Interesting quote by Michael Cuscuna

[Dan Gould]

ah, Gould is trying to stir up trouble again....

as I understand Jim's post, he was saying nothing of the kind.

Screw you, Lowe. My comment was based on previous statements by Jim in many other threads, wherein I am quite certain he repeated the comment about knowing the rules to break them. As I indicated in my post, I couldn't be sure if Jim had actually expressed support for the concept when he mentioned it. Now I know otherwise.

[Simon Weil]

...Sam and Bea opened a performance space within their loft which they called Studio Rivbea. The emotional excesses of the sixties had subsided. The influx of creative technically proficient musicians from Chicago, St. Louis and Detroit shoved a lot of the screaming pretenders off the scene. Freedom was no longer equated with anger and lack of musicianship. Studio Rivbea became an incubator for a lot of serious, new developments in experimental jazz and the forerunner of an alternate way of presenting music in New York.

What I don't understand is why the quote doesn't read:

...Sam and Bea opened a performance space within their loft which they called Studio Rivbea [which] became an incubator for a lot of serious, new developments in experimental jazz and the forerunner of an alternate way of presenting music in New York.

I mean, unless he had an axe to grind.

Simon Weil

[ep1str0phy]

Well, "pro" on the big picture side: in the end, is who says what as important as whether or not a statement is valid or makes any sense?

[JSngry]

I think there's a useful parallel to be made here with the early New Orleans players. I remember reading a Leonard Feather Blindfold test-type thing from the 1950s where he played some early-ish N.O. jazz (maybe something by a Jelly Roll Morton group) for a variety of jazzmen of more recent vintage, including some "swing" players. The reaction was varied, but there was one common thread to the comments - that this was some very early stuff, and that the music and the musicianship had evolved considerably since then. Some of the participants didn't care for the music at all, some admired the spirit in spite of the "roughness" of some of the players' technique, but nobody said that this music was "perfect as is".

Today, there are many people saying just the opposite, that that music is perfect as is, and that even with all the subsequent evolutions, that this particular type of playing is just fine for its time and place.

I'm in sympathy with both sides of the issue, because yeah, "limitations" are what they are and they do what they do, but yeah, you are what you are where you are and you have/don't have what you have/don't have (and nobody has everything), so if you doing something that matters with it all, hey, good for you. Most people don't.

All I'm saying is that appreciation, even a deep appreciation, for something and recognizing the realities of it's "limitations" and sorting out it's ultimate "historical place" are not necessarily mutually exclusive. And I don't think that they should be either. Those are really two different angles/perspectives/whatever of looking at the same thing, both valid for what they ideally set out to do, and both containing the potential pitfalls of rigid dogmatism & sloppy sentimentality.

It's really the same old story - heart vs. intellect, objectivity vs. subjectivity, yin vs. yang. These are things to be dealt with equally and, hopefully, ultimately, balanced. They should not be warring entities demanding an either/or Death Match Ultimate Triumph. The people/things that do make the General Cut over the long(est) haul, though (and really, at 40-50 years distance, that determination is far from yet being made), are almost always the ones who have and offer up a substantial balance of both.

That's not an accident.

[JSngry]

...Sam and Bea opened a performance space within their loft which they called Studio Rivbea. The emotional excesses of the sixties had subsided. The influx of creative technically proficient musicians from Chicago, St. Louis and Detroit shoved a lot of the screaming pretenders off the scene. Freedom was no longer equated with anger and lack of musicianship. Studio Rivbea became an incubator for a lot of serious, new developments in experimental jazz and the forerunner of an alternate way of presenting music in New York.

What I don't understand is why the quote doesn't read:

...Sam and Bea opened a performance space within their loft which they called Studio Rivbea [which] became an incubator for a lot of serious, new developments in experimental jazz and the forerunner of an alternate way of presenting music in New York.

I mean, unless he had an axe to grind.

Simon Weil

Or unless, as has been posited elsewhere, he's never been a particularly "careful" and/or "eloquent" writer.

