Collecting, Appreciating & Understanding All The Music
Hit Parade
Subject: Re: Definition of a "troll"
From: "Stewart Turnbull" St...@Stompin.freeserve.co.uk
Date: Mon, 22 November 1999 02:32 PM EST
Hal Vickery wrote ...
>And then there was the Spike Jones parody, "Chinese Mule Train." I haven't
heard that since I was a kid and the leader of the band my dad was playing in
played it along with a bunch of other Spike Jones 78's. Speaking of Spike, he
once recorded an album called "Dinner Music for People Who Aren't Very Hungry."
I've always thought of most '50s pop music as being just that.<
Hal, I thought you might be interested that I recently listened to some
interview material of Spike Jones. He stated that when rock and roll came on
the scene he found he was in real trouble. "You can't satirise rock and roll!"
He goes on to say that they were used to getting their teeth into melodic,
highly arranged and polished music, then along came Elvis Presley. Elvis would
come out with a new record, ("another Hound Dog every so often") but Spike
admitted defeat, he couldn't find a way to satirise this music because Elvis
had done this himself. The musical simplicity of rock and roll left Spike
bewildered. He said that they stopped making fun out of music because rock and
roll was about as funny as it gets. Spike said that they even used garbage
disposal sounds on records and even used the garbage, but that didn't work.
Stu.
(2)
Stu,
I love the big-band / vocalist, pre-rock 'n roll era of popular music, and I
think that it is second to no other era. Of that era, I have purchased, and
documented, line for line, the following, mostly greatest hit type CDs:
The Ames Brothers (2 CDs), The Andrew Sisters (2) and with Bing Crosby (2), Ray
Anthony (2) including "Dream Dancing", Louis Armstrong (8), including all his
All-Star recordings, and his wonderful vocals, "Satchmo Sings" and "Satchmo
Serenades", Charlie Barnet; Les Baxter; Tex Beneke; Tony Bennett; Hoagy
Carmichael; Teresa Brewer (2); Buddy Clark; Rosemary Clooney; Nat (King) Cole
(4) including "Love Is The Thing"; Perry Como (5); Larry Clinton; June Christy
and Stan Kenton; Bing Crosby (10), including WWII radio broadcasts; Doris Day
(4); Vic Damone; Tommy Dorsey, The Dinning Sisters; Rusty Draper; Billy
Eckstine (3); Les Elgart and Duke Ellington. Eddie Fisher (2); Ralph Flanigan;
Percy Faith; Stan Freberg; The Four Aces (2); and Ella Fitzgerald (12).
Judy Garland (5); Georgia Gibbs; The Gaylords; Jackie Gleason; Benny Goodman
(11); Dick Haymes (2); Horace Heidt; Al Hibbler; The Hilltoppers; Betty Hutton;
Eddy Howard; Burl Ives; The Ink Spots (2); Harry James (6) including Helen
Forrest; Louis Jordan (9) all of his recordings from 1938 through 1954; Gordon
Jenkins; Joni James and Buddy and Ella Johnson; Dick Jurgens, Spike Jones (2)
and Kitty Kallen (2); Dorothy Kirsten (2); Kay Kyser (3); Gene Krupa (3);
Frankie Laine (4); Julius La Rosa; Mario Lanza; Peggy Lee (4); Ralph Marterie;
Al Martino; The McGuire Sisters (2); The Merry Macs; Johnny Mercer; The Mills
Brothers; Glenn Miller (14) including "The Complete Bluebird" recordings in
chronological order; Guy Mitchell (2); Vaughn Monroe (2); Russ Morgan; Lou
Monte (2); Jaye P. Morgan; Ella Mae Morse (6); Patti Page (4);.Les Paul &
Mary Ford (4); Perez Prado; Norman Petty Trio (2); The Pied Pipers; Johnnie
Ray; Dinah Shore (4); Artie Shaw; Jo Stafford (3), Frank Sinatra (78)
including all his significant recordings for seven calendar decades; Rise
Stevens; Kay Starr (2); Orin Tucker; Jerry Vale; Sarah Vaughan (3); Caterina
Valente; Dinah Washington (5); Helen Ward; The Weavers (4); Margaret Whiting
(4); Paul Weston, Lee Wiley and (40) Time-Life "Your Hit Parade" CDs among
others.
But my collection, and corresponding understanding of popular music goes
beyond that era, and I just completed for personal use only, a 51 year, 1939 -
1989, 365 page, two volume history of popular music in annual chart form to
help me keep tack of my CD collection, and I enjoy very much continually
discovering and documenting new recordings from the past.
If you define "good music" in self-serving terms of mid-to late 1930's lyrics,
instrumentation and big-band arrangements and vocal styling, then when the
music changed, you could correctly feel justified in believing that the music
was in decline. But that is only because of your definition, your lack of
knowledge, your personal handicaps and prejudices, and ultimately your own
inability to adapt and remain positive. Remember, it was the fans of that
music who rejected it, and modified it, and not some conspiracy of futuristic,
non-thinking, pointed-headed, music anarchists.
