good "history", but good "art", if that makes any sense.

The Rollins book was, as Mike said, pretty worthless except for the direct quotes, which I often found QUITE valuable. His Trane bio was even worse. How does this

guy get a gig anyway?

Rhetorical question...

[Michael Fitzgerald]

The Bley is a MUCH better book than the Rollins, but only scratches the surface. There's a 500+ page book waiting to be written on that guy (well, both guys, actually). This is a pleasant hors d'oeuvre but still could have been better in terms of fact-checking.

I picked up both books used and I still feel kind of ripped off for the Rollins. I knew it would be terrible (I read Nisenson's Coltrane book when it came out - borrowed it, thankfully), but but when writing a book on Henry Grimes, you gotta do your homework and have everything that's out there. Well, at least that's MY view on the subject of research, apparently this is not universally accepted or we wouldn't have crap like the Nisenson stuff. What is really galling is that on a couple of occasions he actually quotes his other books. Witness the start of a half-page quote:

"As I described the session in my book about Miles Davis, 'Round About Midnight:"

Egads.

Sorry to have brought this up in the Mobley thread.

Mike