Hey, people say broad-brushed shit like that all the time in casual conversation, and if it's somebody you know, you learn to let it slide, knowing as you do the difference between what they "mean" and what they "say". I've been following Cuscuna's career for about 35 years now (without knowing him personally), & I'd like to think that this is the case here - that he comitted something to print that is the equivalent of an off-the-cuff, un-nuanced bit of casual conversation. What he "meant" & what he "said" is something you gotta infer based on "knowing" the person.

If it had been dropped in casual conversation, & if it was somebody I "knew" as well as I feel I "know" Cuscuna, I'd just let it drop/pass unless I either wanted to stir the pot for a bit of lively & friendly ball-busting or else I just wanted to be a disrespectful asshole. That this comment was made in print rahter than in casual conversation raises the level of "responsibility", and that's why I have no problem whatsoever with calling the cat out, and loudly, on his sloppiness. But afaic, anything beyond that is still either friendly ball-busting or else just being a disrespectful asshole.

[Simon Weil]

...Sam and Bea opened a performance space within their loft which they called Studio Rivbea. The emotional excesses of the sixties had subsided. The influx of creative technically proficient musicians from Chicago, St. Louis and Detroit shoved a lot of the screaming pretenders off the scene. Freedom was no longer equated with anger and lack of musicianship. Studio Rivbea became an incubator for a lot of serious, new developments in experimental jazz and the forerunner of an alternate way of presenting music in New York.

What I don't understand is why the quote doesn't read:

...Sam and Bea opened a performance space within their loft which they called Studio Rivbea [which] became an incubator for a lot of serious, new developments in experimental jazz and the forerunner of an alternate way of presenting music in New York.

I mean, unless he had an axe to grind.

Simon Weil

Or unless, as has been posited elsewhere, he's never been a particularly "careful" and/or "eloquent" writer.

Hey, people say broad-brushed shit like that all the time in casual conversation, and if it's somebody you know, you learn to let it slide, knowing as you do the difference between what they "mean" and what they "say". I've been following Cuscuna's career for about 35 years now (without knowing him personally), & I'd like to think that this is the case here - that he comitted something to print that is the equivalent of an off-the-cuff, un-nuanced bit of casual conversation. What he "meant" & what he "said" is something you gotta infer based on "knowing" the person.

If it had been dropped in casual conversation, & if it was somebody I "knew" as well as I feel I "know" Cuscuna, I'd just let it drop/pass unless I either wanted to stir the pot for a bit of lively & friendly ball-busting or else I just wanted to be a disrespectful asshole. That this comment was made in print rahter than in casual conversation raises the level of "responsibility", and that's why I have no problem whatsoever with calling the cat out, and loudly, on his sloppiness. But afaic, anything beyond that is still either friendly ball-busting or else just being a disrespectful asshole.

Well, the fact is Cuscuna put the quote in a rather out of the way place - in a Sam Rivers box set, brought out by himself and with, one would suppose, a rather limited audience. The fact that we're now having this rather extended conversation is down to Guy, who picked the quote out and invited us to have this conversation.

Now, if you wanted to talk "responsibility", I would give a prime amount to him - and, absolutely I would put it down to stirring the pot. Personally I wish the damn thing had never appeared, in that it gives me the unpleasant choice between attacking a man who obviously demands a great deal of respect and letting slide a quote which I don't like.

In my opinion, this conflict is not quite resolvable.

Simon Weil

[RDK]

Personally I wish the damn thing had never appeared, in that it gives me the unpleasant choice between attacking a man who obviously demands a great deal of respect and letting slide a quote which I don't like.

In my opinion, this conflict is not quite resolvable.

I'm not sure if I even understand what the conflict - the "big deal" - is. So you disagree with Cuscuna's opinion - so what? Would it have made a difference if he actually listed the "screaming pretenders" by name? Would you really lose respect for him just because he criticized a group of musicians - even an entire sub-genre of music (and he obviously didn't go that far) - that you presumably enjoy? I agree it's fairly sloppy writing, but it's done more in an effort to prop Rivers up than to specfically tear anyone else down.

