Johnny Mathis' "Open Fire, Two Guitars"

[Larry Kart]

http://www.amazon.com/Open-Fire-Guitars-Johnny-Mathis/dp/B0012GMY3W/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=music&qid=1293483537&sr=1-1

Mathis' vocal chops may be at their peak here (1959); accompaniment is just Al Caiola, Tony Mottola, and either Frank Carroll or Milt Hinton on bass; songs are standards except for a perhaps crafted-for-Mathis ballad from Leiber-Stoller (the title track); Mathis does a lot of personal reshaping of the given melodies and in general brings to mind Charlie Parker's affectionate reference to Johnny Hodges as the Lily Pons of the alto. When Mathis ascends to his topmost register (and he goes way up), it's hard not to take the undeniably androgynous results as an act of some bravery on his part, e.g. "I'm Just a Boy In Love," "(This Is My First Affair) Please Be Kind,"and the verse to "My Funny Valentine"

... but I wonder what JSngry thinks.

[paul secor]

I'm not a Johnny Mathis fan, but I give him props for having his own voice and his own style - more than can be said for many, especially these days.

[JSngry]

I like Johnny Mathis. The man had skills. His main Columbia arranger of this era (Glenn Osser, iirc) was kind of generic/lame, but that's all the more reason to get a taste of this one.

Bought it out of a Goodwill store somewhere in the 70s, in fact. Even then, in the peak of my jazz militant phase, it was obvious that Mathis was a talent worthy of respect, so his readings of standards were not to be shied away from.

Does that answer your question?

But what does this mean, exactly?

When Mathis ascends to his topmost register (and he goes way up), it's hard not to take the undeniably androgynous results as an act of some bravery on his part...

Brave how? Vocally? Coming-out-of-the-closetly? Mary Martin-ly?

Just wondering.

[JSngry]

BTW - there is a similarly themed Dean Martin album on Reprise that, although nothing to stop the presses about, is not unpleasant.

There's also the Sammy Davis Jr/Lauriendo Almedia duet album, also on Reprise, but that one tends to not reach me, meaningfully or otherwise.

[Larry Kart]

I like Johnny Mathis. The man had skills. His main Columbia arranger of this era (Glenn Osser, iirc) was kind of generic/lame, but that's all the more reason to get a taste of this one.

Bought it out of a Goodwill store somewhere in the 70s, in fact. Even then, in the peak of my jazz militant phase, it was obvious that Mathis was a talent worthy of respect, so his readings of standards were not to be shied away from.

Does that answer your question?

But what does this mean, exactly?

When Mathis ascends to his topmost register (and he goes way up), it's hard not to take the undeniably androgynous results as an act of some bravery on his part...

Brave how? Vocally? Coming-out-of-the-closetly? Mary Martin-ly?

Just wondering.

Yes, it answers my question. I asked because you've been kind of edgy lately, albeit edgy based on long-held principles of yours.

Brave mostly in the coming-out-of-the-closet sense, though that's not quite what, or all that, he's doing. I guess it's that his ascents to the upper register here are not just way up there but also (as I said in the thread title) so figuratively "naked" in emotional terms, as though he were swooning or stepping into a dream world. I'll have to go back and check, but IIRC it's a whole different feel from, say, Little Jimmy Scott.

[JSngry]

I asked because you've been kind of edgy lately, albeit edgy based on long-held principles of yours.

Edgy? About Elvis? Dude, I am positively mellow about that Great Deceiver now compared to how I used to be. Trust me.

About standards, yeah, it's time to move on, which is not the same as abandoning. Not at all. But yeah, time to move on, and if people lose money in the process, oh well. Like I care.

Otherwise, this is not a time to remain silent about a lot of things in America. Just as jazz eventually killed itself from within by its "institutions" refusing to move forward in spite of overwhelming evidence its truth and reality had been irrevocably expanded, so does America's collective cultural, moral, and spiritual essence.

Elvis is not the answer, nor is Gershwin, nor is the New York Yankees going on a spending binge this off-season. It's all been done, it's all over, and the results are staring us in the face. The weakening of the collective cultural, moral, and spiritual gene pool by so much inbreeding is pretty evident, no? This shit is about to collapse all over itself, and all we can do is run for cover by standing still.

