ftp.xmission.com/2014.06.ftp.xmission.com.tar/ftp.xmission.com/pub/lists/zorn-list/archive/v02.n378

Internet Message Format | 1998-05-26 | 23KB

From: [e-mail] (Zorn List Digest)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Zorn List Digest V2 #378
Reply-To: zorn-list
Sender: [e-mail]
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Precedence: bulk


Zorn List Digest        Wednesday, May 27 1998        Volume 02 : Number 378



In this issue:
-
       Weird Little Boy question
       Re: Feeling = "Anti-Intellectualism"?  (long)
       Re: serial music & why Zorn
       Cool NYC Stuff
       Re: serial music & why Zorn
       Re: serial music & why Zorn
       Re: serial music & why Zorn
       Feeling = "Anti-Intellectualism"?
       Re: serial music & why Zorn
       Terraplane
       Redman/Dixon
       Re: Recent Goodies
       Re: serial music & why Zorn

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 15:36:18 +0200
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Weird Little Boy question

Hello
I know that Weird Little Boy was a special band project spearheaded by
John Zorn and Mike Patton. Music by Chris Cochrane, John Zorn and
members of the Mr. Bungle.

Does anybody own any of that, and if so what does it sound like?

Thanks
Marcin





- -

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 19:24:18 -0400 (EDT)
From: Christopher Hamilton <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Feeling = "Anti-Intellectualism"?  (long)

On Tue, 26 May 1998, Chris Genzel wrote:

>  What possible important information could you get by just looking up to the
>  sky and watching the stars, getting lost in thoughts and appreciating the
>  beauty of a night sky?

I'm too lazy to make the obvious joke about a huge meteor on a collision
course with the Earth.  My point wasn't that you would learn something
from just looking at the stars, but from considering why you like to look
at the stars.

> > I'm regularly surprised by the
> > anti-intellectualism adopted by so many people when it comes to music.

I'm apparently using 'anti-intellectualism' in a nonobvious way.  I mean
by this opposition to self-conscious consideration of something.  Your
explanation here suggests that it was a mistake on my part to imply that
you're anti-intellectual when it comes to music; you're just
anti-intellectual about music appreciation.

>  May I give you an example of why I can't apply certain characteristics
>  (reasons) to music based on which I like or dislike something.

Oddly enough, your example demonstrates my point as well.

>  One of my
>  recent purchases was Ground-Zero's "Revolutionary Pekinese Opera" (thanks to
>  the person on the list who recommended GZ!). I really love this record. If
>  I'd be asked what exactly is so great about it, I'd say it's so chaotic,
>  noisy and full of manic energy that I feel like being high.

Here you've told us something interesting about the Ground Zero record and
about yourself.

>  On the other
>  hand there are the Y.Eye tracks on "Naked City", which ... well, I don't
>  really dislike them, but I also wouldn't mind if they were missing. And why?
>  Because I find them too chaotic and noisy, and Eye's manic energy is some-
>  times getting on my nerves.

Here you've told us something interesting about the Naked City record and
about yourself.

> You see, I can name the same reasons for liking
>  and for disliking something.

And here, to my mind, you've raised an interesting puzzle.  You may be
right that it's not one that can be solved.  (Or that the solution comes
down to saying "I like this one, and I don't like that one.)  I don't
know.  But I don't think it's obvious that it's not worth thinking about.
In any case, my main point was just that thinking and talking about these
sorts of issues isn't pointless.  I remain surprised that so many people
seem to think it is.  Obviously, no one who isn't part of the music
industry has a responsibility to think and talk about them.  Sorry for the
length.

Chris Hamilton


- -

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 18:29:56 PDT
From: "Jeff Schuth" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: serial music & why Zorn

