So, What Are You Listening To NOW?

[AllenLowe]

4 hours ago, HutchFan said:

There's is nothing that says Moran (or anyone else) has to perform the music in the same manner that it was performed in the past. You might argue that a performance is unidiomatic -- but that's very different than saying it's wrong (relative to whose standard? The past's? Maybe that standard doesn't interest Moran) or ignorant (because he may have deliberately made choices that fly in the face of historical convention).

I love Charles Ives' music. A Frenchman recorded his Second Sonata, a quintessentially American work. But the pianist's interpretation made Ives sound like Debussy or Ravel. Was it idiomatic? No. Was it wrong? No.

Also, I would argue (as I have in the past) that comparing politics and art is a misleading and unhelpful analogy. Political outcomes can be measured; there are rules and laws related to government. Heaven knows politics is not objective -- but there are objective measures that can occur as the result of legislation and policy decisions. Art, on the other hand, does not work like that. What's the FIRST THING people say when they encounter art that subverts their expectations?  They say, "That's not art!"  And that's because the meaning, function, and definition of art is elusive.  

Finally, comparing someone's musical choices to MAGA or Trump is needlessly inflammatory & polarizing. So -- even when you have very interesting ideas to bring to the conversation -- you come across as a know-it-all who owns the the one-and-only "valid perspective."  Any other point of view is just "ignorance."  That is off-putting and disrespectful.  That's why people react negatively.  It's not (only) what you said; it's how you said it.

Respectfully.

 

I am sorry but I feel that this completely misses the point. Of course Jason can play it any way he wants, but that doesn't free him from any judgement that someone may make that he is misunderstanding the music and the idiom. Yes, if he gave an alternative that made sense, that would be a good thing, but he has turned a very free and liberated music into one that is walled in by muddle-class inhibition and a snowflake-like over-sensitivity to racial style and context. I am NOT arguing that it is un-idiomatic; I am arguing that it is dull and denatured and has lost the feeling and essence of the original - which he was trying to preserve in what I think is a very misguided way. You disagree, fine, but you cannot deflect criticism by saying that the artist has the right to do the material his or her own way. No one is arguing for censorship. And I wasn't comparing the musical choices to MAGA - I was simply saying we have this double standard. We hold people's political decisions to certain principled standards based on information and historical perspective, and that is what I am doing musically here. If anyone is put off by my way of arguing - and I have attacked no one here personally - then they can counter my argument.  I give my opinion and then I outline my reasons for having that opinion. If you are put off by that, well....you just don't, in my opinion, have a real sense of the necessity of intellectual give-and-take. It's not personal; I think that when someone pretends to be delving into history by merely reproducing a very middle class and "respectable"  interpretation of something that was, actually, quite respectable and even middle class - but the middle class of 1913 and not the middle class of 2023 - then there is a problem and I feel like someone needs to speak for these musicians who cannot speak for themselves. Yes, that's my opinion. I am not advocating that anyone be forced to accept it (btw I am about to teach a 16 part course on this for Lincoln Center, and it's free, so anyone who wants to get a better understanding of my perspective is welcome to attend by Zoom).

6 hours ago, jlhoots said:

I certainly prefer Little Richard to Pat Boone.

I wonder what Jason would have to say about your assessment. I'd love to hear that debate.

he will never go public with this kind of discussion, which I would love to have. The reason is that he doesn't have to. I am a mere fly spec on the ass of the universe for people like him, who, at that level, do not need to engage with anyine to justify their own positions. All they have to do is give a monologue.

Edited April 20, 2023 by AllenLowe

[JSngry]

25 minutes ago, AllenLowe said:

... people like him, who, at that level, do not need to engage with anyine to justify their own positions. All they have to do is give a monologue.

Do you know for a fact that Moran is functioning in a vacuum and only having an interior monologue to reach his conclusions, not engaging with other sources/resources, or does it just seem that way to you! 

[AllenLowe]

30 minutes ago, JSngry said:

Do you know for a fact that Moran is functioning in a vacuum and only having an interior monologue to reach his conclusions, not engaging with other sources/resources, or does it just seem that way to you! 

I have sent him emails - not contentious ones, but about other subjects - that he doesn't respond to, which is ok and expected, though I do consider myself to be a peer. But my larger assumption is based on dealing - and trying to deal -  with people at that level of fame. I think it breeds a certain sense of un-touchability, a desire not to have to deal with unpleasant disagreements, and an ability to avoid those disagreements just because you can. And honestly, I don't have the energy to make any more futile efforts; it's next to impossible to get in touch with famous people and I am too old and have enough pride (not a lot but enough) to not want to face predictable rejection.