Edgy, you say? Not really. I still enjoy me some good ice cream, conjugal bliss, and smiles on children's faces. But them smiles are not for long, I fear, and Elvis for a ten year old in 2010 is not that far removed from Wagner in a concentration camp.

But I still enjoy a good joke. Didja' hear the one about the farmer, the goat, and the country lawyer?

Brave mostly in the coming-out-of-the-closet sense, though that's not quite what, or all that, he's doing. I guess it's that his ascents to the upper register here are not just way up there but also (as I said in the thread title) so figuratively "naked" in emotional terms, as though he were swooning or stepping into a dream world.

It's not a "secret" about Mathis, is it?

No matter, really. Gene Puerling mined that same androgynous territory for years, and as far as I can tell was a happily married family man. So I think it's more an "emotional character" thing than it is a "sexual orientation" thing. Not that there's anything wrong, etc.

Either way, Mathis at his best had some serious skills. Period.

[Teasing the Korean]

I brought up this album in thread awhile back titled "Jazz albums by pop singers" or something similar, and compared this to a Julie London album. This is one of my two favorite JM albums. along with with his eponymous jazz album.

[Larry Kart]

Hey, I didn't say anything about or in defense of standards, did I, other than to say that was Mathis' repertoire on this album?

No way (at least IMO) that Gene Puerling's territory was akin to Mathis' in the sense we're talking about (though wasn't it Clark Burroughs who sang the upper-register passages that Puerling wrote for The Hi-Los?) The Hi-Los'"affect" there was kind of hip-giggly giggling at its own hipness; Mathis' was, again IMO, deeply nakedly emotional/romantic. Also, I didn't say it was a matter of sexual orientation per se, or only of that, but of his stepping-into-another-world dreaminess. To put it another way, Mathis' ascents here feel like acts of transformation/revelation. Or if you prefer, sort of a St. Sebastian thing.

Of course, it's not a "secret" about Mathis -- that sometimes jerk or worse Sinatra would refer to him onstage in later years as "The African Queen" (jeez, a two-for-one shot) -- but I think that in 1959 there were a lot of young female Mathis fans who either didn't know or chose not to know. And without being a Mathis scholar, I would guess that this album might have stood out in that respect, to a degree that Mathis himself might have been aware of. Thus the possible bravery.

[JSngry]

I think that in 1959 there were a lot of young female Mathis fans who either didn't know or chose not to know.

Dude, that might have been part of the appeal, if you know what I mean...

But it's all good with me & Johnny Mathis, for real, and I would suggest that you check out the Dean Martin side in the same vein I mentioned above for a study in all kinds of contrasts. Dean singing (mostly) standards accompanied by only, if memory serves (and it might well not...), Barney Kessell & Red Mitchell. It ain't bad at all, really.

(though wasn't it Clark Burroughs who sang the upper-register passages that Puerling wrote for The Hi-Los?)

Yes, but surely you're aware of the famous underground film of a Hi-Los rehearsal where Puerling, dressed in full biker regalia, ties up Burroughs and whips his naked buttocks until he hits the note that Puerling wants. Judging from the look on Burroughs' face, he could have hit it long before he actually did. Draw your own conclusions...

It's all over the internet, that one is. You want that I should post a link?

Edited December 27, 2010 by JSngry

[paul secor]

Hey, I didn't say anything about or in defense of standards, did I, other than to say that was Mathis' repertoire on this album?

No way (at least IMO) that Gene Puerling's territory was akin to Mathis' in the sense we're talking about (though wasn't it Clark Burroughs who sang the upper-register passages that Puerling wrote for The Hi-Los?) The Hi-Los'"affect" there was kind of hip-giggly giggling at its own hipness; Mathis' was, again IMO, deeply nakedly emotional/romantic. Also, I didn't say it was a matter of sexual orientation per se, or only of that, but of his stepping-into-another-world dreaminess. To put it another way, Mathis' ascents here feel like acts of transformation/revelation. Or if you prefer, sort of a St. Sebastian thing.

Of course, it's not a "secret" about Mathis -- that sometimes jerk or worse Sinatra would refer to him onstage in later years as "The African Queen" (jeez, a two-for-one shot) -- but I think that in 1959 there were a lot of young female Mathis fans who either didn't know or chose not to know. And without being a Mathis scholar, I would guess that this album might have stood out in that respect, to a degree that Mathis himself might have been aware of. Thus the possible bravery.

Sinatra was truly a class act.

