Stan Getz goes to Hell
John Grabowski
TimRobKev wrote:
>
> I've noticed that all the biographies of Getz treat him as a lying,
> wife-beating alcoholic who took great pleasure in mistreating all his fellow
> musicians. I guess all those tender ballads he played were as phony as that
> whiny and self-pitying sound that he stole from Lester Young.
I'm not defending Getz, but why must his playing be phony because he was
a mean SOB (if he was)? Charlie Parker was nasty, his music sublime.
So was Beethoven. And Wagner. and Van Gogh. Etc. Nice guys don't
necessarily = nice art.
John
--
She's my sister *and* my daughter.
--Evelyn Mulwray
Simon Weil
John Grabowski wrote>
>
>I'm not defending Getz, but why must his playing be phony because he was
>a mean SOB (if he was)? Charlie Parker was nasty, his music sublime.
>So was Beethoven. And Wagner. and Van Gogh. Etc. Nice guys don't
>necessarily = nice art.
>
Simon Weil
2 jazz pagans
Which jury is that--the "nice guy" jury or the "nice art" jury?
- JRB
John Grabowski
Simon Weil wrote:
>
> John Grabowski wrote>
> >
> >I'm not defending Getz, but why must his playing be phony because he was
> >a mean SOB (if he was)? Charlie Parker was nasty, his music sublime.
> >So was Beethoven. And Wagner. and Van Gogh. Etc. Nice guys don't
> >necessarily = nice art.
> >
> The jury is still out about Wagner.
>
> Simon Weil
Perhaps your jury is.
Keith Myath
I don't remember where I heard this ( it could have been here at RMB)
"Don't expect from musicians but their music"
Keith
Simon Weil
2 jazz pagans wrote:
>Simon Weil wrote:
>>
>> John Grabowski wrote>
>> >
>> >I'm not defending Getz, but why must his playing be phony because he was
>> >a mean SOB (if he was)? Charlie Parker was nasty, his music sublime.
>> >So was Beethoven. And Wagner. and Van Gogh. Etc. Nice guys don't
>> >necessarily = nice art.
>> >
>> The jury is still out about Wagner.
>>
>> Simon Weil
>
>
>- JRB
stuff - or very nasty stuff - there is in his art. Here's a quote:
"Ortrud [a character in Wagner's opera "Lohengrin"] is a woman who does not
know love. By this everything most terrible is expressed. Politics are her
essence. A male politician is repulsive, a female politician is horrible: This
horror I had to represent."
Simon Weil
Ralph Jungheim
The President of a prominent jazz label once told me: "None of the
great ones were nice guys." I think this was a slight exaggeration.
Simon Weil
>Simon Weil wrote:
>>
>> John Grabowski wrote>
>> >
>> >I'm not defending Getz, but why must his playing be phony because he was
>> >a mean SOB (if he was)? Charlie Parker was nasty, his music sublime.
>> >So was Beethoven. And Wagner. and Van Gogh. Etc. Nice guys don't
>> >necessarily = nice art.
>> >
>> The jury is still out about Wagner.
>>
>> Simon Weil
>
>
>
>John
>
>
Oh, yes. Let's have an argument about Wagner. :)
Simon Weil
Jeff Beer
In article <19971129151...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
Simon Weil <simo...@aol.com> wrote:
>>Simon Weil wrote:
>>>
>>> The jury is still out about Wagner.
>>>
>>> Simon Weil
>>
>>Perhaps your jury is.
>>
>>
>>John
>>
>>
>
>Oh, yes. Let's have an argument about Wagner. :)
>
>Simon Weil
They always seem to be having one in rec.music.classical.
Jeff
John Grabowski
Simon Weil wrote:
>
> 2 jazz pagans wrote:
> >Simon Weil wrote:
> >>
> >> John Grabowski wrote>
> >> >
> >> >I'm not defending Getz, but why must his playing be phony because he was
> >> >a mean SOB (if he was)? Charlie Parker was nasty, his music sublime.
> >> >So was Beethoven. And Wagner. and Van Gogh. Etc. Nice guys don't
> >> >necessarily = nice art.
> >> >
> >>
> >> Simon Weil
> >
> >
> >- JRB
> stuff - or very nasty stuff - there is in his art. Here's a quote:
>
> "Ortrud [a character in Wagner's opera "Lohengrin"] is a woman who does not
> know love. By this everything most terrible is expressed. Politics are her
> essence. A male politician is repulsive, a female politician is horrible: This
> horror I had to represent."
>
> Simon Weil
>
Sorrry, I forgot half the people on the internet are mentally retarded.
J
--
What happened to your nose, Gittes? Someone slam a bedroom window on
it?
--Loach
Simon Weil
John Grabowski wrote>
A: Designer Bleuuuughhhh.
Simon Weil
John Grabowski
Alex Bunardzic wrote:
>
> bam...@beachnet.com (Ralph Jungheim) wrote:
>
> >The President of a prominent jazz label once told me: "None of the
> >great ones were nice guys." I think this was a slight exaggeration.
>
> same time. These two are absolutelly mutually exclusive.
>
> Alex
Speak for yourself. I happen to be great and a saint. :-)
John
--
He died two weeks ago and one week ago he bought the land. That's
unusual.
