Nicholas Payton on why jazz isn't cool anymore

[zepa]

http://nicholaspayton.wordpress.com/2011/11/27/on-why-jazz-isnt-cool-anymore/

[danstearns]

On Dec 2, 12:53 am, zepa <zepa.pi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> http://nicholaspayton.wordpress.com/2011/11/27/on-why-jazz-isnt-cool-...

woooah..........

[thomas]

On Dec 1, 6:53 pm, zepa <zepa.pi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> http://nicholaspayton.wordpress.com/2011/11/27/on-why-jazz-isnt-cool-...

Who thinks of what they’ll name the baby while they’re fucking?

Etc. He's quite the aphorist.

[335]

On Dec 1, 6:25 pm, danstearns <daniel_anthony_stea...@yahoo.com>
wrote:

> On Dec 2, 12:53 am, zepa <zepa.pi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >http://nicholaspayton.wordpress.com/2011/11/27/on-why-jazz-isnt-cool-...
>
> woooah..........

a few highlights....

Jazz ain’t cool, it’s cold, like necrophilia.

Stop fucking the dead and embrace the living.

Jazz worries way too much about itself for it to be cool.

Jazz died in 1959.

[Steven Bornfeld]

On 12/1/2011 6:53 PM, zepa wrote:
>
>
> http://nicholaspayton.wordpress.com/2011/11/27/on-why-jazz-isnt-cool-anymore/


What isn't cool is my finger is sore from scrolling.

Steve

[terrasbeest]

On Dec 2, 12:53 am, zepa <zepa.pi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> http://nicholaspayton.wordpress.com/2011/11/27/on-why-jazz-isnt-cool-...

So What........

[Graham]

Next time I go to see a jazz gig, I will tell my colleagues I am going
to a concert of 'Postmodern New Orleans music'. That will impress the
hell out of them.

[zepa]

Also, based on Nicholas text, I assume he will not be in "jazz"
festivals
anymore....Only "Postmodern New Orleans music" festivals, if they
exist. :-)
Actually, I wonder if he was speaking seriously.
Before the title his blog says: "On meditation and taking a s
%*#t". :-)

ZP

[rakman]

On Dec 1, 11:53 pm, zepa <zepa.pi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> http://nicholaspayton.wordpress.com/2011/11/27/on-why-jazz-isnt-cool-...

Jazz is cool. they keep playing it over the
speakers in Starbucks.

Talking about post-modern New Orleans music and not
mentioning Lil Wayne is a sign that dude has plenty
of labels/rules and boundaries of his own.

Jazz will still be alive long after this 1959-obsessed
old chap is dead :)

[Al]

So... we're not doing Stonehenge tonight???

[Graham]

I have re-christened my guitar a Postmodern New Orleans music guitar,
but the damn thing still insists on playing jazz. Most annoying.

[Gerry]

On 2011-12-02 05:55:07 -0800, rakman said:

> On Dec 1, 11:53 pm, zepa <zepa.pi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> http://nicholaspayton.wordpress.com/2011/11/27/on-why-jazz-isnt-cool-...
>
> Jazz is cool. they keep playing it over the
> speakers in Starbucks.

Is that what their music is? I make my own coffee, it saves on gas and
I can play my own music.

> Talking about post-modern New Orleans music and not
> mentioning Lil Wayne is a sign that dude has plenty
> of labels/rules and boundaries of his own.

Perhaps "post-apocolyptic" would be better.

> Jazz will still be alive long after this 1959-obsessed
> old chap is dead :)

1959 was a great year, but I've always thought Brubeck's "Time Out" was
the low-water mark of the period. I think 1956 was likely the best
year ever. Anyway, 1963 was the worst, though we could hardly know it
then.

I thought his article was funny in an addle-brained sing-songy way.
--
Where words fail, music speaks. -- Hans Christian Anderson

[John Albin]

On Dec 1, 6:53 pm, zepa <zepa.pi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> http://nicholaspayton.wordpress.com/2011/11/27/on-why-jazz-isnt-cool-...

I think he misread the rules to the Haiku contest.

John

[Bill Williams]

Too busy to respond right now - got some blocks of silence urgently needing to be moved around.

BW

[Joe Finn]

"335" <335p...@gmail.com> wrote

>a few highlights....

>Jazz ain’t cool, it’s cold, like necrophilia.

>Stop fucking the dead and embrace the living.

>Jazz worries way too much about itself for it to be cool.

>Jazz died in 1959.

His playing is as profound as his comments are preposterous. This perplexing
paradox pains people like me. ...joe

--
Visit me on the web www.JoeFinn.net
Or say hello via Facebook:
http://www.facebook.com/?ref=home#!/?ref=home

[Jonathan (not from Cleveland)]

On Dec 2, 9:46 am, Gerry <addr...@domain.com> wrote:

> 1959 was a great year, but I've always thought Brubeck's "Time Out" was
> the low-water mark of the period.

Are you saying you don't like "Take Five"
?

[pmfan57]

On Dec 1, 6:53 pm, zepa <zepa.pi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> http://nicholaspayton.wordpress.com/2011/11/27/on-why-jazz-isnt-cool-...

Read some of his other blogs, which might be considered more
controversial than this one.

[Joe Finn]

"pmfan57" <jwra...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:ac913954-8639-4b58...@j10g2000vbe.googlegroups.com...

People will put the damnedest things online. I continue to believe that
there is a tremendous level of naivety about this. The archive appears to be
eternal so you can never deny that you wrote what you wrote. Payton would do
well to exercise a little restraint. His remarks do not reflect well on him
and I will certainly think twice before buying anything he produces.
.....joe

[335]

On Dec 2, 12:22 pm, "Joe Finn" <J...@JoeFinn.net> wrote:
> "pmfan57" <jwrag...@aol.com> wrote in message

...saw NP perform awhile back with the Blue Note band. He played great
and it sounded a lot like jazz to me.

[tom walls]

On Dec 1, 6:53 pm, zepa <zepa.pi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> http://nicholaspayton.wordpress.com/2011/11/27/on-why-jazz-isnt-cool-...

Sorry to hear it's no longer cool. I guess I'm out.