It is ironic - given his apparent sexual preferences - that Mathis' recordings were considered make-out records by straight couples in the late 50s and early 60s.

[Larry Kart]

Yes, but surely you're aware of the famous underground film of a Hi-Los rehearsal where Puerling, dressed in full biker regalia, ties up Burroughs and whips his naked buttocks until he hits the note that Puerling wants. Judging from the look on Burroughs' face, he could have hit it long before he actually did. Draw your own conclusions...

It's all over the internet, that one is. You want that I should post a link?

Hey, I was there.

[JSngry]

Man, you should be the "edgy" one, then!

[Larry Kart]

I was just watching.

[Jim R]

I like Johnny Mathis. The man had skills.

I ran across a live concert (with orchestra), aired on PBS a year or two ago, which really impressed me. He wasn't going through the motions, if you know what I mean. He still has skills (and desire, and energy), and considering how long he's been around, I really admire that.

[Big Al]

I like Johnny Mathis. The man had skills. His main Columbia arranger of this era (Glenn Osser, iirc) was kind of generic/lame,

Which makes me wonder: the only album of Mathis I've ever heard is his "Merry Christmas" album with Percy Faith. I won't bore y'all with my usual slathering love for Percy Faith, but did JM make any other records with PF?

[Teasing the Korean]

I brought up this album in thread awhile back titled "Jazz albums by pop singers" or something similar, and compared this to a Julie London album. This is one of my two favorite JM albums. along with with his eponymous jazz album.

[ghost of miles]

For anybody who's interested, here's a recent Afterglow program I did with Mathis:

Johnny Mathis: Now and Then

I did an ISDN phone interview with him for a special we were producing about Indiana bandleader and composer/arranger Al Cobine (Mathis was one of the marquee singers who used Cobine as an orchestra contractor) and we spent the second half-hour of the interview talking about Mathis' new CD and some of his classic recordings, which I ended up using in the program linked to above. An extremely gracious guy to talk to.

Edited December 28, 2010 by ghost of miles

[Teasing the Korean]

Johnny Mathis, IIRC, made a number of records with Percy Faith.

Because the topic of JM's sexuality was brought up, this is interesting:

He came out in an interview in the early 1980s and never referenced it again. A few years ago, he was asked in another interview why he never brought it up. JM replied that he received death threats after coming out and preferred to remain silent on the subject. Sad.

[MomsMobley]

Q: Is Sngry a farce, a fraud or a deadpan self-parody of angry white boy cracker-barrel sophist cum 'philosophizer'?

It goes, by the way, for male pop ballads:

Nat Cole >>>> Elvis >>>> Frankie Laine >>>> Dick Haymes >>>> Sinatra >>>> Harry Belafonte >>>> Dean Martin >>>> Pha Terrell ...

And eventually Johnny Mathis.

Who's not terrible-- a long way better than goddamn Tony Bennett, that's for sure-- but it's pretty hard to care.

NOTE: Elvis, Frankie Laine, Harry Belafonte and Dean were all GREAT at numerous other styles besides the ballad.

(I excluded Charles Brown and Percy Mayfield both though I wouldn't argue their inclusion: I count them as blues more so than pop, howev.)

Johnny Mathis "Gotta Serve Somebody"

Edited December 28, 2010 by MomsMobley

[JSngry]

Q: Is Sngry a farce, a fraud or a deadpan self-parody of angry white boy cracker-barrel sophist cum 'philosophizer'?

All of the above, and then some. Sometimes I'm Palladin, sometimes I'm Pal Joey. Depends on what day it is, what the subject matter is, and how much I really care.

And you?

[Joe]

Jim -- perhaps I missed it in my review of this (interesting) conversation, but... exactly which Dean Martin record might that be?

[JSngry]

Dream With Dean.

[medjuck]

Q: Is Sngry a farce, a fraud or a deadpan self-parody of angry white boy cracker-barrel sophist cum 'philosophizer'?

All of the above, and then some. Sometimes I'm Palladin, sometimes I'm Pal Joey. Depends on what day it is, what the subject matter is, and how much I really care.

And you?

"Really care"? I can understand being passionate about someone you like, but why the vitriol about someone you don't like?

[JSngry]

I don't necessarily like everything I care about, and vice-versa.

[Joe]

Dream With Dean.

Much grass.

But how many martinis does it take to achieve Deano's hypnogogic baseline?