-- Jake
Alex Bunardzic
Genie Baker
In article <347D24...@earthlink.net>,
John Grabowski <jg...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>TimRobKev wrote:
>>
>> I've noticed that all the biographies of Getz treat him as a lying,
>> wife-beating alcoholic who took great pleasure in mistreating all his fellow
>> musicians. I guess all those tender ballads he played were as phony as that
>> whiny and self-pitying sound that he stole from Lester Young.
>
It's funny; I worked in jazz clubs for years and should know better,
but am still surprised when I run across someone who can play ballads
like that but turns out to be a pretty nasty human being.
Sometimes I wonder if the peculiar dual meaning of the word "sensitive"
is related to the misfounded expectation. Sometimes "sensitive" means
emotionally fragile, vulnerable -- the kind of thing you hear in those
ballads. Other times it connotes an awareness of and consideration for
others -- the kind of thing you don't associate with people like Stan Getz
and Chet Baker. There's really no reason to think the two character
traits should go hand in hand, though -- even if we do use the same word
for them.
--
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Genie Baker gba...@umich.edu
Coutier Thierry
Genie Baker wrote :
> Sometimes I wonder if the peculiar dual meaning of the word "sensitive"
> is related to the misfounded expectation. Sometimes "sensitive" means
> emotionally fragile, vulnerable -- the kind of thing you hear in those
> ballads. Other times it connotes an awareness of and consideration for
> others -- the kind of thing you don't associate with people like Stan Getz
> and Chet Baker. There's really no reason to think the two character
> traits should go hand in hand, though -- even if we do use the same word
> for them.
Sensitive for being emotionally touched by things. Which happen to others or
you. Great artists have generally big egos. On certain points i don't think they
act in a really rational way. I'd rather say artists may be pretty irrational,
rather chaotic, unpredictable, not completely sane, mature, reasonable. A
violent man has indeed an illness form, a desequilibrium. Sometimes violence is
uncontrolled, sometimes it is a way of expressing oneself, a pitiful way, but
still, when you have no words. Sometimes a violent man happens to be fine
musician. The song he sings, the song he plays must be no other thing than a
smile, a present he gives to you of his innerself, beyond apparences. Maybe Stan
Getz could only find peace when playing the sax. That's how i see things.
Thierry
From Larry Lewicki :
> Stan playing a "moving" version of Polkadots and Moonbeams only means that he
> > has good aesthetic judgement, harmonic ear and ability to create meaningful
> motific relations on the fly in his improvisation.
How insensitive.
Mcloidsman
> Sometimes I wonder if the peculiar dual meaning of the word "sensitive"
>is related to the misfounded expectation. Sometimes "sensitive" means
>emotionally fragile, vulnerable -- the kind of thing you hear in those
>ballads. Other times it connotes an awareness of and consideration for
>others -- the kind of thing you don't associate with people like Stan Getz
>and Chet Baker. There's really no reason to think the two character
>traits should go hand in hand, though -- even if we do use the same word
>for them.
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>Genie Baker gba...@umich.edu
I think you've hit the nail on the head there.
Tom Walls
In article <661k0p$j5v$1...@newbabylon.rs.itd.umich.edu>,
gba...@lsa.umich.edu (Genie Baker) wrote:
> It's funny; I worked in jazz clubs for years and should know better,
> but am still surprised when I run across someone who can play ballads
> like that but turns out to be a pretty nasty human being.
> is related to the misfounded expectation. Sometimes "sensitive" means
> emotionally fragile, vulnerable -- the kind of thing you hear in those
> ballads. Other times it connotes an awareness of and consideration for
> others -- the kind of thing you don't associate with people like Stan Getz
> and Chet Baker. There's really no reason to think the two character
> traits should go hand in hand, though -- even if we do use the same word
> for them.
> --
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Genie Baker gba...@umich.edu
My old friend Dan used to say, "You're sensitive? Yeah, sensitive to yourself!"
--
Psychromatically Yours,
Tom Walls
JFR
In <347F8C...@ix.netcom.com> 2 jazz pagans <gal...@ix.netcom.com>
writes:
>Simon Weil wrote:
>>
>> John Grabowski wrote>
>> >
he was
>> >a mean SOB (if he was)? Charlie Parker was nasty, his music
>> >So was Beethoven. And Wagner. and Van Gogh. Etc. Nice guys don't
>> >necessarily = nice art.
>> >
>> The jury is still out about Wagner.
>>
>> Simon Weil
>
>Which jury is that--the "nice guy" jury or the "nice art" jury?
>
>- JRB
OK, I am ignorant - who was Wagner - and why was/is he controversial?
Thanks.
John R.
Malcolm Rockwell
Tom Walls wrote:
>
> In article <661k0p$j5v$1...@newbabylon.rs.itd.umich.edu>,
> gba...@lsa.umich.edu (Genie Baker) wrote:
> > It's funny; I worked in jazz clubs for years and should know better,
> > but am still surprised when I run across someone who can play ballads
> > like that but turns out to be a pretty nasty human being.
What's on the outside ain't necessarily what's on the inside.
Malcolm R
2 jazz pagans
Richard Wagner (1813-1883), German opera composer (Siegfried, the Ring
cycle, The Flying Dutchman, etc.). Considered by many to be one of the
great composers of all time, but also a notorious anti-Semite--his music
was a favorite of Hitler's.