[danstearns]

i would tend to agree that it's wayyyy over-the-top on purpose
but he's definitely trying to make a point he believes in as well
Check this:

http://nicholaspayton.wordpress.com/2009/12/14/more-on-the-death-of-jazz/

basically the same thing without the intentional hyperbole.....

[Tim McNamara]

Ah well, apparently when you're desperate for attention you can get it
by saying dumb things. It woks for politicians, wy not for jazz
musicians. My favorite was:

"Jazz was a limited idea to begin with."



This one was pretty good, though:

"It零 where you choose to put silence that makes sound music."

--
Your time is limited. Don't waste it living someone else's life.

Steve Jobs 1955-2011

[Tim McNamara]

In article
<6d75020a-dee9-4ddb...@h3g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>,

335 <335p...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Dec 2, 12:22 pm, "Joe Finn" <J...@JoeFinn.net> wrote:
> > "pmfan57" <jwrag...@aol.com> wrote in message
> >
> > news:ac913954-8639-4b58...@j10g2000vbe.googlegroups.c
> > om... On Dec 1, 6:53 pm, zepa <zepa.pi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > >http://nicholaspayton.wordpress.com/2011/11/27/on-why-jazz-isnt-coo
> > >l-...
> > >>Read some of his other blogs, which might be considered more
> > >>controversial than this one.
> >
> > People will put the damnedest things online. I continue to believe
> > that there is a tremendous level of naivety about this. The archive
> > appears to be eternal so you can never deny that you wrote what you
> > wrote. Payton would do well to exercise a little restraint. His
> > remarks do not reflect well on him and I will certainly think twice
> > before buying anything he produces. .....joe
>

> ...saw NP perform awhile back with the Blue Note band. He played
> great and it sounded a lot like jazz to me.

Postmodern Nawlins, man!

[Tim McNamara]

In article <sh5Cq.5723$2e7....@newsfe18.iad>,

"Al" <a...@dataviewresearch.com> wrote:

> So... we're not doing Stonehenge tonight???

LOL!

[Cozmik Ray]

Al wrote:
> So... we're not doing Stonehenge tonight???

NO WE'RE NOT GONNA FUCKING DO STONE'ENGE!!!

[Gerry]

Isn't that interesting.

[Gerry]

I couldn't begin to say it loud enough.

[Gerry]

Just re-read the article: No need to worry as there's no mention of you
unless it's "coded".

[ecj]

On Dec 1, 5:53 pm, zepa <zepa.pi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> http://nicholaspayton.wordpress.com/2011/11/27/on-why-jazz-isnt-cool-...

Marvelous musician, terrible writer.

And...really? "A Love Supreme" isn't cool? News to me and about
everyone else on the planet.

[Jonathan (not from Cleveland)]

Wow...
No comment

[Joe Finn]

"335" <335p...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:6d75020a-dee9-4ddb...@h3g2000yqa.googlegroups.com...

Yup. He's been a big fav of mine for years too. That's why I find his
negativity so disconcerting. ...joe

[Gerry]

On 2011-12-02 17:47:31 -0800, Jonathan (not from Cleveland) said:

> On Dec 2, 7:25 pm, Gerry <addr...@domain.com> wrote:
>> On 2011-12-02 07:56:24 -0800, Jonathan (not from Cleveland) said:
>>
>>> On Dec 2, 9:46 am, Gerry <addr...@domain.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> 1959 was a great year, but I've always thought Brubeck's "Time Out" was
>>>> the low-water mark of the period.
>>
>>> Are you saying you don't like "Take Five"
>>> ?
>>
>> I couldn't begin to say it loud enough.
>

> Wow...
> No comment

You said it!
No comment.

[bsuth...@cox.net]

On Dec 1, 4:53 pm, zepa <zepa.pi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> http://nicholaspayton.wordpress.com/2011/11/27/on-why-jazz-isnt-cool-...

Some people are drawn to, and indulge in, terrible shit music simply
because their brains cannot process or synch up to the abstract. They
want a beat and some identity and they don't want extended experiences
in the arts. If you played some jazz or Bach for them, they would
totally dislike it and be bored. Their music might give them some kind
of vulgar high like rap, where they have to identify with some fake
pride of a thug figure as a way of self grasping, when they have no
accomplishments or real purpose for having self-esteem normally. They
completely have no understanding of the god-like enjoyments that come
from being able to understand actual music, much less the best-crafted
music. There is a coarseness, or obscuration that binds them to a more
dualistic reality (the rapper, as an example, is in opposition to the
rest of the world) instead of producing actual music that doesn't
require words and is a whole other dimension of experience beyond self-
fixation. Just a beat, an identity. And that is what is cool these
days. Art being cool? It died in 1959. Parker saw it too. Bebop was
once the popular music but it couldn't last because it was art and
died as a result of R&B in Harlem: beat and identity: silly cloths and
dance; not much has changed since then. Rap can be art, and exist as
art, I'm not saying otherwise. However it shows us what the kids think
is cool these days post 1959: a beat and an identity. Jazz is beyond
that level of simplicity. Zappa saw that too: he said that jazz wasn't
dead, but that jazz smelled bad. Jazz began its death in the 1950s.
Parker knew it. He suffered over it. Shortly thereafter, the rock
players stole the American blues, exported it from to/from England,
and the money makers all conspired to pump low grade music into our
culture. The pop music and entertainment industry was off making big
money. Jazz was primarily American black art, abstract, and elevated
beyond normal pop music, and money makers would never sustain it and
make money unless they sold it to white kids (the market) and that was
not easy; so jazz died as a popular musical form. It took the
marketers years to get white kids to buy black music: R&B, rap,
mostly. Because the pop culture money machine mastered the beat, and
the identity components that sell records. Jazz has nothing to do with
silly clothes, stage dancing, entertaining light shows, or anything
else in pop culture. Jazz exists for us lucky few who can rise above
the norm of shit music. It lives within us. We are blessed to be able
to love it and help it evolve as well as enjoy the music from its era,
the genius artists, and the details of the art form. We are the
fortunate ones. And we have a duty to endure, promulgate jazz.