[AllenLowe]

"Screw you, Lowe."

as usual, Gould is his eloquent self. What's s'matter Dan, the wife walk out on you again?

[K1969]

...Sam and Bea opened a performance space within their loft which they called Studio Rivbea. The emotional excesses of the sixties had subsided. The influx of creative technically proficient musicians from Chicago, St. Louis and Detroit shoved a lot of the screaming pretenders off the scene. Freedom was no longer equated with anger and lack of musicianship. Studio Rivbea became an incubator for a lot of serious, new developments in experimental jazz and the forerunner of an alternate way of presenting music in New York.

What I don't understand is why the quote doesn't read:

...Sam and Bea opened a performance space within their loft which they called Studio Rivbea [which] became an incubator for a lot of serious, new developments in experimental jazz and the forerunner of an alternate way of presenting music in New York.

I mean, unless he had an axe to grind.

Simon Weil

Or unless, as has been posited elsewhere, he's never been a particularly "careful" and/or "eloquent" writer.

Hey, people say broad-brushed shit like that all the time in casual conversation, and if it's somebody you know, you learn to let it slide, knowing as you do the difference between what they "mean" and what they "say". I've been following Cuscuna's career for about 35 years now (without knowing him personally), & I'd like to think that this is the case here - that he comitted something to print that is the equivalent of an off-the-cuff, un-nuanced bit of casual conversation. What he "meant" & what he "said" is something you gotta infer based on "knowing" the person.

If it had been dropped in casual conversation, & if it was somebody I "knew" as well as I feel I "know" Cuscuna, I'd just let it drop/pass unless I either wanted to stir the pot for a bit of lively & friendly ball-busting or else I just wanted to be a disrespectful asshole. That this comment was made in print rahter than in casual conversation raises the level of "responsibility", and that's why I have no problem whatsoever with calling the cat out, and loudly, on his sloppiness. But afaic, anything beyond that is still either friendly ball-busting or else just being a disrespectful asshole.

Well, the fact is Cuscuna put the quote in a rather out of the way place - in a Sam Rivers box set, brought out by himself and with, one would suppose, a rather limited audience. The fact that we're now having this rather extended conversation is down to Guy, who picked the quote out and invited us to have this conversation.

Now, if you wanted to talk "responsibility", I would give a prime amount to him - and, absolutely I would put it down to stirring the pot. Personally I wish the damn thing had never appeared, in that it gives me the unpleasant choice between attacking a man who obviously demands a great deal of respect and letting slide a quote which I don't like.

In my opinion, this conflict is not quite resolvable.

Simon Weil

Sorry to wade in here but I've been following this thread with keen interest. Even though I'm not a specialist on the kind of music you're discussing, the central themes are universal. When you filter out the polemic (is Cuscuna right or wrong in saying what he said and in how he said it....) , you're left with an interesting discussion on the appreciation of music from various perspectives and on what makes great music last 50 year on (Jsngry's point). Whether a limited audience or not, Cuscuna's comments were made in print in the public domain. So I think it's a little tough on Guy to imply that he's somehow responsable for stiring the pot. Besides, I'm sure that , as would any self respecting critic, Cuscuna would rather be discussed - and criticized - than ignored. What are threads for if not for little lively debate from time to time? If any one can contact Cuscuna I think they should and ask him to set the record straight here on, as JSngry put it, "What he 'meant' & what he 'said'"

[7/4]

"Screw you, Lowe."

as usual, Gould is his eloquent self. What's s'matter Dan, the wife walk out on you again?

That's nothing, I get told to "eat shit and die".

[AllenLowe]

yeah, he's a rude boy - not sure why the moderators put up with his stuff -

[Tom Storer]

previous statements by Jim in many other threads, wherein I am quite certain he repeated the comment about knowing the rules to break them.