- JRB
arnie svetz
Richard Wagner <<<<<<<Considered by many to be one of the
> great composers of all time, but also a notorious anti-Semite--his music
> was a favorite of Hitler's >>>>>>>>>>>>
Wagner is not only one of my favorite composers
but I am one of those that beleives that
Wagner has done pretty much all you can do with tonal music. After him
there is not much left. Jazz music is trivial by comparaison but
nevertheless interesting in a very superficial way. It appeals to fringe
pop fans looking for something better but lacking the perceptual skills
to understand anything requiring more than a 5 minute attention span. A
John Coltrane composition where he plays for 20 minutes ad nauseum on
and on repeating himself profusely and boring the hell out of prople
with ears and memory is ample proof of that. Wagner's music is
architecture and it will last to influence the future. Coltrane and
Davis, Miles that is, will be just so much dust on shelves and that is
all that their influence will generate in the future. Of that I am
certain.
By the way how do you prove to the person whose question you are
answering that Wagner was a notorious Anti-semite ? What information are
you using to formulate this notion. This inquiring mind is waiting with
baited breath to hear this explanation.
Arnie
Simon Weil
JRB wrote
>Richard Wagner <<<<<<<Considered by many to be one of the
>> great composers of all time, but also a notorious anti-Semite--his music
>> was a favorite of Hitler's >>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>Wagner is not only one of my favorite composers
> but I am one of those that beleives that
>Wagner has done pretty much all you can do with tonal music. After him
>there is not much left. Jazz music is trivial by comparaison but
>nevertheless interesting in a very superficial way. It appeals to fringe
>pop fans looking for something better but lacking the perceptual skills
>to understand anything requiring more than a 5 minute attention span. A
>John Coltrane composition where he plays for 20 minutes ad nauseum on
>and on repeating himself profusely and boring the hell out of prople
>with ears and memory is ample proof of that. Wagner's music is
>architecture and it will last to influence the future. Coltrane and
>Davis, Miles that is, will be just so much dust on shelves and that is
>all that their influence will generate in the future. Of that I am
>certain.
>
>By the way how do you prove to the person whose question you are
>answering that Wagner was a notorious Anti-semite ? What information are
>you using to formulate this notion. This inquiring mind is waiting with
>baited breath to hear this explanation.
>
>
>Arnie
Simon Weil
Doug Norwood
> Wagner is not only one of my favorite composers but...
Wagner is one of my favorite composers too. Right up there with Duke
Ellington, J. S. Bach, Tadd Dameron, Frederick Delius and Thelonious Monk.
> By the way how do you prove to the person whose question you are
> answering that Wagner was a notorious Anti-semite ?
Have you seen some of the writings of Wagner? It would be hard to regard
him as anything other than a proto-nazi.
There is no correlation, either directly or inversely, between the
character of an individual and his accomplishments in any field (whether
artistic or otherwise). While nice guys often finish last, they sometimes
finish first as well.
Doug Norwood
>
>
> Arnie
>
Zapbailey
JRB wrote
>Richard Wagner <<<<<<<Considered by many to be one of the
>> great composers of all time, but also a notorious anti-Semite--his music
>> was a favorite of Hitler's >>>>>>>>>>>>
>
To which arnie svetz replied;
>Wagner is not only one of my favorite composers
> but I am one of those that beleives that
>Wagner has done pretty much all you can do with tonal music. After him
>there is not much left. Jazz music is trivial by comparaison but
>nevertheless interesting in a very superficial way. It appeals to fringe
>pop fans looking for something better but lacking the perceptual skills
>to understand anything requiring more than a 5 minute attention span. A
>John Coltrane composition where he plays for 20 minutes ad nauseum on
>and on repeating himself profusely and boring the hell out of prople
>with ears and memory is ample proof of that. Wagner's music is
>architecture and it will last to influence the future. Coltrane and
>Davis, Miles that is, will be just so much dust on shelves and that is
>all that their influence will generate in the future. Of that I am
>certain.
>
>By the way how do you prove to the person whose question you are
>answering that Wagner was a notorious Anti-semite ? What information are
>you using to formulate this notion. This inquiring mind is waiting with
>baited breath to hear this explanation.
>
>
>Arnie
Did you post this in the spirit of friendly discourse and discussion? If that
were your intent, you certainly could have dispensed with the entire first
paragraph.
John Monroe
On 4 Dec 1997, George Traynor wrote:
> In article <3487B4...@bala.net>, arnie says...
> >[Jazz] appeals to fringe pop fans looking for something better but
> >lacking the perceptual skills to understand anything requiring more
> >than a 5 minute attention span.
I don't think I want to waste my time trying to write a response to this.
I'll just say that it's exactly this kind of priggish elitism which made
me get fed up with atonal classical music (which used to be a major
interest of mine). Yuck. *We* all know who's going into the "dust bin of
history", after all. Can anyone here whistle the tune from the
"Sarabande" in Schoenberg's "Suite, op.29"? Would anyone want to?
> >By the way how do you prove to the person whose question you are
> >answering that Wagner was a notorious Anti-semite ? What information are
> >you using to formulate this notion. This inquiring mind is waiting with
> >baited breath to hear this explanation.