[danstearns]

little know (geek) fact:

A Love Supreme was paid an ultimate tribute of sorts when it was
spoofed on the old MST3K as "An Evil Supreme" with an additional tip
of the cap to Kurouac's Dr. Sax !

"......that's atonal" <cut to commercial>

Incidentally, i think he's pretty obviously a talented writer, albeit
one who's perhaps a tad egocentric.................
In any event, I wouldn't take it personally, because it's really just
food for thought. That it comes from an insider is interesting as it
suggest, at least using his own logic, that there is a crisis of
confidence under all the bluster and jibes

[Mark Guest]

On Dec 3, 7:19 am, danstearns <daniel_anthony_stea...@yahoo.com>
wrote:

Junk food for thought, IMO

[tom walls]

eh?

[danstearns]

> Junk food for thought, IMO- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Hey fair enough, i'm not expressing an opinion one way or another on
what he's saying btw
but i do find it interesting that it's coming from a solid "insider"
but i do think people are quick to dismiss him as a bad writer, or a
publicity seeker simply because they personally don't like what he's
saying. But i think if you read through some of his other blogs it's
pretty apparent that he's given it some thought.....but they're his
opinions filtered through his personality and IMO worth more than a
cursory dismissal----though in the original post he was indeed
speaking fighting words, and polemic usually takes the place of
discourse at that point

[Jonathan (Cleve)]

On Dec 1, 6:53 pm, zepa <zepa.pi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> http://nicholaspayton.wordpress.com/2011/11/27/on-why-jazz-isnt-cool-...

I read Nicholas Payton's post to mean that too many "jazz" musicians
allow themselves to be defined by a label that not only limits their
music, but also limits the respect and renumeration they're likely to
receive.

I just got back from NYC and spent a couple evenings in the west
village checking out music. The level of musicianship there is
amazing, and any jazz player who hasn't been there should go. It
strikes me, though, that one would be hard pressed to find another
field of endeavor where people with such extraordinary skills are so
poorly compensated. It really saddened me to think of what these
really amazing artists must be earning. I think that's an important
part of Payton's point.

I question whether the label itself is the true culprit, but Payton
also talks about what a mistake it was for jazz to separate itself
from popular music. You can agree or disagree with this from an
aesthetic perspective, but it's hard to argue that this separation
hasn't been disastrous for jazz musicians.

Maybe a post-modern approach to traditional New Orleans music would be
more aesthetically fresh than the post-bop path so many have taken.
Maybe not. However, it sure couldn't do any worse in terms of the
financial sustainability of being a "jazz" musician.

As Payton says, "Jazz is cool only if you don't play it for a living."

[TD]

On Dec 1, 6:53 pm, zepa <zepa.pi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> http://nicholaspayton.wordpress.com/2011/11/27/on-why-jazz-isnt-cool-...

I see a new street being penned down yonders way: Payton Place.

-TD

[Bob R.]

I hear what you're saying. But maybe if enough musicians just play and
develop whatever they feel is musically worthwhile, without worrying
about whether they're referencing "the tradition" (as if there's only
one!) enough, or whether it reflects its "New Orleans roots" enough,
or any of the other zillions of artificial barriers and criteria
people like to set up... maybe someone will just accidentally create
some good music we haven't heard before. And if they do, I don't care
if they call it "jazz" or "Dubuque, Iowa music" or whatever. Because
Nick's right about one thing: I'd rather be a player than a hater.

[guitarannie]

You are one of my favorite people

[mikeo]

as if we aren't already relegated to the back corner couple of rows at
any record store, now where will they put the "postmodern whatever"
section? Oh, i get it, he found a way to distance his music from
KennyG's. brilliant...i think.
but seriously, i found the rant to be a waste of my time but God bless
him for having strong convictions and for standing up for something he
feels strongly about.

[TD]

On Dec 3, 9:46 am, Mark Guest <mark.c.gu...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Junk food for thought, IMO- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

"Jazz is dead like Buddha is dead." What a stretch for a concept.
Therefore, the inverse must be equally true: Jazz is very much alive
like the Buddha is very much alive in each and every one of us, who
can at least blow on Rhythm changes. Yea, Payton is a deep cat. I can
dig it. While I'm at it, I think I'll mosey on over to my Mayan
calender and check out the year 1959 a little closer.

-TD

[ecj]

On Dec 3, 10:03 am, danstearns <daniel_anthony_stea...@yahoo.com>

My comment about his writing had nothing to do with his point, it was
about his writing. His point is dumb enough that I don't even really
feel like it's worth arguing about. Jazz musicians shouldn't have
accepted jazz as a label, but he's cool because he plays 'post-modern
New Orleans music'. Uh...ok.

That piece was painful to read. An endless series of non sequiturs
intended to come off as "deep". What does the phrase, "Jazz, like the
Buddha, is dead," mean? Who knows. It sure makes him sound awfully
full of himself, though.

I didn't even make it to the end of the piece I was so exhausted by
his aimless, rambling declarations. There's an old adage in writing
about "showing, not telling."

[danstearns]

> about "showing, not telling."- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

not my axe to grind......... but if it matters to anyone he has
addressed the hoopla brought on by his blog here:

http://nicholaspayton.wordpress.com/2011/12/02/1319/

[danstearns]

> -TD- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

i'm only responding to this post because i was quoted in it.....imo,
when posting about jazz it is largely whatever it means to that
individual.I really don't have an opinion one way or the other on the
original post except that i found it interesting in that it was coming
from an insider (not a random writer,critic or someone with a musical
axe to grind), and i did take some time to read some of Payton's other
blogs and it's pretty obvious he can write---it's pretty easy to make
someone look cool or like a fool with any one isolated quote,
especially given a point you're trying to make of your own! But at
least he wrote less polemic blogs on the same topic that show that
he's put some thought into it whether you agree with his opinions (or
metaphors) or not

[mikeo]

i just read his bio and found his latest record, a love themed
release, is entitled "Bitches"...how sweet.
Perhaps that is why i've never heard of him before...well that and I
refuse to listen to jazz music recorded after 1959 when it died.
:)

[TD]

On Dec 3, 1:29 pm, danstearns <daniel_anthony_stea...@yahoo.com>

> metaphors) or not- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

I chose only one quote of many. I do not need to worry about the
isolation factor ( I'd rather quote the Bard, "T'is too starved an
argument for my sword"), as his blog is riddled with contradictions
and more than an undercurrent of 'crow-jim'. I do not try to make a
point. I do not need to. In fact, I think he is a good musician, all
told, but he is not a good writer.

