fasstrack Posted September 20, 2012 Author Report Share Posted September 20, 2012 He married a woman with money-not a judgement but a fact, and it gave him some breathing room. I thought Tal was a great man. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robertoart Posted September 20, 2012 Report Share Posted September 20, 2012 He married a woman with money-not a judgement but a fact, and it gave him some breathing room. I thought Tal was a great man. He never said that in the interviews I read In the ones I read he left out that bit. Just used to say he wanted to leave the big city behind and be a sign painter again. Everyones got a spin I suppose. I've got a guitar instruction video he did a few years before he died. He seemed like a kind and gentle soul - for such a monster player. He plays the Red guitar on it that was made especially for him for an early colour TV performance. It's probably on youtube. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fasstrack Posted September 20, 2012 Author Report Share Posted September 20, 2012 I met him a few times. A doll, and a pioneer on my axe. Eddie Diehl got to play w/him, lucky dog. Tal was his hero. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cih Posted September 21, 2012 Report Share Posted September 21, 2012 (edited) Well I have to agree there are some very creative people doing well in business - but I do think that generally speaking, personal opinions and the scope for individual expression are extremely stifled in the average workplace - blocks on web access, prescribed patterns of speech on the phone etc etc but maybe that's another topic. As for modernism in 'the arts', I think it was definitely a positive thing, and no conspiracy. In any case of course, nobody ought to pay any attention to who should or would usually enjoy a piece of art or music - you just take it as you see it yourself. This man puts fashion on a pedestal: Edited September 21, 2012 by cih Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cih Posted September 22, 2012 Report Share Posted September 22, 2012 I know what I said about modernism wasn't entirely accurate.. just reading a biog of Wyndham Lewis, where he writes in an early letter: "Verisimilitude–that's what you want to get with your wheezy efforts... But that isn't what people want. They don't want vicarious experience; they don't want to be educated. They want to be amused... By brilliant fellows like me. Letting off brilliant fireworks. Performing like dogs on tight ropes. Something to give them the idea they're at a performance. You fellows try to efface yourselves; to make people think there isn't any author and they're living in the affairs you... adumbrate.." etc etc so the pedestal is turned into a stage.. or something. The passive artits is gone, so is the passive audience (but the artists still fancy themselves) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Magnificent Goldberg Posted September 22, 2012 Report Share Posted September 22, 2012 I know what I said about modernism wasn't entirely accurate.. just reading a biog of Wyndham Lewis, where he writes in an early letter: "Verisimilitude–that's what you want to get with your wheezy efforts... But that isn't what people want. They don't want vicarious experience; they don't want to be educated. They want to be amused... By brilliant fellows like me. Letting off brilliant fireworks. Performing like dogs on tight ropes. Something to give them the idea they're at a performance. You fellows try to efface yourselves; to make people think there isn't any author and they're living in the affairs you... adumbrate.." etc etc so the pedestal is turned into a stage.. or something. The passive artits is gone, so is the passive audience (but the artists still fancy themselves) I assume you mean Percy Wyndham Lewis, the Vorticist painter, not D B Wyndham Lewis, the biographer and humorous writer (the original 'Beachcomber'). I'd always take Percy's statements on art as meriting about a stone and a half of salt. He wrote superbly using what I think of as the most powerful style in the English language; but it was very self-serving and not at all objective. MG Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cih Posted September 22, 2012 Report Share Posted September 22, 2012 That's him: Percy. The one with the moostache Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fasstrack Posted September 22, 2012 Author Report Share Posted September 22, 2012 I don't find Ayn Rand's ideas 'vile' in the least, just glibly misinterpreted by many-and misappropriated by the right. She was anti-collectivist (also anti-God) but the me-against-the-world piece is overplayed. In The Fountainhead Roark wasn't out there by himself. He was sometimes in harmony with and sometimes opposed to some strongly individual people with their own motives and conflicts. Ultimately it took a collaboration to design and build the Wynand Building and in the end Roark's sticking to his guns was not only a victory over the herd mentality and its manipulators but led to the actualization of the Dominique Francon character. But everyone who tried to take Roark down did it by calling him an egotist making himself and his buildings above the people he served. He wasn't. He was an independent thinker willing to collaborate with like minded thinkers on projects bigger than any one idea or ego, that served the public anyway. Not collectivist or tyrant, but a 'collaborationist'. I think you are being very generous in your interpretation here. As far as misappropriated by the