Well, I'd suggest Arnie take a look at Chapter 20 of Paul Rose's "German
Question/Jewish Question: Revolutionary Anti-Semitism from Kant to
Wagner" (Princeton University Press, 1990). Or, if he prefers, he could
get his information straight from the horse's mouth, so to speak, by
reading Wagner's 1850 essay "Judaism in Music." I don't think a reader
confronted with Wagner's writings would need much in the way of
"perceptual skills" to realize that the man hated Jews (or at least hated
some wierd stereotypical straw-man which he chose to call "the Jew"--with
disastrous consequences, as we know now).
However, I also want to note that Hitler's liking for Wagner can't really
be used as proof of Wagner's anti-Semitism. After all, by the time Hitler
came along, Wagner was good and dead, and had, obviously, no control over
how his music was received. Also, it's worth noting that Hitler also had
a soft spot for Mahler, who was Jewish himself. Nobody ever accused Adolf
of being rational.
John Monroe.
Patrick Marcotte
Very interesting post, Arnie, but I have a couple of questions for you.
arnie svetz wrote:
> Wagner is not only one of my favorite composers
> but I am one of those that beleives that
> Wagner has done pretty much all you can do with tonal music. After him
> there is not much left. Jazz music is trivial by comparaison but
> nevertheless interesting in a very superficial way. It appeals to fringe
> pop fans looking for something better but lacking the perceptual skills
> to understand anything requiring more than a 5 minute attention span.
QUESTION
Though I acknowledge that the above is a troll of the highest magnitude,
let me just ask: what makes you sure that us jazz cretins ("pop fans"?
first time I've been called THAT) aren't listening to the superior
music. Nothing you say in this post supports your contention that jazz
is "trivial" or "superficial." Perhaps you learned in high school that
to influence other with your opinions, you need to support them with
facts. At the risk of prolonging this thread, can you tell us dummies
why Wagner is superior to Coltrane or Davis? (Although I suspect your
argument would resemble one of comparing apples to nickels.)
A
> John Coltrane composition where he plays for 20 minutes ad nauseum on
> and on repeating himself profusely and boring the hell out of prople
> with ears and memory is ample proof of that. Wagner's music is
> architecture and it will last to influence the future. Coltrane and
> Davis, Miles that is, will be just so much dust on shelves and that is
> all that their influence will generate in the future. Of that I am
> certain.
>
> By the way how do you prove to the person whose question you are
> answering that Wagner was a notorious Anti-semite ? What information are
> you using to formulate this notion. This inquiring mind is waiting with
> baited breath to hear this explanation.
QUESTION
This last sentence conjures up some amusing visual imagery. What bait
are you using on your breath? Worms? Minnows? (Might try some
Listerine afterward.) THIS inquiring mind is waiting with BATED breath
for your answer.
--
Patrick Marcotte
Marc Sabatella
And since no one has bothered to point this out, I figured I'd observe
his lasting claim to fame: the tune used as a bridal march in 99% of
weddings (you know, "here comes the bride"). This particular piece is
probably not a great example of his sophisticated harmonic sense, but
the rest of "Lohengrin", from which the passage was taken, is.
--------------
Marc Sabatella
ma...@outsideshore.com
"The Outside Shore"
A Jazz Improvisation Primer, Scores, Sounds, & More:
http://www.outsideshore.com/
Dave Lane
From under a bridge, Arnie the Troll wrote:
> [...] Jazz music is trivial by comparaison but
> nevertheless interesting in a very superficial way. It appeals to fringe
> pop fans looking for something better but lacking the perceptual skills
> to understand anything requiring more than a 5 minute attention span. A
> John Coltrane composition where he plays for 20 minutes ad nauseum
Gee. That means I have to use up my whole attention span
*four times* to listen to it. And by the time I've figured out
whether it's an oud or a tamboura that I'm hearing, my
attention has wandered.
> By the way how do you prove to the person whose question you are
> answering that Wagner was a notorious Anti-semite ? What information are
> you using to formulate this notion. This inquiring mind is waiting with
> baited breath to hear this explanation.
Maybe if you'd stop eating BAIT, your breath would smell better.
--Dave
2 jazz pagans
Marc Sabatella wrote:
>
> And since no one has bothered to point this out, I figured I'd observe
> his lasting claim to fame: the tune used as a bridal march in 99% of
> weddings (you know, "here comes the bride"). This particular piece is
> probably not a great example of his sophisticated harmonic sense, but
> the rest of "Lohengrin", from which the passage was taken, is.
>
There are actually two wedding "marches," "Here comes the bride" and the
one that's used after the ceremony as the newlyweds make their way up
the aisle. I thought the recessional was the piece that was Wagner's and
"Here comes etc." was by Schubert or someone else. At any rate, I
understand that both pieces, in their original settings, are associated
with weddings/marriages that don't turn out well. True?
- Jim
Gary Milliken
>OK, I am ignorant - who was Wagner - and why was/is he controversial?
>
Richard Wagner (pronounced VOGG-ner) was a German composer in the 19th
century, who wrote many very long and ponderous operas about the noble
heritage of the German people, and who was outspokenly anti-Semitic.
Which was no doubt one of the main reasons he was Hitler's favorite
composer.