-TD

[Greger Hoel]

På Sat, 03 Dec 2011 19:17:27 +0100, skrev ecj <eva...@gmail.com>:

> I didn't even make it to the end of the piece I was so exhausted by
> his aimless, rambling declarations. There's an old adage in writing
> about "showing, not telling."

It's "telling by showing." Otherwise, I agree with you.

--
Sendt med Operas revolusjonerende e-postprogram: http://www.opera.com/mail/

[Tim McNamara]

In article
<dd6d9285-cc5b-4d4e...@p16g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>,

"Jonathan (Cleve)" <jgi...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I question whether the label itself is the true culprit, but Payton
> also talks about what a mistake it was for jazz to separate itself
> from popular music. You can agree or disagree with this from an
> aesthetic perspective, but it's hard to argue that this separation
> hasn't been disastrous for jazz musicians.

Define disastrous.

If you're talking about commerce that is more or less true. Few jazz
musicians have been able to make a "good" living since the end of the
swing era when jazz *was* popular music. The best paid musicians of
that era were making what amounts to rock star money. And yet Miles and
Herbie and some others have found ways to have pretty good economic
success.

Some people point the finger at bebop as the thing that separated jazz
from "popular music." I am not sure that is completely true. The swing
era ran its course to a great extent and was being supplanted for a
variety of reasons and jazz musicians might have found themselves in the
same economic predicament without bebop. Hard to say.

Prohibition had an effect on jazz that was beneficial at least for some
musicians in some places, as was the repeal of Prohibition, but the move
from big bands to small combos put a lot of jazz musicians out of
regular work. The dance circuit was good for jazz musicians in many
places, but the Saturday night dance gigs faded and the ballrooms
closed. Radio, TV, motion pictures, the rise of other types of popular
music, WW II and its aftermath, etc., were all significant competitors
for the public's discretionary money.

The assertion by Payton and others that "jazz is dead" is obvious
foolishness if they mean literally that there is no more jazz being
created. If they mean that jazz is no longer a prominent popular music,
i.e., that it is "dead" commercially then they may have a point. It's
even sillier to try to assign a date of death.

Payton mentioned the Buddha in his rant; if he's read the Buddha's
teachings then he should know that a fundamental tenet of Buddhism
which is impermanence. Everything changes and nothing stays the same.
There are Western parallels to the Buddha's thinking, particularly
Heraclitus who noted that "All things move and nothing remains still"
and "you cannot step twice into the same stream." Jazz isn't dead but
it has changed and will continue to change.

--
Your time is limited. Don't waste it living someone else's life.

Steve Jobs 1955-2011

[campfire]

On Dec 2, 6:04 pm, "Cozmik Ray" <CallMe...@spamalot.com> wrote:
> Al wrote:
> > So... we're not doing Stonehenge tonight???
>
> NO WE'RE NOT GONNA FUCKING DO STONE'ENGE!!!

"I have re-christened my guitar a Postmodern New Orleans music
guitar,
but the damn thing still insists on playing jazz"

I wish mine would!

BTW- Who appointed Nicholas Payton "Minister of cool?" If jazz died in
1959, somebody should bury it. I want to see the autopsy!

[thomas]

On Dec 3, 2:08 pm, mikeo <mikeo...@comcast.net> wrote:
> i just read his bio and found his latest record, a love themed
> release, is entitled "Bitches"...how sweet.

That reminds me of a young man I know who complained to me a month ago
that a showing of the Rufus Thomas set from the Wattstax movie was
racially offensive, but who also thinks that the word "bitch" is not
inherently demeaning to women.

PS: Here's Rufus:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pfSrExqD1L4

[TD]

Loveeeeeeeeeeeeee Rufus! He was the real thing. "Stand right
where'ya're and get them arms a'flappin!" Now there's a quote.


-TD

[thomas]

On Dec 3, 4:35 pm, TD <tonydecap...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > PS: Here's Rufus:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pfSrExqD1L4
>
> Loveeeeeeeeeeeeee Rufus! He was the real thing. "Stand right
> where'ya're and get them arms a'flappin!"  Now there's a quote.

I like: "He may be a brother, but he ain't my brother", which is how a
lot of folks seem to be feeling about Nick lately.

[rakman]

On Dec 3, 5:27 pm, mikeo <mikeo...@comcast.net> wrote:
> as if we aren't already relegated to the back corner couple of rows at
> any record store,

What's a record store?

[Ric]

And he just digs a deeper hole.

[Jonathan (Cleve)]

On Dec 3, 3:37 pm, Tim McNamara <tim...@bitstream.net> wrote:
>
> Define disastrous.


I think we largely agree on these points, Tim, although I would
suggest that Miles and Herbie were at some point playing the most
popular form of "jazz" music since the swing era.

Yes, I was talking about commerce. I wouldn't argue that the idiom is
dead artistically. In many ways it's as vital as ever, but the
economics of jazz is awfully rough on the artists. I would call it
disastrous. And the economics of jazz correlates directly to its
ability to speak to more than a very narrow audience. It's reached the
point where, once an artist gets the "jazz" label attached to him,
there's little he can do to overcome the stigma that goes with it. I
can understand why a guy like Payton finds that situation very
frustrating and is given to ranting about it.

Miles and Herbie did a lot to re-popularize jazz after the swing era
died, or at least they did so following Miles' classic quartet of the
early '60s. The stuff they did in the Bitches Brew era brought a
larger audience to jazz than we've seen since.

Miles talked about how jazz died as a popular idiom when it stopped
being dance music. I think there are lots of artists who bring a lot
to the art form these days. I'm just glad I'm not one of the guys
trying to make a living off it.

[TD]

I give you one thing Mr. Campfire, at least you're not sitting around
yourself.