Right - if the shoe fits... Sometimes the idea of 'progressive aesthetics' can be co-opted to provide the 'aesthetic-poetry' for 'survival of the fittest' 'social' ideologies - from where Rand was undeniably coming from. Leni Riefenstahl used fascist aesthetics to similarly create the visual poetry to support the Nazi ideology. She also has her defenders who try and separate her power as a visual organiser, from the fascism it sought to enable. One of the aims of Post-Modernism wasn't merely appropriating - but also to deny artists the ability to get away with such things 'merely in the name of Art'. Artists had to begin to take responsibility for the meaning of their work, and what that work represented beyond the aesthetics. I'll give Rand the benefit the doubt and say that perhaps she had 'the trickle down effect' in mind. But I doubt that. And the people who rose to the top of the USSR party and the satellites corrupted the ideas of Karl Marx ----can Marx be blamed for that? There are always going to be users and corrupters. I thought Rand was a good storyteller, and at the time I read the Fountainhead--early 20s---what I indicated is what I got from it. Maybe I'd view it differently now.I doubt it, though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fasstrack Posted September 23, 2012 Author Report Share Posted September 23, 2012 I don't find Ayn Rand's ideas 'vile' in the least, just glibly misinterpreted by many-and misappropriated by the right. She was anti-collectivist (also anti-God) but the me-against-the-world piece is overplayed. In The Fountainhead Roark wasn't out there by himself. He was sometimes in harmony with and sometimes opposed to some strongly individual people with their own motives and conflicts. Ultimately it took a collaboration to design and build the Wynand Building and in the end Roark's sticking to his guns was not only a victory over the herd mentality and its manipulators but led to the actualization of the Dominique Francon character. But everyone who tried to take Roark down did it by calling him an egotist making himself and his buildings above the people he served. He wasn't. He was an independent thinker willing to collaborate with like minded thinkers on projects bigger than any one idea or ego, that served the public anyway. Not collectivist or tyrant, but a 'collaborationist'. I think you are being very generous in your interpretation here. As far as misappropriated by the Right - if the shoe fits... Sometimes the idea of 'progressive aesthetics' can be co-opted to provide the 'aesthetic-poetry' for 'survival of the fittest' 'social' ideologies - from where Rand was undeniably coming from. Leni Riefenstahl used fascist aesthetics to similarly create the visual poetry to support the Nazi ideology. She also has her defenders who try and separate her power as a visual organiser, from the fascism it sought to enable. One of the aims of Post-Modernism wasn't merely appropriating - but also to deny artists the ability to get away with such things 'merely in the name of Art'. Artists had to begin to take responsibility for the meaning of their work, and what that work represented beyond the aesthetics. I'll give Rand the benefit the doubt and say that perhaps she had 'the trickle down effect' in mind. But I doubt that. I think we're also falling down a common intellectual trap door: thinking I can speak as an artist\servant\self-expresser\communicator---the last the most important to me---who plies his craft every day. The more I think the less I play---b/c the less focused I am. I think these discussions are fine--I started this one, right? They are postmortems, though. I think it's not my place to give my philosophy to people except by playing. If it's happening and has feeling they'll know---just as if I'm blocked and the flow is blocked. Through the years I've learned to trust peoples' higher capabilities. Though I'm disappointed often when they act low something always brings me back to the way I need to think to be successful at what I'm trying to do. The main thing is: the 'thinnin', Babalouie, is cool---but is best done after, not during. Way less baggage that way, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robertoart Posted September 25, 2012 Report Share Posted September 25, 2012 (edited) I don't find Ayn Rand's ideas 'vile' in the least, just glibly misinterpreted by many-and misappropriated by the right. She was anti-collectivist (also anti-God) but the me-against-the-world piece is overplayed. In The Fountainhead Roark wasn't out there by himself. He was sometimes in harmony with and sometimes opposed to some strongly individual people with their own motives and conflicts. Ultimately it took a collaboration to design and build the Wynand Building and in the end Roark's sticking to his guns was not only a victory over the herd mentality and its manipulators but led to the actualization of the Dominique Francon character. But everyone who tried to take Roark down did it by calling him an egotist making himself and his buildings above the people he served. He wasn't. He was an independent thinker willing to collaborate with like minded thinkers on projects bigger than any one idea or ego, that served the public anyway. Not collectivist or tyrant, but a 'collaborationist'. I think you are being very generous in your interpretation here. As far as misappropriated by the Right - if the shoe fits... Sometimes the idea of 'progressive aesthetics' can be co-opted to provide the 'aesthetic-poetry' for 'survival of the fittest' 'social' ideologies - from where Rand was undeniably coming from. Leni Riefenstahl used fascist aesthetics to similarly create the visual poetry to support the Nazi ideology. She also has her defenders who try and separate her power as a visual organiser, from the fascism it sought to enable. One of the aims of Post-Modernism wasn't merely appropriating - but also to deny artists the ability to get away with such things 'merely in the name of Art'. Artists had to begin to take responsibility for the meaning of their work, and what that work represented beyond the aesthetics. I'll give Rand the benefit the doubt and say that perhaps she had 'the trickle down effect' in mind. But I doubt that. I think we're also falling down a common intellectual trap door: thinking I can speak as an artist\servant\self-expresser\communicator---the last the most important to me---who plies his craft every day. The more I think the less I play---b/c the less focused I am. I think these discussions are fine--I started this one, right? They are postmortems, though. I think it's not my place to give my philosophy to people except by playing. If it's happening and has feeling they'll know---just as if I'm blocked and the flow is blocked. Through the years I've learned to trust peoples' higher capabilities. Though I'm disappointed often when they act low something always brings me back to the way I need to think to be successful at what I'm trying to do. The main thing is: the 'thinnin', Babalouie, is cool---but is best done after, not during. Way less baggage that way, We may have to disagree on the qualities and motives of Rand. However, as a Jazz musician (especially in this day and age), are not the choices you make, re- style, repertoire, sound etc., not 'representing' a certain aesthetic and 'conceptual' position, and any 'communication' you make - with an audience - or other musicians - will be filtered by it. Perhaps in essence, it's nothing more than, 'this is the sound and style I love', 'this is me, and I hope you like it and are moved by it' etc. But it's also more than that, because what music styles or traditions you choose not to play (or be associated with), are also statements in a way. So I think there is a certain amount of aesthetic-polemical intent in all the musical choices one remains committed to. And I guess this is true for passionate listeners as well - it's just that there is probably less on the line. So yes, it's about honest and direct (and sincere) communication, but there's always a sub-text to 'what' you play. Then again, I remember reading Scofield say something like, 'I never worried too much about trying to emulate anything, because in the end your playing always sounds like the things you like the most'. That's paraphrasing his exact quote, but it basically what he meant. Edited September 25, 2012 by freelancer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSngry Posted September 25, 2012 Report Share Posted September 25, 2012 what music styles or traditions you choose not to play (or be associated with), are also statements in a way. So I think there is a certain amount of aesthetic-polemical intent in all the musical choices one remains committed to. hmmmm... on the one hand, yeah, ok, sure, and sometimes you need to take a stand, but on the other hand, that can all get in the way of being your natural self, and not just in music. "How old would you be if you didn't know how old you were" just as easily translates into "who would you be if you didn't know who you were supposed to be". And of course, the more that the "supposed to be" comes from externally, the less natural to self it becomes, except in the sense that there's always somebody looking to fuck somebody up for some reason. not proposing a solution, don't have one, but it seems to me that the less often people respond to the external "supposed to be"s, the more pushed back upon they become. Hell, I like the Ronettes, Sonny Rollins, Steve Lacy, The Beach Boys, George Jones, all kinds of House music, all kinds of Jazz music, just all kinds of MUSIC music, and I'd love to have a band that lives in a world that has a sustainable business model for servicing the live musical needs of people who are likewise so inclined. But that's who I "am", and I'm not "supposed to be" that, at least not if I want to have what I want from the world as it exists. Try playing "Ghosts" & "Goodnight Sweetheart" back to back for any kind of audience except one who's looking for "irony", and see how far that gets you. And even for the irony-seekers, hey, sorry, there ain't none there except what you project onto it. So in the end, you're fucked there as well, because no fool like to be called a fool, except by a fellow fool who's looking to join the club. So what do I do, make some kind of manifesto-polemic and create a bunch of contrived music about what I'm not and what I don't like and how what I do like is SO much better but NOBODY GETS IT BUT ME, and how what I like and what "the world" likes is constantly at odds except in polarized little cubbyholes? Yeah, I could do that, but how natural does that end up being? How is making music - and seeking a business opportunity - in response to everything I don't like preferable to making music in response to what I do like, other than doing the former serves the needs of the marketplace, which is always looking to stir up some shit, because stirred-up shit always sells, at least in the short-term. Why, I don't know. It still smells like shit. stirred up or not. And inevitably shit gets stirred up, because even if you do just do what comes natural, somebody is going to be looking to use it as a business opportunity to "make a statement" against what THEY feel is fucked up. So...there's no escape but back into yourself, and that only works if you know what you're getting into by going there. Be prepared! I think the only statement that I have to make at this point is that I have no statement to make, and no, that is not intended to be a statement in itself. Definitely not. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NmOE92ACzZY Are these "statements" or are these just natural, beautiful expressions of who people are? I think it only becomes a "statement" when somebody needs it to be, for whatever reason, and that's when the door gets opened to the forces of "supposed to be". Lord we don't need another "statement"...we just need people to be who they are. If that's too hard to figure out on its own terms, if life is too obtuse on this plane that it needs to be reduced down to a "statement", then walk away from that shit, and the faster the better. Ain't no need for it to be like that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robertoart Posted September 26, 2012 Report Share Posted September 26, 2012 (edited) Yes and that is beautiful man. But whatever playing you have developed over a lifetime, however eclectic, is still going to represent the principles you valorise in music. And I can't imagine from reading your posts here, that not a little of that must seep into your 'business' gigs. All the people on here that are open about their own music activities and opinions have a streak of the musical-polemicist about them. I think I was being conscious that all the great movements in Jazz represent more than just the changing of aesthetics for it's own sake. polemical  [puh-lem-ik, poh-] Part of Speech: adjective Definition: argumentative Synonyms: belligerent, combative, contentious, contrary, controversial, disputatious, eristic, factious, fire-eating, having a chip on one's shoulder, litigious, opinionated, polemic, pugnacious, quarrelsome, salty, scrappy, spiky, touchy Edited September 26, 2012 by freelancer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fasstrack Posted September 26, 2012 Author Report Share Posted September 26, 2012 Freelancer: Dunno, man, that's an awful lot to think about-esp. when piaying. I don't want to think anymore, just work on the basics and just trust. If I do that correctly-honestly-the listener will probably figure out what I stand for b\c if they didn't run away in horror and stayed to listen they probably stand for a lot of the same things. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSngry Posted September 26, 2012 Report Share Posted September 26, 2012 ...I can't imagine from reading your posts here, that not a little of that must seep into your 'business' gigs. All the people on here that are open about their own music activities and opinions have a streak of the musical-polemicist about them. It does. And it's taken the fun out of it, or at least a lot of it. Not just the fun, but the joy (fun is kinda cheap, ya' know, nothing wrong with that, but...). Seems like whenever and whatever you play, the expectations (of everybody) is that you "be" something. Pop gig, lounge gig, jazz gig, it's all about role-playing in the playing. Which is ok in one way, I mean, yeah, if you got people paying you, or even just giving you the compliment of giving you a place in their plans, of requesting your presence instead of somebody else s, they got a right, and if you don't feel like being that, then lord knows, other people need the gig and the money, but.... I've yet to come up with a real solution/replacement, though, but that's my problem. And I realize I'm being a bit spoiled/petulant/goofy here, so enough of that. But please, just...stop it, everybody, audience and players like, with this "everything's got to mean something" business. No, it doesn't (and if it does, it will, regardless of what we "want" or "think"), and besides, you get out of something what you go looking for. The more I live, the more I'm convinced of that. Nature abhors a vacuum, etc. You can convince yourself of anything if it's what you want to believe. In the meantime, life goes on, and if you don't believe that it does, try and stop it. I dare you! Just remember that everything was perfect in the Garden Of Eden until people started fucking around with "knowing" instead of "being". They thought it would be better, right? Well, maybe not so much, eh? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSngry Posted September 26, 2012 Report Share Posted September 26, 2012 I think I was being conscious that all the great movements in Jazz represent more than just the changing of aesthetics for it's own sake. I think all the great movements in jazz (as well as the non-great ones) had/have more to do with "defining of self" than they did "aesthetics". And I think it's important to keep that cart before that horse, lest we shift the game from the universe to the parlor, as well as losing the right to reserve the right. But alas, here I go getting all polemical and shit. DAMMIT!!!! :g:g Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fasstrack Posted September 26, 2012 Author Report Share Posted September 26, 2012 C'mon everybody. 6,7,8, WE ARE THE WORLD...WE ARE THE PEOPLE (singing interrupted by sounds of gunfire). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_forumlogo.png.a607ef20a6e0c299ab2aa6443aa1f32e.png)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.