His relevance to the present discussion? He is a classical counterpart
to Stan Getz, an artist whose work you may (or may not) enjoy on its
own merits, but whose personal life you'd best ignore if you want to
appreciate the music.
I once played a Jewish wedding at which the couple had explicitly
requested "Here Comes the Bride" for their processional (about as
normal a choice as can be). The bass player at the gig was Jewish,
and he objected to this choice because it is in fact the Wedding March
from Wagner's opera "Lohengrin". I had to point out to him that
he and I were probably the only people there who knew that, so just
play the damn tune and make the wedding party happy.
GM
Lcfpsf
Arnie,
Personally, I consider the music of Wagner to be bombastic, heavy handed and
lacking the elegance, and musical sophistication of composers such as Mozart,
Beethoven, Bach, Schubert, Haydn,Chopin, and Brahms.
You can have Wagner and I will take the above list along with Ellington, Monk,
Dameron,Wayne Shorter, and Horace Silver.
Peter Friedman
TomC
The occasional moron makes life interesting. But when they fly their "I'm
ignorant" flags, it's a bit much. Dissing Miles and Trane is one thing. But
Wagner as the be-all and end-all of tonal music? You wanna share some of
that herb your smoking?
TomC
arnie svetz <" arnsv"@bala.net> > wrote in message
<3487B4...@bala.net>...
Colonel Mortimer
folks? are you there?
1. wagner's forte (to me) was his mastery of the leitmotif as a
compositional device
2. wagner was a jew-hating maggot who should have been skinned alive to
show the world what kind of treatment jew-hating maggots deserve
3. to say that coltrane sucks because he's not some classical bohack,
well....ever hear of 'improvisation'? how about 'spontaneous
combustion'? these are two things that coltrane mastered. even people
who do not like him give him credit to being a master of music. i don't
know what his prejudices were and i don't care...i have this tape of him
being interviewed where the interviewer tries to goad him into saying
'black audiences are better than white audiences' over and over...his
reply (i'm paraphrasing) "i don't care about the race of the audience"
in essence, if you wanna be Louis Farrakhan and master leitmotifs, go
ahead....when it comes time to meet the Maker and you've been nothing
but a vessel for hate in your life, then leitmotifs won't help you much.
at least coltrane, regardless of his religious affiliations, was trying
to be a force for good in the world. there's something to be said for
that and that is somehow related to the music we make.
take care,
cm
Mark Polis
arnie svetz <" arnsv"@bala.net> wrote:
>SNIP<
Jazz music is trivial by comparaison but
¤nevertheless interesting in a very superficial way. It appeals to
fringe
¤pop fans looking for something better but lacking the perceptual
skills
¤to understand anything requiring more than a 5 minute attention span.
A
¤and on repeating himself profusely and boring the hell out of prople
¤with ears and memory is ample proof of that. Wagner's music is
¤architecture and it will last to influence the future. Coltrane and
¤Davis, Miles that is, will be just so much dust on shelves and that
is
¤all that their influence will generate in the future. Of that I am
¤certain.
¤By the way how do you prove to the person whose question you are
¤answering that Wagner was a notorious Anti-semite ? What information
are
¤you using to formulate this notion. This inquiring mind is waiting
with
¤baited breath to hear this explanation.
¤Arnie
Every so often it is refreshing to happen upon an enigmatic post such
as this one by Arnie Svetz. A post which denigrates jazz within the
RMB newsgroup could simply be a troll to bait flamers, or it could
represent the bleatings of one who sincerely speaks with the authority
of the ignorant. I tend to believe that the latter situation applies,
and that Mr. Svetz somehow perceives that he will bestow jazz
aficionados the opportunity to bask in the aura of his cerebral
quintessence. Either way, Mr. Svetz is to be pitied.
--
o-----« Mark Polis mjp...@csrlink.net »-----o
Marc Sabatella
gal...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
>
>There are actually two wedding "marches," "Here comes the bride" and the
>one that's used after the ceremony as the newlyweds make their way up
>the aisle. I thought the recessional was the piece that was Wagner's and
>"Here comes etc." was by Schubert or someone else.
No, you have it backwards. The traditional processional (entrance) is
the Wagner; the traditional recessional (exit) is by Mendelssohn.
Personally, I think Elsa's procession to the cathedral (Wagner, I
think also from Lohengrin, obviously I haven't seen it or I'd know) is
one of the cooler pieces of music ever written.
Colonel Mortimer
points well taken, sir.
cm
Geoffrey Scott FitzGibbon, Esq.
--Cyberdog-MixedBoundary-002EBF57
X-Fontfamily: Monaco
X-Fontsize: 9
Content-Type: text/enriched; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<SMALLER><SMALLER><FIXED> </FIXED></SMALLER></SMALLER>
--Cyberdog-MixedBoundary-002EBF57
Content-Type: image/jpeg
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
<encoded_portion_removed>
3eUm3d15JqSiigD/2Q==
--Cyberdog-MixedBoundary-002EBF57
X-Fontfamily: Monaco
X-Fontsize: 9
Content-Type: text/enriched; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<SMALLER><SMALLER><FIXED>
Mr. Svetz comments reflect a profound ignorance and prejudice. No
educated musician can doubt for a moment that Charlie Parker's genius
was on a par with the great classical composers such as Mozart,
Wagner, etc.</FIXED></SMALLER></SMALLER>
--Cyberdog-MixedBoundary-002EBF57--
H. Loess
George Traynor <radia...@idsonline.com> wrote:
>In article <3489AD...@postit.com>, Colonel says...