-TD

[pmfan57]

On Dec 3, 4:35 pm, TD <tonydecap...@gmail.com> wrote:

And he was great on the bagpipes. Oh, no that was a different Rufus.

[Frisbieinstein]

On Dec 2, 7:53 am, zepa <zepa.pi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> http://nicholaspayton.wordpress.com/2011/11/27/on-why-jazz-isnt-cool-...

Bones, give me a chorus of Melancholy Baby.

I'm a doctor, Jim, not a pre-post-NewOrleans musician!

[Frisbieinstein]

"Bones, give me a chorus of Melancholy Baby."

"I'm a doctor Jim, not a post-modern New Orleans musician!"

[bsuth...@cox.net]

On Dec 3, 1:37 pm, Tim McNamara <tim...@bitstream.net> wrote:
> In article
> <dd6d9285-cc5b-4d4e-9d68-b38a4a835...@p16g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>,

Tim, IMO, you nailed it !!! Tim's quote:

"Payton mentioned the Buddha in his rant; if he's read the Buddha's
teachings then he should know that a fundamental tenet of Buddhism
which is impermanence."

This is exactly correct. The Buddha knew that during our current age
that Buddhism would begin its decline and eventually be gone from the
planet. My lama teaches this same premise: that only those with the
karma (cause and effect) that brings them to Buddhism will be able to
gain from its wisdom and nobody will gain when it is gone. The
parallel to jazz is obvious to me. Tibet fell in 1950 and there is
very little Buddhism in India, most was wiped out by the Moslem
invaders. Much like we see today in Afghanistan. The living lamas all
know that Buddhism will soon be gone. The Buddha himself predicted its
decline and extinction; as you said: impermanence is a certainty.

Payton is using the Buddha as a metaphor to represent jazz. That's all
he is saying: those of us fortunate enough to enjoy this precious art
form have become fewer and fewer. The beautiful music of the last
century, Porter, Kern, Rogers, you name it have been replaced by great
talents whose names will not become popular, because good music ain't
cool anymore. I think Payton's rant is painful, because it hurts to
see some truth in it.

[TD]

LOL

[andy-uk]

Imagine how annoyed YOU would be if you spent $15k recording a CD and
someone puts it up on Youtube the next day.

[andy-uk]

On Dec 4, 1:34 pm, andy-uk <andy.uk.j...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Imagine how annoyed YOU would be if you spent $15k recording a CD and
> someone puts it up on Youtube the next day.

oh, and every armchair "jazz" fan criticized it.

[lukejazz]

On Sunday, December 4, 2011 7:34:26 AM UTC-6, andy-uk . wrote:
> Imagine how annoyed YOU would be if you spent $15k recording a CD and
> someone puts it up on Youtube the next day.

Just as a point of discussion - reading that, I think I'd be more mad at myself for spending that amount of money on producing a project if I didn't have the money to lose. IMO funding a CD is a real gamble, and you shouldn't gamble what you can't afford to lose.

Also, making anything public opens it up for criticism. If you don't want to be criticized you'll need to keep things to yourself. Probably anyone who has ever done anything worth doing was criticized for it.

So if that's something that he did (I truly don't know anything about who you're talking about) and he lost on it, I would think he has no one to blame but himself. Things are not what they were in the music biz 20 or even 10, or even 5 years ago.

Luke

[TD]

The thing is, most of the guys I know, along with myself, don't give a
shit about who, what, how, when, where, why, or what is supposed to
be. This includes who did this or did that , lost, gained, fell in and
out of love, or became mad as hell and just couldn't take it anymore
only to jump off a roof. We just keep playing our horn, no matter what
any trend dictates. We don't care about who says jazz is dead, Buddha
is dead, Christ is dead, or who really killed the Kennedys. We don't
care, if there is a ray of truth in the necrophilia and accompanying
expletive blogging rants. All the better. An Oz of truth is a precious
commodity and you know what? Most of us can go with that. It's best to
just dig in and play our axes. Well ain't it?

-TD

[bsuth...@cox.net]

Right on !!!

[andy-uk]

>
> So if that's something that he did (I truly don't know anything about who you're talking about) and he lost on it, I would think he has no one to blame but himself. Things are not what they were in the music biz 20 or even 10, or even 5 years ago.
>
> Luke

I don't know how much he paid for it, but his some of his latest CD is
up on Youtube who then plaster adverts over it and he gets nothing and
you say the biz is not what it was !!

[Joe Finn]

"TD" <tonyde...@gmail.com> wrote

>"Jazz is dead like Buddha is dead." What a stretch for a concept.
>Therefore, the inverse must be equally true: Jazz is very much alive
>like the Buddha is very much alive in each and every one of us, who
>can at least blow on Rhythm changes. Yea, Payton is a deep cat. I can
>dig it. While I'm at it, I think I'll mosey on over to my Mayan
>calender and check out the year 1959 a little closer.

>-TD

1959 was a while ago. Eisenhower was president. To suppose that history came
to some sort of conclusion at that point is simply ludicrous. The political
and economic affairs of the world have continued to go forward. Great
advances in science, engineering, technology, medicine, etc. have been
especially noteworthy but the humanities and the arts have not exactly stood
still. Authors, artists, architects, and actors have continued to produce
works of great significance. Payton would have us believe that music, and
jazz in particular, somehow stands apart from the pageant of world progress
and that somehow there has been a freezing of the creative process and
perhaps of time itself.

Looking at a Mayan calendar certainly can't hurt. ...joe

--
Visit me on the web www.JoeFinn.net
Or say hello via Facebook:
http://www.facebook.com/?ref=home#!/?ref=home

[ecj]

There are more than 350 million practitioners of Buddhism on the
planet right now. It's the fourth largest religion in the world.
It's not going anywhere anytime soon.

If jazz musicians had that many fans we'd be more popular than Hannah
Montana.

[TD]

On Dec 4, 2:01 pm, "Joe Finn" <J...@JoeFinn.net> wrote:
> "TD" <tonydecap...@gmail.com> wrote

Actually, I have decided to mayan my own business.