Your self-serving attack on 50's popular music only documents your ignorance of
the subject material. Specifically, your current post is incorrect, for Stan
Freberg produced many hit satirical records of 1950's music, and so could have
Spike Jones if he still had the creative spirit that he possessed throughout
the 1940's. Collector's Choice is offering a new 4 CD retrospective of Stan
Freberg's marvelous career.
By the way, I just purchased Spike Jones' wonderful brand new "Greatest Hits"
CD which for the first time contains all of his charted hits, and I just heard
"Chinese Mule Train" for the first time.
You are not alone with your self-righteous, negative beliefs: There are many
other revisionist, negative-minded, pseudo-music historians, like yourself, in
a 1950's discussion group who incorrectly believe that meaningful 50's music
began only in 1955 and consists only of rock 'n roll, rhythm and blues and
doo-wop music. They understand big-band music probably as little and you
understand the evolutionary changes that followed.
The numbers and examples of music fans who lost the ability to understand
changes are too many to numerate, but to list one group, there were many fans
of early 30's (Paul Whiteman-like) music, who were convinced that the end of
music had arrived with the advent of Benny Goodman, his mixing of black and
white musicians, and his new "swing" music.
Of course, they were wrong, the 50's music people are wrong, and so are you.
In terms of music, in terms of having some respect for all the music and all
the music-makers, and all music lovers' sensitivities, have you ever thought
about talking only of what you like, and letting it go at that?
With your negative views you probably gain favor with those of similar
opinions, but ultimately you become the looser, because I lose respect for you
as a knowledgeable correspondent, and you become unacceptable in my world of
music.
Best regards,
Ed Yorke
Hal Vickery
hitp...@aol.com (Hit Parade) wrote:
<snip prologue>
The comments were those of Spike Jones. Since he's dead, I guess you'll
just have to lash out at the messenger.
nsmf
Leo Scanlon
>... I just completed for personal use only, a 51 year, 1939 -
>1989, 365 page, two volume history of popular music in annual chart form to
>help me keep tack of my CD collection...
Now, THAT would be something to behold! You should really look into
having it published.
Leo
Stewart Turnbull
Hit Parade wrote in message
<19991124132536...@ng-cp1.aol.com>...
>
>edited message<
>Stu.
>Ed, I answered your e-mail as comprehensively as possible, but I was
unaware that the same e -mail you forwarded to me also appeared on the
newsgroup.
I do not wish to waste space and the time of the members here by re printing
it in
detail. I apologise to them because it would seem I must once again pick up
on a few points.
My original post was not my opinion. Whether I like Elvis' music or not is
immaterial.
>your current post is incorrect....Stan Freberg produced many satirical hits
of fifties music...and so could Spike Jones if he still had the creative
spirit<
But, they were individuals. Spike stated that no matter what he tried it
didn't
work. He thought he might be coming close on occasions but then Elvis would
release another record and it was back to the drawing board. He said he
didn't wish to put Elvis down. I understood this fact and I thought that you
would. In the world of satire, or musical
impersonators of vocalists and bands, whatever, it requires, in some cases,
an
excessive exaggeration. Freberg found a way to make it work, with the echo
chamber angle. Although it is a send up, it isn't a put down!
I would have respected a post from you if only to say you disagreed with
what Spike said, and given a positive reason why.
>my self serving attack on 50's popular music<
I never attacked 50's music. Negative you may call me, but I can't be more
postive than that.
>have you ever thought about talking about what you like and letting it go
at that?<
Not really. I talk about what I like and what I don't like, doesn't
everyone? Debate is the name of the game. Do you prefer it to be otherwise?
Maybe, I may be mistaken, it would appear by your post that you may find
this unacceptable and that you would prefer a more negative newsgroup tailor
made to suit your
needs by being in agreement with all your views.
>having some respect for all the music<
I collect, but I don't collect everything, why should I if I don't enjoy it?
Someone once said," There is good music and there is bad music". I agree
with this. On the other hand it has been said, "There is no bad music, it's
the way it's played which counts". We all have our opinions on what is good
or bad music, and we can each have our own judgement on the way it's played.
I respect this fact. I usually avoid what, in my opinion, I consider to be
bad music which no matter how it's played it doesn't improve it any. Your
subject heading states you are an appreciator of ALL the music, which
therefore
signifies that you must also be an appreciator of ALL bad music, even after
a transformation has taken place and it still doesn't suit your taste.
>with your negative views...I lose respect for you as an knowledgeable
correspondent and you become unacceptable in my world<
I lay no claim on being a knowledgeable correspondent. To be acceptable in
your world would mean a world minus debate, criticism, be it both for or
against, facts, and opinions, unless they carry a proviso that they be
acceptable by you, and maybe humour. I would not wish to be accepted in such
a world. I welcome criticism, it is healthy, but I would feel that when my
opinions are at odds with yours you would be self righteous rather than just
rightly critical.
I admire your extensive collection list which you posted, most impressive,
best regards,
Stu.
Hal Vickery
<St...@Stompin.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> Hit Parade wrote in message
> <19991124132536...@ng-cp1.aol.com>...
> >
> >edited message<
> >Stu.