>From [e-mail] Tue May 26 15:46:09 1998
>Received: from default - 153.34.15.126 by email.msn.com with Microsoft
SMTPSVC;
>     Tue, 26 May 1998 15:45:41 -0700
>Message-ID: <000c01bd89c1$9d360ae0$7e0f2299@default>
>From: "Snap" <[e-mail]>
>To: "Jeff Schuth" <[e-mail]>
>Cc: <[e-mail]>
>Subject: Re: serial music & why Zorn
>Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 18:48:45 -0400
>X-Priority: 3
>X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
>X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4
>X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4
>Return-Path: [e-mail]
>
>
>Jeff Shuth wrote:
>
>
>>
>>>>
>>
>    First of all, I don't even own a thesaurus. Secondly, my
grandiloquence
>(ahem - I'm sorry, how about "overtly wordy writing or speaking") is a
way
>of cramming as much information into as brief a space as possible.
Why's
>everything got to be so simple? Verbosity is like an inside-joke or a
>musician's homogeneous dialect based upon preconceptions, much like
Zorn's
>"The Classic Guide to Strategy". Have you considered yet that my
scattergun
>approach to words was a deliberate lampooning of what seems to creep
its way
>onto this list quite often?
>    Epistolary vindications aside, I do feel comfortable knowing that I
>never confuse "your" (possessive determiner) with "you're"
(contraction). So
>much for mellifluity.
>
>You're pal,
>Snap
    I don't think you get my point.  I realize that in an e-mail I may
forget to add an apostraphe. Actually, that letter got sent before I
could even finish it, due to the slip of my finger. I'm not here to
proof read all my work; I have better things to do than try to impress a
group of pseudo-intellects like yourself.  When I sit down and right an
essay however, I am meticulous in detail.  I don't think your being
verbose at all, I just think you sound awkward.  Read any newspaper,
essay or novel and you won't find the author trying to fit every single
12 letter word that they can into the letter.  Zorn doesn't do this
either.  His wording is often even crude.  He swears, slangs and
rambles.  His linear notes do hold a lot of valuable information,
something that your notes lack.
>
>


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

- -

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 21:46:44 -0500 (CDT)
From: Tom Benton <[e-mail]>
Subject: Cool NYC Stuff

The above is what I'm looking for.  As luck would have it I'm going to be
coming up for five days of the NY JazzFest and it occurs to me that I
have nothing planned to do with my daylight hours.  Sites, shops, I'm open
to anything.  Especially the inside scoop from all you native NYCers out
there.

And I would certainly love to meet any Zorn-listers who are going to be
around, so if anybody wants to get together and hang then please get in
touch.

later all,
  Tom


- -

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 23:15:56 EDT
From: Tag Yr It <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: serial music & why Zorn

In a message dated 98-05-26 22:25:31 EDT, you write:

<<    I don't think you get my point.  I realize that in an e-mail I may
 forget to add an apostraphe. Actually, that letter got sent before I
 could even finish it, due to the slip of my finger. I'm not here to
 proof read all my work; I have better things to do than try to impress a
 group of pseudo-intellects like yourself.  When I sit down and right an
 essay however, I am meticulous in detail.  I don't think your being
 verbose at all, I just think you sound awkward.  Read any newspaper,
 essay or novel and you won't find the author trying to fit every single
 12 letter word that they can into the letter.  Zorn doesn't do this
 either.  His wording is often even crude.  He swears, slangs and
 rambles.  His linear notes do hold a lot of valuable information,
 something that your notes lack.
  >>

This grammar is so sad, I'm not even going to attempt to comment on it. But is
there a 6th grader out there who would?

- -

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 21:36:37 -0500
From: Rich Williams <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: serial music & why Zorn

Jeff Schuth wrote:

>     I don't think you get my point.  I realize that in an e-mail I may
> forget to add an apostraphe. Actually, that letter got sent before I
> could even finish it, due to the slip of my finger. I'm not here to
> proof read all my work; I have better things to do than try to impress a
> group of pseudo-intellects like yourself.  When I sit down and right an
> essay however, I am meticulous in detail.  I don't think your being
> verbose at all, I just think you sound awkward.  Read any newspaper,
> essay or novel and you won't find the author trying to fit every single
> 12 letter word that they can into the letter

Umm...Have you considered the possibility that the original post was a
pun?


- -

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 13:56:00 PDT
From: "Jeff Schuth" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: serial music & why Zorn

>>
>    And I myself am not at all surprised by the unerring elitism and
>two-dimensional attempts at aesthetic erudition adopted by those on
this
>list who have the unmitigated propensity to objectify and thus coronate
>their personal system of valuing a medium of art which is wholly
palatial,
>by that I mean pertinent to one's own tastes, and even at times to
one's own
>causality - a sequence of events and fixations in life may lead up to
one's
>preference of a genre over another; an observation as demanded, I know,
but
>entirely arbitrary when all that really might matter to a person is
>gastro-intestinal bliss.
>    Just who the hell do you think your kidding?  Do you always sit and
write an informal response with a thesaurus?  I mean, your not talking
above my level or anything, but the language is not fluent.  Besides, if
you were really that naturally efficient in English, shouldn't your
grammar be perfect?