[Matt Faunce]

On Thursday, December 1, 2011 6:53:46 PM UTC-5, zepa wrote:
> http://nicholaspayton.wordpress.com/2011/11/27/on-why-jazz-isnt-cool-anymore/

To Nicholas Payton,

As a classical musician, I understand your feelings on this issue, albeit from a different angle. When I'm out looking for a gig, I stopped calling myself a "classical guitarist" because too many people associate "classical" with stuffy and uppity which is not the image they want in their establishment. So I call myself a "solo guitarist." Then when I play them some romantic or modern classical music, they like it. The music is cool, the notion of 'classical' isn't.

Both jazz and classical musicians get type-casted, from players as well as promoters and the general public. But should we change the term of the music we play, or fight to expand the term in the general public? I say the latter for the following reason.

Your article brought to mind something I read by a famous mathematician:

"Whenever we pass from that which is simple to that which is complex, we shall
see the necessity of carrying our terms with us and enlarging their meaning, as
we enlarge our own ideas." –– Augustus De Morgan, pg. 37 of 'On the Study and
Difficulty of Mathematics'

Ex., 'divide' means something to us in our simple ideas, ex., 1 divided by 2 = 1/2, but when we pass to the more complex idea, 1 divided by 1/2 = 2, and think "how can you 'divide' an apple and get more than one apple?" we are using an extended meaning of 'divide.' In the expanded idea, the word divide is still used because the process we use to compute the answer is the same old division, but we are no longer dividing 1 like an apple with a knife.

As jazz evolved, because it stayed rooted in the tradition, we still call it jazz. This is natural to language. Terms evolve with their subjects. Some terms are unfortunate, like 'Greenland' and 'Iceland', and 'Indian' (for Native American) etc., but those are born from mistakes.

Yeah, some people use labels to exploit ideas, but given how other words are expanded I think it's better to expand the word 'jazz' than try to render it to the past. I think the best approach is to make 'jazz' cool. Hell, you more than anybody, with your trumpet anyway, are doing just that! 'Baroque' was a term meant to insult the music of it's day! But Bach, Handel, Scarlatti, et al, marched on showing the world what this music, call it what you want, is really all about.

Matt

[Gerry]

On 2011-12-04 15:47:17 -0800, ecj quoted:

>> Payton is using the Buddha as a metaphor to represent jazz. That's all
>> he is saying: those of us fortunate enough to enjoy this precious art
>> form have become fewer and fewer.

"Enjoy"? We have no way of calculating that. Only how many people
"buy" it and the internet has screwed that number up forever as well. I
heard a guy comment to his crew about the piped music in a sushi bar.
It was some 50's-era Blue Note thing. I doubt that appreciation would
be easily tracked.

>> The beautiful music of the last
>> century, Porter, Kern, Rogers, you name it have been replaced by great
>> talents whose names will not become popular, because good music ain't
>> cool anymore.

I don't know what Payton is talking about. I know the word "cool" can
be used any number of different ways, and even when used with the same
intention means different things to folk based on their age group,
background culture etc. In the US we tend to recycle antiques and so
the artifacts of previous times regain cool endlessly in clothing and
related styles. "Mad Men" apparently recycled plenty of that. Rod
Stewart recorded some very successful "American Songbook" albums, as
have many artists in the past 15 years. I figure that is "popularity".

Regardless of the which "cool" we're talking about, good music can
always at least be assumed to be good. People usually prefer things
that are good over those that are bad.

Payton didn't address things specifically enough for me, but I'm sure
they sum up his views just the way he liked. There are many thousands
of others whose opinions count for more with me, because with many of
them they can make their thoughts understood.

>> I think Payton's rant is painful, because it hurts to see some truth in it.

We find both pain and truth where we find it, which frequently isn't
where others find it.

> There are more than 350 million practitioners of Buddhism on the
> planet right now. It's the fourth largest religion in the world.
> It's not going anywhere anytime soon.

Belief systems and the "practice" of them are often open to
interpretation as well. There are many "Christians" in the US and a
sizable proportion of them aren't practitioners of the religion other
than checking a box on a form. Or perhaps occasionally fearing they
are being punished by a deity for unknown reason, just as their
forbears from 10 thousand years ago.

> If jazz musicians had that many fans we'd be more popular than Hannah Montana.

If all musics combined had that many fans it would be a very different
planet. I wonder how many of the 350 million have ever bought a
recording of anything. Or how many of them can read, or own a TV.

I think it's a safe assumption that of the 350 million people
professiong Buddhism as their religion of choice that many of them have
never had any experience with jazz and likely never will.
--
Where words fail, music speaks. -- Hans Christian Anderson

[Gerry]

On 2011-12-04 16:05:18 -0800, Matt Faunce said:

> On Thursday, December 1, 2011 6:53:46 PM UTC-5, zepa wrote:
>> http://nicholaspayton.wordpress.com/2011/11/27/on-why-jazz-isnt-cool-anymore/
>
> To Nicholas Payton,
>
> As a classical musician, I understand your feelings on this issue,
> albeit from a different angle. When I'm out looking for a gig, I
> stopped calling myself a "classical guitarist" because too many people
> associate "classical" with stuffy and uppity which is not the image
> they want in their establishment. So I call myself a "solo guitarist."
> Then when I play them some romantic or modern classical music, they
> like it. The music is cool, the notion of 'classical' isn't.

For some people this is true, and for others this is false. Words have
different meanings for different people and even these meanings are in
constant flux. Including "cool", "classical", "liberal", "sex" and
"food". It's really quite amazing. You know that pizza is now a
vegetable...

But there's no second guessing this: Using a new phrase is an excellent
idea before it is continuously torqued for one task as well as that
task's corruption. A "solo guitarist" isn't open to any
interpretation: It is a single person playing a guitar. Then you only
have to worry about the people who think a solo performer is dull or
implies the presence of a crummy drum machine, or perhaps they don't
like "guitar music" because that means either Lightning Hopkins or
James Taylor and they don't like those two guys.

What does cool mean in your context? Popular? Or a cultural beckoning
indicating novelty or excitement? If somebody plays something different
a listener might say, "Wow, that's cool" despite the fact that they've
never heard anything like it. Others might say "those shoes aren't
'cool' anymore" implying general popularity.