[Rabshakeh]

2 hours ago, AllenLowe said:

Yes, if he gave an alternative that made sense, that would be a good thing, but he has turned a very free and liberated music into one that is walled in by muddle-class inhibition and a snowflake-like over-sensitivity to racial style and context. I am NOT arguing that it is un-idiomatic; I am arguing that it is dull and denatured and has lost the feeling and essence of the original - which he was trying to preserve in what I think is a very misguided way.

What did you think of the later tracks, starting with "Memphis Blues" and going on?

I had a very similar, very negative, reaction to yours in relation to the first half of the record - particularly the opening monologue and then the rather awkwardly educational (to my ears) large group tracks which felt to me to be stiff and like they were missing a point. 

But then I really enjoyed the second half, where Moran's piano is more prominent and the treatment of the mid sized group tunes is looser and more daring. A lot of the stiff studio quality of the first half seemed to drop away.

It did not quite redeem the first half of the record for me, but it did change my overall view of the project. I think that if it had not had that opening monologue and perhaps had fewer of the larger group tracks I would have regarded it much more highly. As it is, I thought it was an interesting experiment that I would return to, but perhaps not all of it.

Edited April 20, 2023 by Rabshakeh

[BillF]

[EKE BBB]

[soulpope]

1 hour ago, BillF said:

Good one ....

[optatio]

[Gheorghe]

9 minutes ago, optatio said:

On the Trail.....that´s Fred Grofé ´s tune, isn´t it. 
I think it is a tune I always "heard" in a more modal way of playing. I don´t know this version, but my favourite is one where Jackie McLean plays it. I´m usually more a chord based player, but on "Trail" you can go farther out, open it more and get in a more modal thing.....

19 hours ago, ghost of miles said:

I think I remember I saw this somewhere advertised then. "Double Talk" was the title of one LP. 

But the annoying thing with the 80´s BN albums was that they were extremly short lived. I have the "Jackie McLean-McCoy Tyner" somehow I got that, but so much else Mid 80´s stuff, it seemed to be OOP very shortly after it was released. No idea why....

[BillF]

1 hour ago, optatio said:

👍

[AllenLowe]

9 hours ago, Rabshakeh said:

What did you think of the later tracks, starting with "Memphis Blues" and going on?

I had a very similar, very negative, reaction to yours in relation to the first half of the record - particularly the opening monologue and then the rather awkwardly educational (to my ears) large group tracks which felt to me to be stiff and like they were missing a point. 

But then I really enjoyed the second half, where Moran's piano is more prominent and the treatment of the mid sized group tunes is looser and more daring. A lot of the stiff studio quality of the first half seemed to drop away.

It did not quite redeem the first half of the record for me, but it did change my overall view of the project. I think that if it had not had that opening monologue and perhaps had fewer of the larger group tracks I would have regarded it much more highly. As it is, I thought it was an interesting experiment that I would return to, but perhaps not all of it.

it's been a little while, I will go back and check them out.

[Larry Kart]

Hutch Fan -- Given that James Reese  Europe was a unique important figure, musically and historically, one would think that Moran was under an obligation to make a genuinely insightful connection to his actual music, which in Allen Lowe's knowledgable view, and in my view as well, Moran has not done. Admittedly doing so would have been quite a task because the "language," so to speak of, Europe's music, striking though it is, differs quite a bit from the habits of much African-American music from only few years later in the 20th Century. One point alone: while Europe's music had abundant "drive,"  it does not even in an incipient way really  swing. To grasp that and to be able to convey its nature and implications to players of today would be a daunting proposition to say the least -- a considerable act of imaginative empathy would seem to be required.

[mjazzg]

2 minutes ago, Larry Kart said:

Hutch Fan -- Given that James Reese  Europe was a unique important figure, musically and historically, one would think that Moran was under an obligation to make a genuinely insightful connection to his actual music, which in Allen Lowe's knowledgable view, and in my view as well, Moran has not done. Admittedly doing so would have been quite a task because the "language," so to speak of, Europe's music, striking though it is, differs quite a bit from the habits of much African-American music from only few years later in the 20th Century. One point alone: while Europe's music had abundant "drive,"  it does not even in an incipient way really  swing. To grasp that and to be able to convey its nature and implications to players of today would be a daunting proposition to say the least -- a considerable act of imaginative empathy would seem to be required.