"You have to know the rules to break them" basically means that if you break rules only because you haven't learned them well enough--the mistakes of beginners or incompetents--then you're not going to fool those who are in the know. However, this has kind of morphed into a slightly different meaning, "only if you can prove you know the rules will we indulge you if you choose not to follow them."

If someone is merely using different rules, it doesn't make any difference if they know or don't know the rules they're not using. In jazz, however, conservative listeners often believe that if musicians aren't using the rules of harmony, rhythm and vocabulary that they, the listeners, are familiar with, then there are no rules, it's nothing but chaos. However, they'll grudgingly grant musicians the right to leave the beaten track if they can show that they know where the beaten track is--that's what makes them part of the club, and if they're part of the club then they can be excused. This is what leads to situations where people demand that "free" players demonstrate bebop chops before their non-bebop music will be seriously considered--clearly ridiculous.

Another meaning has to do with a knowing breaking of the rules--a transgression whose relationship to the rules gives it a richness of meaning. In this way musicians can carry on a dialogue with the past and a reflection on the present. When AACMers played blues or swing in a broadly approximate way, full of intended awkwardness, excess, or dissonances and irregularities that in the context of "the rules" would be mistakes, they were commenting on "the rules" with irony and deep affection, mocking them in a teasing way while demonstrating that they remained a source of joy and expression even when altered. That's another important way to break the rules that is only possible when you know them.

[JSngry]

Personally I wish the damn thing had never appeared, in that it gives me the unpleasant choice between attacking a man who obviously demands a great deal of respect and letting slide a quote which I don't like.

In my opinion, this conflict is not quite resolvable.

Sure it is. Look at it as an indicator of why there's so many typos on BN reissues & consider it a lesson learned.

[AllenLowe]

Tom Storer is right on the money - and I tend to find musicians who know something about their own history to be more interesting - but first of all one has to test oneself in a way that is blind- in other words, listen to the music without preconceptions and decide, without context, necessarily, whether you like it or not - hard to do, perhaps, but I always find it an interesting exercise to listen in my car and make a judgment when I have no idea who is playing. I get some interesting results - I even liked a Wynton piece once, very much - so who knows? When I do this, more often than not I find myself NOT liking musicians whom I normally admire. And most of the stuff I DO like is on a local indie rock show (of course I am a complete jazz burnout these days).

Clem, I know what you mean about Abercrombie and Hall, but I like Abercrombie in particular; problem is that I cannot STAND the sound of most jazz guitar - I think these CDs should have a warning "not to listen to while operating heavy machinery."

Edited May 10, 2007 by AllenLowe

[Guy Berger]

Whether a limited audience or not, Cuscuna's comments were made in print in the public domain. So I think it's a little tough on Guy to imply that he's somehow responsable for stiring the pot.

I don't think Simon was criticizing me, so no harm done.

Guy

[Hot Ptah]

oh yeah, i'm just goofin' on both those guys-- they're legit artists & do their own things... Abercrombie, if & when gets raucous, obviously has a lot to offer & Hall was excelsior of something NOBODY ELSE SHOULD TRY AGAIN (ever) but totally, jazz guitar can wear anyone out... or should. thankfully, there was also Barney Kessel, Paul Burlison, Cliff Gallup & Link Wray.

speaking of which, i too remain

edc

ozona, fla

clementine, I get a lot of enjoyment out of your posts, but I must confess that I find it difficult to tell when you are "just goofin'".

[AllenLowe]

let's not forget Junior Barnard of the Bob Wills band -

[Niko]

now that this great (thank you!) thread sems to have finally run a little out of steam, i can maybe ask a (slightly off-topic, but only slightly) question: i have and have and enjoy some of the older 60s New York etc Free Jazz but of the new arrivals that have been discussed I haven't heard a single record: what would two or three fine records be which could help me find out what Braxton, AEC, AACM, BAG or anything else of the second group of musicians discussed were all about?