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

- -

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 22:57:11 +0200
From: [e-mail] (Chris Genzel)
Subject: Feeling = "Anti-Intellectualism"?

 On Sun, 24 May 1998, I wrote:

>>    I don't really care why I like the stuff I like. I just like it, and I'm
>>    feeling very comfortable with this. The "why"s and "how"s are not only
>>    different from person to person, but also for me from piece to piece.
>>    Question: do you like watching the stars? why?

 Mr. Hamilton answered:

>    Trying to answer this question might well teach you something important
> about yourself or the stars or both.

 What possible important information could you get by just looking up to the
 sky and watching the stars, getting lost in thoughts and appreciating the
 beauty of a night sky?

> I'm regularly surprised by the
> anti-intellectualism adopted by so many people when it comes to music.

 Actually, my friends would laugh at the idea of me being
 anti- or non-intellectualistic. :)

 There are two ways of enjoying music: on a intellectual level or on a, say,
 visceral one. The first one has to do with analyzing, the second one with
 feeling. Now tell me, how can you appreciate a ballad when saying "ah, there
 are A chords followed by D chords" etc. instead of feeling the melancholy of
 these chords? I won't say you shouldn't analyze music. I often do it myself,
 but I do it to see what's there in a track, how it works, and not to figure
 out why or why not I like it. I like something just because of it.

 May I give you an example of why I can't apply certain characteristics
 (reasons) to music based on which I like or dislike something. One of my
 recent purchases was Ground-Zero's "Revolutionary Pekinese Opera" (thanks to
 the person on the list who recommended GZ!). I really love this record. If
 I'd be asked what exactly is so great about it, I'd say it's so chaotic,
 noisy and full of manic energy that I feel like being high. On the other
 hand there are the Y.Eye tracks on "Naked City", which ... well, I don't
 really dislike them, but I also wouldn't mind if they were missing. And why?
 Because I find them too chaotic and noisy, and Eye's manic energy is some-
 times getting on my nerves. You see, I can name the same reasons for liking
 and for disliking something. The truth is that Ground-Zero feels right for
 me and the Eye tracks don't. This may be (and certainly is) completely
 different for other people, but that's the whole point.

 And snap wrote to Mr. Hamilton:

>     That you failed to extract from what he had said about his attraction to
> Zorn's recordings shows that your attention is channeled toward some red
> herring of a demagogic ideal - or ideals - with which some of us may be
> unaware (they say age is requisite to wisdom) and therefore unconcerned. For
> Chris Genzel HAS just told us why he likes Zorn's music: FOR
> NON-INTELLECTUAL REASONS. [In tandem with some of his personality traits,
> perhaps, albeit intrinsically, the Vedantic method of defrocking things like
> "science" and "reason"(which has been stood upon its head for quite some
> time now) clearly his way of dispensing with demons of sophistry and
> possibly even enriching his listening pleasure.]

 I guess that this adds to my listening pleasure, because I can surrender to
 the flow of the piece, get lost in its sounds, and I often get a good idea of
 what the musicians/composer wanted to express. Actually, more often than not,
 this leads me to liking most music in one way or another.

 Kind regards,
 - Chris.

 ---------------------------------------------
 *    Chris Genzel --- [e-mail]    *
 * Homepage & Herbie Hancock Discography at: *
 *    http://home.t-online.de/home/stamil/   *
 ---------------------------------------------


- -

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 05:19:53 PDT
From: "Jeff Schuth" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: serial music & why Zorn