Thank you for this post, the first in this discussion that provides insight and attempts to explain why Moran's approach might be seen as 'unsuccessful', especially in the eyes of those with knowledge and expertise. This is just what I have been looking for rather than just perjorative descriptors.

Larry Kart, are there other factors intrinsic to Europe's music that make Moran's appear not to have hit the mark? I'm genuinely interested as someone who has enjoyed Moran's project both live and recorded.

I still reserve my right to enjoy Moran's interpretation though 😀

[jazzcorner]

18 hours ago, BillF said:

👍

Now playing:

😁 👍

On 4/19/2023 at 1:08 AM, Peter Friedman said:

👍😁

[Kevin Bresnahan]

5 hours ago, Gheorghe said:

On the Trail.....that´s Fred Grofé ´s tune, isn´t it. 
I think it is a tune I always "heard" in a more modal way of playing. I don´t know this version, but my favourite is one where Jackie McLean plays it. I´m usually more a chord based player, but on "Trail" you can go farther out, open it more and get in a more modal thing.....

I think I remember I saw this somewhere advertised then. "Double Talk" was the title of one LP. 

But the annoying thing with the 80´s BN albums was that they were extremly short lived. I have the "Jackie McLean-McCoy Tyner" somehow I got that, but so much else Mid 80´s stuff, it seemed to be OOP very shortly after it was released. No idea why....

I have been told that back then, Blue Note's bean counters routinely discontinued CD titles that failed to sell a certain number of discs per year. I believe the number was 500 but it may have been lower. The bean counters did not discriminate between older recordings and newer ones. They deleted a lot of classic Blue Note titles too.

BTW - when Michael Cuscuna found out about this, he complained and was able to get them to at least let him know before they deleted a title, which enabled him to stock up for Mosaic's True Blue store. For many years, the True Blue store offered many deleted Blue Note CDs for sale after they went OOP.

Michael and Tom Evered also worked with Tower Records' One Way distribution company to re-release a bunch of deleted Blue Note titles in the limited edition "Collector's Choice" series. I bought a ton of those when they came out circa 1995.

[HutchFan]

2 hours ago, Larry Kart said:

Hutch Fan -- Given that James Reese  Europe was a unique important figure, musically and historically, one would think that Moran was under an obligation to make a genuinely insightful connection to his actual music, which in Allen Lowe's knowledgable view, and in my view as well, Moran has not done. Admittedly doing so would have been quite a task because the "language," so to speak of, Europe's music, striking though it is, differs quite a bit from the habits of much African-American music from only few years later in the 20th Century. One point alone: while Europe's music had abundant "drive,"  it does not even in an incipient way really  swing. To grasp that and to be able to convey its nature and implications to players of today would be a daunting proposition to say the least -- a considerable act of imaginative empathy would seem to be required.

Larry - I think understand what you're saying, and that's why I feel like a critique of Moran's playing because it's unidiomatic is completely understandable.  But, even if that's the case, Moran isn't under any "obligation" (to use your word) to perform JRE's music idiomatically -- using historically accurate language -- if he doesn't want to.

An analogy: People who study baroque music and the Historical Informed Practice (HIP) movement have transformed our understanding of the way Bach's and other's music actually sounded like during the baroque era.  The work that HIP scholars and performers have done is valuable and important, a real addition to scholarship.  However, if a performer chooses to perform in a non-HIP style, that's not wrong.  For example, people in the HIP movement criticized Stokowski because "his" Bach was incredibly Romanticized & anachronistic.  But, from where I'm sitting, Stokowski's interpretations are vital and interesting.  They do NOT work as examples of HIP, but they do work as pieces of music that have been re-contextualized and re-interpreted in a different era.

I haven't even heard the Moran recording that we're discussing.  So I'm not making an argument about the particulars of his performance.  I'm talking about the principle of it.  I believe very strongly that Moran is under NO obligation to perform the music in a "historically informed" style. 

This also reminds me of our conversation from a few months (years?) ago about Milestone-era Sonny Rollins.  Lots of folks think they know better than Sonny Rollins what he should have been playing in the 70s and beyond.  That's baloney, IMO.  Nobody knows better than Sonny Rollins what and how he should play.  Full stop.  We're free to like it or not like it -- and we are free to criticize it, based on whatever criteria we choose.  But we are terribly misguided if we think we know better than Sonny what he should or should not do as an artist.  That is his choice.  Same with Jason Moran.