I don't know which one Payton intended to mean, if you had an intention.

> Hell, you more than anybody, with your trumpet anyway, are doing just
> that! 'Baroque' was a term meant to insult the music of it's day! But
> Bach, Handel, Scarlatti, et al, marched on showing the world what this
> music, call it what you want, is really all about.

I don't think a musician makes a style beckon an audience. I think he
makes his/her own statement and that intrigues or it does not. I've
heard many people say that don't like country but then admit that they
like Bob Wills or Hank Williams.

Same with jazz: They say they don't like it, but when played jumping
cut of early Count Basie or an uptempo tune by Shorty Rogers from the
mid-50's they say they like it and would like to hear more. I haven't
been able to narrow down why it is that they instead associate the term
"jazz" with a geriatric version of "Satin Doll" played at a nursing
home, banjo music from the county fair, or Free Jazz as primal therapy
for the performer only.

I think mostly people hear the word "jazz" and it's coolness/hotness
has to do with the fact that it means "not dance music" or "not music
with lyrics" or "antique/historic music" or "Black music" or something
else. It's these assumptions that are the root of coolness/hotness of
jazz, I believe.

[butle...@hotmail.com]

Maybe Nicholas Payton is being ironic using the term 'postmodern',
which has come to mean 'intellectual nonsense'. Here's a good article
by Richard Dawkins on the subject:
http://www.physics.nyu.edu/faculty/sokal/dawkins.html

[Tim McNamara]

In article
<8ad13061-46ef-4083...@d10g2000vbf.googlegroups.com>,

andy-uk <andy.u...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Imagine how annoyed YOU would be if you spent $15k recording a CD and
> someone puts it up on Youtube the next day.

And how happy you might be the day after that if 10,000 people saw the
clip, liked it and bought the CD or digital copies.

By the time Jerry Garcia died, the Grateful Dead were grossing nearly
$50 million a year after a couple of decades of aiding and abetting the
audience in taping concerts and trading the tapes. They did "everything
wrong" in protecting their "intellectual property" and yet prospered.

Sometimes there is a bigger picture, sometimes not.

[Tim McNamara]

In article
<32051509.48.1323013319480.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@yqnq37>,

Read "Rework" by Jason Fried and David Heinemeier Hansson about
entrepreneurship. It's not gospel but it's interesting and there are a
lot of very valid points that can be applied to musicians trying to make
a living (and, to be fair, a number of points that don't apply).

[Tim McNamara]

In article
<db4526d7-da7a-49b8...@p9g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>,

And YouTube has a system for any copyright holder to have the video
taken down. If having an unauthorized clip of YouTube is a problem, do
something about it. Bitching on a blog about it doesn't help an effin'
thing.

[Tim McNamara]

In article
<ec643b53-3c1f-4011...@b32g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>,

TD <tonyde...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Dec 4, 2:01 pm, "Joe Finn" <J...@JoeFinn.net> wrote:
> > "TD" <tonydecap...@gmail.com> wrote
> >
> > >"Jazz is dead like Buddha is dead." What a stretch for a concept.
> > >Therefore, the inverse must be equally true: Jazz is very much
> > >alive like the Buddha is very much alive in each and every one of
> > >us, who can at least blow on Rhythm changes. Yea, Payton is a deep
> > >cat. I can dig it. While I'm at it, I think I'll mosey on over to
> > >my Mayan calender and check out the year 1959 a little closer. -TD
> >
> > 1959 was a while ago. Eisenhower was president. To suppose that
> > history came to some sort of conclusion at that point is simply
> > ludicrous. The political and economic affairs of the world have
> > continued to go forward. Great advances in science, engineering,
> > technology, medicine, etc. have been especially noteworthy but the
> > humanities and the arts have not exactly stood still. Authors,
> > artists, architects, and actors have continued to produce works of
> > great significance. Payton would have us believe that music, and
> > jazz in particular, somehow stands apart from the pageant of world
> > progress and that somehow there has been a freezing of the creative
> > process and perhaps of time itself.
> >
> > Looking at a Mayan calendar certainly can't hurt.     ...joe
>

> Actually, I have decided to mayan my own business.

There's a time for that.

[Gerry]

On 2011-12-04 16:40:41 -0800, butle...@hotmail.com said:

> Maybe Nicholas Payton is being ironic using the term 'postmodern',
> which has come to mean 'intellectual nonsense'.

It has in much the same way that "conservative", "liberal", "pro-life"
and "politically correct" have come to mean intellectual nonsense.
That is, when it is used by idiots to accomplish nonsense.

> Here's a good article by Richard Dawkins on the subject:
> http://www.physics.nyu.edu/faculty/sokal/dawkins.html

I should provide a link to noise about "politically correct" for all
those who lampoon the concept while adhering rigidly to their own
version of it.

There is no argument that there are boatloads of jackass academics who
lard their essays with incomprehensible gibberish. The word
"post-modern" doesn't really qualify.

Last summer I read a lot about modernism and the 20's. In the reading
list where these:

"Making Music Modern: New York in the 1920's" by Carol J. Oja. (It's
not about jazz, but about Varese, Carl Ruggles, Henry Cowell, Virgil
Thompson and music of that persuasion.)

"New World Coming: The 1920's and the Making of Modern America" by
Nathan Miller.

"The First Moderns: Profiles in the Origins of 20th Century Thought"
by William R. Everdell.

Throughout these books I've come to the conclusion that only an
academic can tell you what "modernism" is and is not. And even better:
ask two academics and then go get popcorn and a tall drink and watch
the fur fly.

Everdell in the introduction to "First Moderns" spends no small amount
of time whittling out the turf he intends to call Modernism and what he
rejects. A few interesting thoughts from this:

"The insistence on a supra-ethnic community of thought and of art is
one of the positions often defined as Modernism."

Quoting Mark Stephens: "One of the great achievements of Modernism was
to stress the value of art as art, free from its encumbering
baggage--the overstuffed rooms, the money, the snobbery."

"With a capital letter, Modern, like postmodern, becomes a term
applying mostly to high or intellectual culture."