>>at least coltrane, regardless of his religious affiliations, was trying
>>to be a force for good in the world. there's something to be said for
>>that and that is somehow related to the music we make.
>As great as Coltrane was, I don't try to attribute things to him that may or may
>not be warranted. I'll leave it to people like Nisenson who'll try to get
>inside Coltrane's head, not me.
I expect CM's notion that Coltrane was "trying to be a force for good in the
world" is not based on his or Nisenson's 'trying to get inside Coltrane's
head', but on Coltrane's own statement of this intention. It's in the Kofsky
interview, which can be found at <http://www.dnai.com/~fkofsky/jcint2.html>.
--
Henry L.
hlo...@pipeline.com
John Monroe
On Sun, 7 Dec 1997, Marc Sabatella wrote:
> Personally, I think Elsa's procession to the cathedral (Wagner, I
> think also from Lohengrin, obviously I haven't seen it or I'd know) is
> one of the cooler pieces of music ever written.
If we're talking about cool Wagner, it'd also be hard to overlook "Tristan
und Isolde" (especially the famous "Liebestod," which comes at the very
end). It's pretty amazing music -- it actually provided Nietzsche with the
jumping-off point for his first major work as a philosopher, "The Birth of
Tragedy from the Spirit of Music." A good recording to check out would be
Carlos Kleiber's, on Deutsche Grammophon. Talk about goosebumps!
And, of course, for Jazz fans, there's Stan Kenton's, uh, *interesting*
album "Kenton/Wagner," which is a kind of tragedy in itself. ;)
John Monroe.
Simon Weil
John Monroe wrote:
>>>>>If we're talking about cool Wagner, it'd be hard to overlook "Tristan und
Isolde" (especially the famous "Liebestod", which comes at the very end). It's
pretty amazing music - - it actually provided Nietzsche with the jumping off
point for his major work as a philosopher, "The Birth of Tragedy from the
Spirit of Music."<<<<<
For sure "Tristan and Isolde" is remarkable - For some the most romantic piece
of music *ever*. The "Liebestod" is in the middle of the opera (Act 2 Scene 2).
I'm not an expert on Nietzsche, but as far as I know Nietzsche only refers to
Tristan in section 21 (i.e near the end) of "The Birth of Tragedy from the
Spirit of Music". I also have the impression that Wagner's philosophical ideas,
rather than his music, were a jumping off point for "The Birth..."
Simon Weil
tomb...@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu
>>1. wagner's forte (to me) was his mastery of the leitmotif as a
>>compositional device
That's it? He was also one of the greatest and most innovative
orchestrators in history. (And he wasn't bad with harmony, melody,
and counterpoint either.)
Harry Avant
mill...@scofield.corp.sun.com (Gary Milliken) wrote:
(snip) The bass player at the gig was Jewish,
>and he objected to this choice because it is in fact the Wedding March
>from Wagner's opera "Lohengrin". I had to point out to him that
>he and I were probably the only people there who knew that, so just
>play the damn tune and make the wedding party happy.
>GM
Just about the best yet on this thread!
Harry
Steve Smith
George Traynor wrote:
> >2. wagner was a jew-hating maggot who should have been skinned alive to
> >show the world what kind of treatment jew-hating maggots deserve
>
> Well that's all probably true, but unfortunately you're a hundred years too
> late. There's not a whole lot you can do about him now.
This remark and general sentiment does kind of cast an odd new perspective on a new
Uri Caine disc that's out everywhere but in the U.S. (we'll be seeing it sometime in
the new year), "Wagner e Venezia" on Winter & Winter, in which the pianist sets
several of Wagner's greatest hits for piano, string quartet and accordion. Wasn't
there some discussion of Caine accentuating the Jewish element of Mahler in his disc
of that composer's work on the same label? In this case I wonder what the results
sound like... obviously there would have been no Jewish element to bring out, but
setting the work in the style of a Venetian cafe orchestra is provocative in its own
right -- the connection is purportedly Wagner's own exile in Venice in 1858, his
love of the area and the fact that some of his music was actually composed there.
Anyone heard this and care to comment?
Steve Smith
ssmi...@sprynet.com
John Monroe
On 8 Dec 1997, Simon Weil wrote:
> For sure "Tristan and Isolde" is remarkable - For some the most romantic piece
> of music *ever*.
Yes. Maybe because of the romance angle (there are places where "Tristan"
mimics sex as accurately as nearly any music I've ever heard, except
maybe Mingus' "Black Saint"), it appeals to me a lot more than the
"Ring," which gets a bit Teutonic for my taste.
> The "Liebestod" is in the middle of the opera (Act 2
> Scene 2).
You're mistaken here. The "Liebestod" (literally "Love-Death") is the
climactic moment of the opera, which comes at the very end, when Isolde
sings a long aria, and then dies of her love for the recently-deceased
Tristan. I'm not sure how you arrived at Act 2, Scene 2. Orchestras
often perform an instrumental version of the "Liebestod" as the last
movement of a suite which includes the preludes to Acts one and three.