[clifford_thornton]

For the recommendations of things pertinent to this thread, here's a start:

Chicagoans:

Roscoe Mitchell: LRG/The Maze/SII Examples (Nessa)

Roscoe Mitchell: Nonaah (Nessa)

The Art Ensemble of Chicago: The Paris Sessions (Pathe)

The Art Ensemble of Chicago: A Jackson in Your House/Message to Our Folks (Charly/Actuel)

The Art Ensemble of Chicago: Certain Blacks (America)

The Art Ensemble of Chicago: 1967-1968 (Nessa), for historical context

Muhal Richard Abrams: Young At Heart/Wise in Time (Delmark)

Muhal Richard Abrams: LifeA BlineC (Novus)

Wadada Leo Smith: The Kabell Years (Tzadik)

Marion Brown/Leo Smith: Creative Improvisation Ensemble (Freedom)

Anthony Braxton: For Alto (Delmark)

Anthony Braxton: New York, Fall 1974 (Arista)

Anthony Braxton: Creative Orchestra Music 1976 (Arista)

Anthony Braxton: Creative Contstruction Company 1 & 2 (Muse)

St. Louis:

Julius Hemphill: Dogon A.D. (Mbari)

Black Artists' Group: In Paris, Aires 1973 (BAG)

Ofamfa: Children of the Sun (Universal Justice)

Post-AACM integrationists:

Revolutionary Ensemble: Vietnam 1 & 2 (ESP-Disk')

Revolutionary Ensemble: The Psyche (Re: Records/Mutable)

Sirone: Artistry (Of the Cosmos)

Michael Gregory Jackson: Clarity (Bija) incl. L. Smith, O. Lake and D. Murray

Barry Altschul: You Can't Name Your Own Tune (Muse)

NY Loft Jazz:

Frank Lowe: The Flam (Black Saint) w/ L. Smith, J. Bowie, C. Shaw

Rashied Ali/Frank Lowe: Duo Exchange (Survival)

Rashied Ali: Quintet (Survival), w/ Blood Ulmer, Earl Cross, etc.

Noah Howard: Live at the Village Vanguard 1972 (Freedom)

Charles Tyler: Voyage From Jericho (Ak-Ba/Bleu Regard)

Charles Tyler: Saga of the Outlaws (Nessa)

Clifford Thornton: The Gardens of Harlem (JCOA)

I skimp a little on St. Louis, as I've not followed the BAG scene as closely as some others here have. There's a lot of Braxton from the '80s on that I haven't heard, but most of the work from the '60s thru the '70s is pertinent to this discussion, and I included a bit of that here. I err on the side of early AEC, for it is my preference. The earlier Delmark AACM titles I mostly left out, as that may be more of a precedent than anything else. There should be more stuff in the recommendations thread.

[RDK]

now that this great (thank you!) thread sems to have finally run a little out of steam, i can maybe ask a (slightly off-topic, but only slightly) question: i have and have and enjoy some of the older 60s New York etc Free Jazz but of the new arrivals that have been discussed I haven't heard a single record: what would two or three fine records be which could help me find out what Braxton, AEC, AACM, BAG or anything else of the second group of musicians discussed were all about?

Cheapest way to sample some of this stuff (if you don''t mind downloads) is emusic.com.

[clifford_thornton]

Regardless of the Cuscuna quote, the '70s were a really fertile time for the music. Some of us who were there could probably tell some stories - and I'm not just talking the loft jazz scene, etc., but also considering the Europeans and the expats. From a historical perspective, it was a crucial period for this music.

[clifford_thornton]

BOTH. i wouldn't deny they (or, say, the last 30 years of John McLaughlin) are real artists but likewise i wouldn't say by far most of their records drive my batshit to use a controversial Lacanian trope. McLaughlin used to be so smokin' he's still useful but JA & JH are pretty baleful influences on waaaaaaay too many chops dudes (& there are, will be others.)