I've highlighted half the introduction, but my take-away is that Modern
itself as a phase/period/philosophy is seemingly nuanced into sometimes
contradictory categories. I've found "post-modern" to be the same
thing. Particularly when you can't define Modernism in a highly
specific way, defining what supersedes it.

I don't think the word is devoid of meaning. I think it's as simple
and direct and universally understood as the word "jazz".

[TD]

On Dec 4, 9:05 pm, Gerry <addr...@domain.com> wrote:

Ironically, the word is old (circa late 1800's) and first used
concerning artwork departing from French Impressionism. To me, it
seems a default term used to conveniently challenge any established
('tangible') norm. It is a Bohemian type word used as if to say "Up
yours, I no longer adhere to that...I have a hipper way" In actuality,
I think it flies better in architecture than in music, and we have
seen this.

-TD

[RickH]

On Dec 1, 5:53 pm, zepa <zepa.pi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> http://nicholaspayton.wordpress.com/2011/11/27/on-why-jazz-isnt-cool-...

Strange article, New Orleans is probably the last place left in the US
where jazz and the "common man" still intermingle regularly and jazz
is "useful", out there on the streets, lots of dancers, a culture, a
way of life, people with an actual fun use for jazz. He says:

"Jazz separated itself from American popular music.
Big mistake."

The above two lines in his "poem" are the only two that really make
any sense, and just about sum it up for a lot of people.

[lukejazz]

I hear you TD. I have a good friend who is a trumpet instructor and when ever discussions get into this kind of realm he'll come out with a "let's just play". I wholeheartedly agree with him. That's one of the reasons I exist on this spinning rock - to make music. Somebody else can sort all this shit out later if they want to. It can become too distracting if you let it. I'll think I'll go practice now.

Luke B

[Graham]

From his latest blog it seems he is now saying that is it just the
word 'jazz' he is complaining about, not the music. He would prefer
to call it 'black american music'.

[tom walls]

I'm going to start calling apples "Tom's delicious fruit".

[TD]

On Dec 5, 8:00 am, "Bob R." <brgee...@ec.rr.com> wrote:
> On Dec 5, 7:41 am, Graham <graham...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
>

> He seems preoccupied with matters of the toilet, and that's fitting:
> all that s**t must need someplace to go.

Good name for some one's new CD, "Toiletries in Motion."

-TD

[TD]

On Dec 5, 7:41 am, Graham <graham...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:

There lies his otherwise partially hidden indicant. I prefer to pay
homage rather than to segregate.

-TD

[campfire]

On Dec 3, 8:36 pm, TD <tonydecap...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Dec 3, 3:59 pm, campfire <lawrc...@msn.com> wrote:
>
> > On Dec 2, 6:04 pm, "Cozmik Ray" <CallMe...@spamalot.com> wrote:
>
> > > Al wrote:
> > > > So... we're not doing Stonehenge tonight???
>
> > > NO WE'RE NOT GONNA FUCKING DO STONE'ENGE!!!
>
> > "I have re-christened my guitar a Postmodern New Orleans music
> > guitar,
> > but the damn thing still insists on playing jazz"
>
> > I wish mine would!
>
> > BTW- Who appointed Nicholas Payton "Minister of cool?" If jazz died in
> > 1959, somebody should bury it. I want to see the autopsy!
>
> I give you one thing Mr. Campfire, at least you're not sitting around
> yourself.
>
> -TD

Tony,
I read your post and thought it was a little odd, didn't really make
sense to me. I was making my coffee yesterday morning and suddenly I
just started laughing. I'm probably the only one that didn't get it.
{8^D>

[TD]

> {8^D>- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

The it was worth the wait!

[Joe Finn]

"Matt Faunce" <mattf...@gmail.com> wrote

>As jazz evolved, because it stayed rooted in the tradition, we still call
>it jazz. This >is natural to language. Terms evolve with their subjects.
>Some terms are >unfortunate, like 'Greenland' and 'Iceland', and 'Indian'
>(for Native American) etc., >but those are born from mistakes.

>Yeah, some people use labels to exploit ideas, but given how other words
>are >expanded I think it's better to expand the word 'jazz' than try to
>render it to the past. >I think the best approach is to make 'jazz' cool.
>Hell, you more than anybody, with >your trumpet anyway, are doing just
>that! 'Baroque' was a term meant to insult the >music of it's day! But
>Bach, Handel, Scarlatti, et al, marched on showing the world >what this
>music, call it what you want, is really all about.

>Matt

Matt:
Thanks for your insights on this topic. The issue regarding the evolution of
jazz is central to Payton's comments. Today's jazz clearly is not
stylistically the same as what Armstrong and Ellington were doing, but jazz
is still in it's infancy. There are people still alive today who heard Duke
and Pops perform live. There are indeed musicians still around who played
with them. We like to talk about early baroque vs. late baroque, and these
are useful distinctions, but jazz is not yet at that point in it's own
history. Some of these sorts of classifications require the passage of time
before become clearer. ...joe

[thomas]

On Dec 5, 7:41 am, Graham <graham...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:

Uh-oh. I read even further down. What a disturbed individual. I've
lost all interest in checking out his music.

[thomas]

On Dec 5, 7:41 am, Graham <graham...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:

He's going further than that:

"To call the music Jazz is to enslave a music that was meant to be
free. To call our music Jazz, is to call a Black person a Nigger."

And yet it's perfectly fine to title your unmarketable album
"Bitches"?
Clearly we're not discussing a self-reflective thinker.

[ecj]

This is what I was trying to get across earlier. He's a great
musician, but he's also a moron.

[thomas]

On Dec 5, 10:36 am, "Bob R." <brgee...@ec.rr.com> wrote:
>
> > And yet it's perfectly fine to title your unmarketable album
> > "Bitches"?
> > Clearly we're not discussing a self-reflective thinker.
>

> Don't leave out his theories about racial purity...

I didn't read that far down, and I don't think I will. I'm already
slogging through similar racial nonsense by a 1920s musician, John
Powell:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Powell_%28musician%29

[TD]

I mean, "wow." He makes Payton look like Bunny Rabbit from Kaptain
Kangaroo.

-TD

[thomas]

Yeah. It's best for everybody if charismatic racist musicians stay out
of politics.