> I'm not an expert on Nietzsche, but as far as I know Nietzsche only refers to
> Tristan in section 21 (i.e near the end) of "The Birth of Tragedy from the
> Spirit of Music". I also have the impression that Wagner's philosophical ideas,
> rather than his music, were a jumping off point for "The Birth..."
This point is debatable. My assertion that "The Birth" was inspired by
"Tristan" was perhaps oversimplifying things a bit. It's certainly true
(according to available biographical information) that Nietzsche's first
encounter with Wagner was through a piano reduction of "Tristan und
Isolde", which he obtained in about 1861, and studied quite closely. This
later moved him to become friendly with Wagner himself (beginning around
1868). Nietzsche published his essay in 1872. So, when you talk about
a "jumping-off point", it depends where you place the beginning, and which
way you want to read Nietzsche's rather slippery essay.
My contention would be that, in the end, Nietzsche's intellectual roots
(like Wagner's, actually) were in Schopenhauer, and in classical philology
(which he stood on its head in "Birth"), not so much in Wagner's theories.
What Wagner's *music* (Tristan in particular) did was provide Nietzsche
with a kind of ideal example of the new realms of experience to which a
"modern" work of art could give access.
At this point, though, I think I'm beginning to stray too far off topic
(perhaps I've even gotten a bit, gasp, pedantic -- not difficult for a
grad student).
So I end with a wink, and, as I go down beneath the undertow of argument,
I make a helpless gesture towards Mr. Getz, whose brilliant, totally
non-Wagnerian tenor playing is somehow the root of this entire thread.
John Monroe.
Simon Weil
John Monroe wrote:
>> The "Liebestod" is in the middle of the opera (Act 2
>> Scene 2).
>
>You're mistaken here. The "Liebestod" (literally "Love-Death") is the
>climactic moment of the opera, which comes at the very end, when Isolde
>sings a long aria, and then dies of her love for the recently-deceased
>Tristan. I'm not sure how you arrived at Act 2, Scene 2. Orchestras
>often perform an instrumental version of the "Liebestod" as the last
>movement of a suite which includes the preludes to Acts one and three.
Act 2 (whereLove is persistently linked with Death).
>So I end with a wink, and, as I go down beneath the undertow of argument,
>I make a helpless gesture towards Mr. Getz, whose brilliant, totally
>non-Wagnerian tenor playing is somehow the root of this entire thread.
>
'Nuff said.
Simon Weil
tomb...@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu
In article <3489AD...@postit.com> dont...@postit.com writes:
>
>2. wagner was a jew-hating maggot who should have been skinned alive to
>show the world what kind of treatment jew-hating maggots deserve
I'm inclined to let people hate anyone they want, as long as
they don't go around skinning them alive. Start down that
slope, and next thing you know they're skinning people who
hate people who hate jews.
Jan Johannsen
>Marc Sabatella wrote:
>>
>> And since no one has bothered to point this out, I figured I'd observe
>> his lasting claim to fame: the tune used as a bridal march in 99% of
>> weddings (you know, "here comes the bride").
>There are actually two wedding "marches," "Here comes the bride" and the
>one that's used after the ceremony as the newlyweds make their way up
>the aisle. I thought the recessional was the piece that was Wagner's and
>"Here comes etc." was by Schubert or someone else.
No, "here comes the bride" is Wagner, the other one is by
Mendelsohn-Bartholdy, from the music for Shakespeare's
"Midsummernight's Dream" (is that the proper english title?) ,
and there it is indeed used in the wedding scene!
Jan
JFR
In <3487B4...@bala.net> arnie svetz <" arnsv"@bala.net> writes:
>
>Richard Wagner <<<<<<<Considered by many to be one of the
>> great composers of all time, but also a notorious anti-Semite--his
music
>> was a favorite of Hitler's >>>>>>>>>>>>
>
> but I am one of those that beleives that
>Wagner has done pretty much all you can do with tonal music. After him
>nevertheless interesting in a very superficial way. It appeals to
fringe
>pop fans looking for something better but lacking the perceptual
skills
>to understand anything requiring more than a 5 minute attention span.
A
>John Coltrane composition where he plays for 20 minutes ad nauseum on
>and on repeating himself profusely and boring the hell out of prople
>with ears and memory is ample proof of that. Wagner's music is
>architecture and it will last to influence the future. Coltrane and
>Davis, Miles that is, will be just so much dust on shelves and that is
>all that their influence will generate in the future. Of that I am
>certain.
>
>By the way how do you prove to the person whose question you are
>answering that Wagner was a notorious Anti-semite ? What information
are
>you using to formulate this notion. This inquiring mind is waiting
with
>baited breath to hear this explanation.
>
>
>Arnie
Go bait your line elsewhere. Your jazz vs. classical comparison is
pretty lame and inappropriate.
tomb...@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu
In article <19971208231...@ladder01.news.aol.com> simo...@aol.com (Simon Weil) writes:
>John Monroe wrote:
>>>>>>If we're talking about cool Wagner, it'd be hard to overlook "Tristan und
>Isolde" (especially the famous "Liebestod", which comes at the very end). It's
>pretty amazing music - - it actually provided Nietzsche with the jumping off
>Spirit of Music."<<<<<
>
>For sure "Tristan and Isolde" is remarkable - For some the most romantic piece
>I'm not an expert on Nietzsche, but as far as I know Nietzsche only refers to
>Tristan in section 21 (i.e near the end) of "The Birth of Tragedy from the
>Spirit of Music". I also have the impression that Wagner's philosophical ideas,
>rather than his music, were a jumping off point for "The Birth..."