Bob Dunn lives!!

hope this helps,

edc in the deadpan

ozona, fla

If somebody can find me tapes of the McLaughlin/Van Hove/Bennink/Bennink group of ca. 1968, I'd be much obliged...

[Niko]

I skimp a little on St. Louis, as I've not followed the BAG scene as closely as some others here have. There's a lot of Braxton from the '80s on that I haven't heard, but most of the work from the '60s thru the '70s is pertinent to this discussion, and I included a bit of that here. I err on the side of early AEC, for it is my preference. The earlier Delmark AACM titles I mostly left out, as that may be more of a precedent than anything else. There should be more stuff in the recommendations thread.

thank you much, for answering my question even though this has all been discussed before! (i knew; but a 22 page thread dedicated alone to Braxton - not that i didn't read some of it - and many more threads dedicated to him and others of these artists require a lot of work until you are down to a number of albums you might seriously consider buying, especially, if you don't know the music at all ) thank you

[ep1str0phy]

This thread is dead and all, but in response to clifford:

Ofama? It showcases an important element of the BAG scene (the performative aspect), but it dangles between "rough" and "trainwreckish" in the musical sense (not the Tyrone W. sense). I think some of the Human Arts Ensemble discs (Under the Sun and Streets of St. Louis come to mind) are probably a better indication of what the BAG guys were capable of in a technically grounded, conceptually cohesive context.

As for the Chicagoans--sure it happened a little later, but Lester Bowie's solo work can't not be mentioned, as he's surely one of the more expressive and intelligent musical eclectics of the past few decades. Although it's not the best that Bowie could do, I'd put The Great Pretender (ECM) up there for good measure (as sort of a proto-Brass Fantasy thing, or at least showcasing an approach that was specific to Bowie among the other AACMers).

I might also add mention of Jarman's Delmarks (specifically As If It Were the Seasons, oft cited as it is as indicative of the whole early AACM thing--and even if it is just precedent, it's by no means a tentative music, and one of the few larger group recordings we have from that vintage) and Muhal's Black Saints (nothing really new on those sides, but there are elements of his concept that come across clearer on albums like Spihumonesty than on the few Delmarks).

...and--George Lewis, one of the best and brightest we've got (period). Many would say Homage to Charlie Parker (Black Saint) is the one and I'd be inclined to agree, though his stuff with the Voyager program (e.g., Voyager) is a pocket revolution in and of itself. He's one of the only articulate and academically-informed music scholars coming from the inside of the scene--more well-spoken than many so-called "theorists" we have these days. His widely-available papers--they're on the official NY AACM website--are a miracle of insight, considering where they're coming from (or *period*, really).

As for the Downtown guys: we're of course leaving many out, but you can't talk Downtown without Threadgill and Air. These are a good start:

Air: Air Time (Nessa)

Air: Air Song (Why Not)

Air: Air Lore (Arista/Novus)--oft-talked about, featuring reworkings of early jazz and ragtime material. It's perhaps not "original" to this extent as the other two albums mentioned--where the repertory is somewhat more flexible and the musicians are given more room to move--but Air Lore is about as forward-thinking a "historical" album as you can get, which is a very AACM thing.

Henry Threadgill--everything on Arista/Novus, and, for a different flavor, his material with the group Very, Very Circus: Too Much Sugar For A Dime (BMG/Novus) and Spirit of Nuff Nuff (Black Saint), for me.

Also: Marion Brown's Impulse recordings and his ECM (Afternoon of a Georgia Faun) deserve mention for invoking and developing many of the same elements that the AACM was pondering in the early 70's, and doing so to very individual effect. Brown's penchant for space and silence, "made" and found instrumentation, and African and Black American ethnology blend into something very unique--and it's also a strong link between early 60's free jazz and what later generations were doing.

[Chuck Nessa]

No time for other arguments with details of esp1's post beyond saying if you admire Threadgill, you need the About Times before the BMG stuff.

Brown's Calig recordings should be heard before the Impulse stuff too.

It is a shame "availability" writes "history".