>
> >If you define "good music" in self-serving terms of mid-to late 1930's
> lyrics,
> >instrumentation and big-band arrangements and vocal styling, then when the
> >music changed, you could correctly feel justified in believing that the
> music
> >was in decline. But that is only because of your definition, your lack of
> >knowledge, your personal handicaps and prejudices, and ultimately your own
> >inability to adapt and remain positive. Remember, it was the fans of that
> >music who rejected it, and modified it, and not some conspiracy of
> futuristic,
> >non-thinking, pointed-headed, music anarchists.
Take heart, Stu. If you go back and check out my original posts in the
threads, "An interesting email" and "Another interesting email," you will
find that an anonymous person used almost these exact same words in a
private email to me. Feel fortunate that this time the words were actually
sent to the newsgroup, too. I think we're dealing here with our own
version of Johnny One Note.
> >Your self-serving attack on 50's popular music only documents your
> ignorance of
> >the subject material. Specifically, your current post is incorrect, for
> Stan
> >Freberg produced many hit satirical records of 1950's music, and so could
> have
> >Spike Jones if he still had the creative spirit that he possessed
> throughout
> >the 1940's. Collector's Choice is offering a new 4 CD retrospective of
> Stan
> >Freberg's marvelous career.
Yeah, I was ignorant of the '50s, too. At first it was because I was one
of those damn rock 'n' rollers. When I showed that wasn't the case it was
because I was unable to adapt.
Glad to see you're not just ambushing people via email anymore, Ed.
> >Ed, I answered your e-mail as comprehensively as possible, but I was
> unaware that the same e -mail you forwarded to me also appeared on the
> newsgroup.
I apologize. I think my posting his negative emails here might have had
something to do with it. As I said in another post, the adjectives he uses
above ("self-righteous, negative") refer simply to anyone who disagree with
him.
> I do not wish to waste space and the time of the members here by re printing
> it in
> detail. I apologise to them because it would seem I must once again pick up
> on a few points.
> My original post was not my opinion. Whether I like Elvis' music or not is
> immaterial.
>
> >your current post is incorrect....Stan Freberg produced many satirical hits
> of fifties music...and so could Spike Jones if he still had the creative
> spirit<
> But, they were individuals. Spike stated that no matter what he tried it
> didn't
> work. He thought he might be coming close on occasions but then Elvis would
> release another record and it was back to the drawing board. He said he
> didn't wish to put Elvis down. I understood this fact and I thought that you
> would. In the world of satire, or musical
> impersonators of vocalists and bands, whatever, it requires, in some cases,
> an
> excessive exaggeration. Freberg found a way to make it work, with the echo
> chamber angle. Although it is a send up, it isn't a put down!
> I would have respected a post from you if only to say you disagreed with
> what Spike said, and given a positive reason why.
That wouldn't follow past form, however.
> >my self serving attack on 50's popular music<
> I never attacked 50's music. Negative you may call me, but I can't be more
> postive than that.
Maybe he was confusing you for me! I think he called me self-serving, too.
> >have you ever thought about talking about what you like and letting it go
> at that?<
> Not really. I talk about what I like and what I don't like, doesn't
> everyone? Debate is the name of the game. Do you prefer it to be otherwise?
> Maybe, I may be mistaken, it would appear by your post that you may find
> this unacceptable and that you would prefer a more negative newsgroup tailor
> made to suit your
> needs by being in agreement with all your views.
I can't imagine participating in any discussion in which everyone had to
agree. The book "1984" comes to mind.
> >having some respect for all the music<
> I collect, but I don't collect everything, why should I if I don't enjoy it?
> Someone once said," There is good music and there is bad music". I agree
> with this. On the other hand it has been said, "There is no bad music, it's
> the way it's played which counts". We all have our opinions on what is good
> or bad music, and we can each have our own judgement on the way it's played.
> I respect this fact. I usually avoid what, in my opinion, I consider to be
> bad music which no matter how it's played it doesn't improve it any. Your
> subject heading states you are an appreciator of ALL the music, which
> therefore
> signifies that you must also be an appreciator of ALL bad music, even after
> a transformation has taken place and it still doesn't suit your taste.
I took a class in music appreciation once. The professor stressed that in
listening to music we need to keep a critical ear open. Are the musicians
good players or not? Is the writing good or not?
> >with your negative views...I lose respect for you as an knowledgeable
> correspondent and you become unacceptable in my world<
> I lay no claim on being a knowledgeable correspondent. To be acceptable in
> your world would mean a world minus debate, criticism, be it both for or
> against, facts, and opinions, unless they carry a proviso that they be
> acceptable by you, and maybe humour. I would not wish to be accepted in such
> a world. I welcome criticism, it is healthy, but I would feel that when my
> opinions are at odds with yours you would be self righteous rather than just
> rightly critical.
> I admire your extensive collection list which you posted, most impressive,
The thing that I find interesting is the automatic assumption when he
disagrees with someone, that the person he disagrees with is lacking in
knowledge of the subject. I don't think there is *anyone* in this group
who is the font of all knowledge in every area. I've made it a point to
learn as much about music as I can over the past 40 years, and I still know
a lot less than what there is left to learn.
nsmf