Now that's some serious makeout music. The harmony never resolves at all
throughout the piece, until the final chord.
JFR
In <66bi6f$kdp$1...@pigpen.csrlink.net> mjp...@csrlink.net (Mark Polis)
writes:
>
nevertheless interesting in a very superficial way. It appeals to
>fringe
>
pop fans looking for something better but lacking the perceptual
>skills
>
to understand anything requiring more than a 5 minute attention span.
>A
>
John Coltrane composition where he plays for 20 minutes ad nauseum on
>
and on repeating himself profusely and boring the hell out of prople
>
with ears and memory is ample proof of that. Wagner's music is
>
architecture and it will last to influence the future. Coltrane and
>
Davis, Miles that is, will be just so much dust on shelves and that
>is
>
all that their influence will generate in the future. Of that I am
>
certain.
>
>
By the way how do you prove to the person whose question you are
>
answering that Wagner was a notorious Anti-semite ? What information
>are
>
you using to formulate this notion. This inquiring mind is waiting
>with
>
baited breath to hear this explanation.
>
>
>
Arnie
>
>
>as this one by Arnie Svetz. A post which denigrates jazz within the
>RMB newsgroup could simply be a troll to bait flamers, or it could
>represent the bleatings of one who sincerely speaks with the authority
>of the ignorant. I tend to believe that the latter situation applies,
>and that Mr. Svetz somehow perceives that he will bestow jazz
>aficionados the opportunity to bask in the aura of his cerebral
>quintessence. Either way, Mr. Svetz is to be pitied.
>
>--
>
>
No,Arnie, I can't read into
your real intentions by these electrons (bait vs. true opinion or some
combo of both). All I can say is that I have a rather different view
of classical and jazz music.
Classical-classical is mostly background music to my ears and overly
composed and jazz is composed in the moment. To me, jazz is about
freedom, newer and more rewarding harmonically, rhythmically and
melodically and classical is rendered to now be nice background stuff,
IMHO. Things have changed a lot, but some of us can't keep up with
those changes.
I do like some of the 20th century "classical" (what is a better term
for this?) and will explore that some more and also realize that it is
important to understand the importance of the classic classical stuff
for overall musical growth.
John R.
humphrey bogart
TomC wrote:
> The occasional moron makes life interesting. But when they fly their "I'm
> ignorant" flags, it's a bit much. Dissing Miles and Trane is one thing. But
> Wagner as the be-all and end-all of tonal music? You wanna share some of
> that herb your smoking?
>
> TomC
>
> arnie svetz <" arnsv"@bala.net> > wrote in message
> <3487B4...@bala.net>...
> >Wagner is not only one of my favorite composers
> > but I am one of those that beleives that
> >Wagner has done pretty much all you can do with tonal music. After him
> >there is not much left.
yeah, before he slinked back off to his teutonic rhythms, i wanted to ask if
wagner had
a kick ass drummer :-)
Bernie T
>
> x-no-archive:yes
> To reply remove NOSPAM
>
Web site address is wrong---sorry about that. It should be:
Colonel Mortimer
it's a repeated theme or musical phrase, in this context.
like, every time a specific character appears, his theme or a
re-interpretation of it would be in the score....shit like that he was
good at. he was still a jew-hating maggot though, leitmotifs and all.
later,
cm
JFR
In <3489AD...@postit.com> Colonel Mortimer <dont...@postit.com>
writes:
>
>folks? are you there?
>
>1. wagner's forte (to me) was his mastery of the leitmotif as a
>compositional device
What's a leitmotif?
Chuck Nessa
Why didn't these 2 ignorant posts cancel each other out, so my blood didn't
have to boil? I don't know which one pisses me of the most!
CN
JFR wrote:
> >o-----«Ť Mark Polis Ť mjp...@csrlink.net Ť»-----o
tomb...@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu
Jew-hating maggot, but where would film composers be without
that leitmotif schtick?
Mark Polis
Chuck Nessa <cne...@earthlink.net> wrote:
¤Why didn't these 2 ignorant posts cancel each other out, so my blood
didn't
¤have to boil? I don't know which one pisses me of the most!
¤CN
You quoted THREE posts, pal - so which two make your blood boil?
Pascal Ferret
Does anybody know where I could find a copy of "The Eye of Jazz" by
Herman Leonard (published by Viking Pr on November 1989; ISBN:
0670827711)?
Thank you,
Pascal
Le Jazz
On Thu, 18 Dec 1997 15:42:56 +1100, Pascal Ferret <peo...@zip.com.au> wrote:
>Does anybody know where I could find a copy of "The Eye of Jazz" by
>Herman Leonard (published by Viking Pr on November 1989; ISBN:
>0670827711)?
"Availability: This title is out of print, but if you place an order we may be able to find you a
used copy within 1-3 months"
This is the answer you get from Amazon (http://www.amazon.com)
Alain Le Roux - Le Jazz
http://lejazz.simplenet.com