 

O.K.  Enough on this.  I'll hop off my hobbyhorse now! 

 

Edited April 20, 2023 by HutchFan

[Referentzhunter]

[mjzee]

16 minutes ago, Referentzhunter said:

Beautiful cover!  I wonder why they replaced it with this:

[HutchFan]

[Larry Kart]

22 minutes ago, HutchFan said:

Larry - I think understand what you're saying, and that's why I feel like a critique of Moran's playing because it's unidiomatic is completely understandable.  But, even if that's the case, Moran isn't under any "obligation" (to use your word) to perform the music JRM's music idiomatically -- using historically accurate language -- if he doesn't want to.

An analogy: People who study baroque music and the Historical Informed Practice (HIP) movement have transformed our understanding of the way Bach's and other's music actually sounded like during the baroque era.  The work that HIP scholars and performers have done is valuable and important, a real addition to scholarship.  However, if a performer chooses to perform in a non-HIP style, that's not wrong.  For example, people in the HIP movement criticized Stokowski because "his" Bach was incredibly Romanticized & anachronistic.  But, from where I'm sitting, Stokowski's interpretations are vital and interesting.  They do NOT work as examples of HIP, but they do work as pieces of music that have been re-contextualized and re-interpreted in a different era.

I haven't even heard the Moran recording that we're discussing.  So I'm not making an argument about the particulars of his performance.  I'm talking about the principle of it.  I believe very strongly that Moran is under NO obligation to perform the music in a "historically informed" style. 

This also reminds me of our conversation from a few months (years?) ago about Milestone-era Sonny Rollins.  Lots of folks think they know better than Sonny Rollins what he should have been playing in the 70s and beyond.  That's baloney, IMO.  Nobody knows better than Sonny Rollins what and how he should play.  Full stop.  We're free to like it or not like it -- and we are free to criticize it, based on whatever criteria we choose.  But we are terribly misguided if we think we know better than Sonny what he should or should not do as an artist.  That is his choice.  Same with Jason Moran.

 

O.K.  Enough on this.  I'll hop off my hobbyhorse now! 

 

One demurral about your Rollins analogy. What Rollins played in the '70s was of course  based to some considerable degree on what he  he had been playing for much of his life, as was our reactions to what he played in the '70s. We have no comparable evidence about Moran's involvement with Europe's music other than the fact of what he's done with it. Yes, Moran is free to handle Europe's music however he wishes, but ... let me try another analogy. We're all familiar with Duke Ellington's music. A variation on it a la Guy Lombardo or Spike Jones? These are not matters of restricting anyone's artistic freedom but rather of context and something like common sense. 

[mjazzg]

46 minutes ago, HutchFan said:

Larry - I think understand what you're saying, and that's why I feel like a critique of Moran's playing because it's unidiomatic is completely understandable.  But, even if that's the case, Moran isn't under any "obligation" (to use your word) to perform the music JRM's music idiomatically -- using historically accurate language -- if he doesn't want to.......

I haven't even heard the Moran recording that we're discussing.  So I'm not making an argument about the particulars of his performance.  I'm talking about the principle of it.  I believe very strongly that Moran is under NO obligation to perform the music in a "historically informed" style.

 

Thanks for articulating what I've failed to in my recent posts @HutchFan

I don't disagree with your analogy at all just removed it from my quote as I want to highlight your points about Moran

Obviously others can critique the outcome of Moran's choices. It's only really enlightening when that's done with explanation, like @Larry Kart's recent post for which I am grateful 

[HutchFan]

8 minutes ago, Larry Kart said:

Yes, Moran is free to handle Europe's music however he wishes, but ... let me try another analogy. We're all familiar with Duke Ellington's music. A variation on it a la Guy Lombardo or Spike Jones? These are not matters of restricting anyone's artistic freedom but rather of context and something like common sense. 

Sure.  I buy that.  Practically speaking, EKE as performed by Guy Lombardo holds zero interest.

And I full well could hear Moran's performance and dislike it intensely.  (Or not.)  My argument was about the principle, not the particular.  

 

Edited April 20, 2023 by HutchFan

[Peter Friedman]

[HutchFan]

6 minutes ago, mjazzg said:

Thanks for articulating what I've failed to in my recent posts @HutchFan

I had to stew on it for a while!   

 

[mjazzg]

10 minutes ago, HutchFan said:

I had to stew on it for a while!   

 

Have a rest now then 😃 maybe play some music...