>From [e-mail] Tue May 26 20:37:06 1998
>Received: from 204.60.24.189 (brpt-sh4-port189.snet.net
[204.60.24.189])
>    by smtp1 (8.8.8/8.8.8/SNET-bmx-1.1) with SMTP id XAA03257;
>    Tue, 26 May 1998 23:37:03 -0400 (EDT)
>Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
>Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 21:36:37 -0500
>From: Rich Williams <[e-mail]>
>Reply-To: [e-mail]
>Organization: The United States of Amnesia
>X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Macintosh; I; PPC)
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>To: Jeff Schuth <[e-mail]>
>CC: [e-mail]
>Subject: Re: serial music & why Zorn
>References: <[e-mail]>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
>Jeff Schuth wrote:
>
>>     I don't think you get my point.  I realize that in an e-mail I
may
>> forget to add an apostraphe. Actually, that letter got sent before I
>> could even finish it, due to the slip of my finger. I'm not here to
>> proof read all my work; I have better things to do than try to
impress a
>> group of pseudo-intellects like yourself.  When I sit down and right
an
>> essay however, I am meticulous in detail.  I don't think your being
>> verbose at all, I just think you sound awkward.  Read any newspaper,
>> essay or novel and you won't find the author trying to fit every
single
>> 12 letter word that they can into the letter
>
>Umm...Have you considered the possibility that the original post was a
>pun?
>   Yes I have considered that possability.  I also think I was an ass
hole for writing this letter--must have been in a bad mood or something,
sorry
>


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

- -

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 09:43:34 -0400
From: Brian Olewnick <[e-mail]>
Subject: Terraplane

Though I enjoyed Sharp's initial release from this band a couple of
years back, two things nagged at me: the somewhat thin overall group
sound and the often plodding drumwork. Well, these problems have been
rectified.

Caught Terraplane at the Knit last evening and they were ferocious. The
line-up was Sharp (guitar, steel guitar, tenor), Sam Furnace (alto and
baritone), Dave Hofstra (electric bass and tuba) and Sim Cain (drums).
The addition of Furnace is crucial; he and Sharp balance each other
perfectly, both in the tight heads and in the roaring free playing and
he contributes a rich, full sound that the band needed. Cain was
extraordinary, always varying the rhythms (even tossing in a few d 'n' b
licks) and playing with enormous enthusiasm. They stretched things a lot
farther than the disc, expanding the blues form 'til it burst. Wonderful
stuff. I trust they're planning to record.

Brian Olewnick

PS. To forestall anyone asking, I did manage to last three songs into
Eszter Balint's set. The less said, the better.

- -

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 27 May 98 11:41:57 -0300
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Redman/Dixon

Hi Zornheads!
A friend of mine is looking desperately for Joshua Redman's "Captured
Live" (Jazzdoor); is there anybody out there who can give us a clue?

And what about cellist Akua Dixon from Quartette Indigo? Any
information/reviews on her?

Thanks in advance.

- -Hugo, from Argentina

- -

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 13:07:59 -0500
From: Craig Rath <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Recent Goodies

At 03:06 PM 5/26/98 UT, you wrote:

>then you'd probably like Marclay's release
>on ReR, which I forget the title of.


It's called "More Encores", which makes me assume there is an earlier album
called "Encores" which I have never seen.


>There he dedicates each track to a
>particular artist and uses only recordings of that artist.  There's your
>plunderphonics.  It's next on my to get list, but I've heard "Maria
Callas" and
>it's excellent.  Plus, I dig Marclay as the master phono-blaster, and so
maybe
>I'm biased.  In any case, I'd go there.


I second the recommendation.  While I really like "Records" a lot, this one
seems to find its way into the CD player much more often.



- -

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 15:12:45 -0400
From: "Snap" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: serial music & why Zorn

>>
>>Jeff Shuth wrote:
>>
>>
>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>    First of all, I don't even own a thesaurus. Secondly, my
>grandiloquence
>>(ahem - I'm sorry, how about "overtly wordy writing or speaking") is a
>way
>>of cramming as much information into as brief a space as possible.
>Why's
>>everything got to be so simple? Verbosity is like an inside-joke or a
>>musician's homogeneous dialect based upon preconceptions, much like
>Zorn's
>>"The Classic Guide to Strategy". Have you considered yet that my
>scattergun
>>approach to words was a deliberate lampooning of what seems to creep
>its way
>>onto this list quite often?
>>    Epistolary vindications aside, I do feel comfortable knowing that I
>>never confuse "your" (possessive determiner) with "you're"
>(contraction). So
>>much for mellifluity.
>>
>>You're pal,
>>Snap
>    I don't think you get my point.  I realize that in an e-mail I may
>forget to add an apostraphe. Actually, that letter got sent before I
>could even finish it, due to the slip of my finger. I'm not here to
>proof read all my work; I have better things to do than try to impress a
>group of pseudo-intellects like yourself.  When I sit down and right an
>essay however, I am meticulous in detail.  I don't think your being
>verbose at all, I just think you sound awkward.  Read any newspaper,
>essay or novel and you won't find the author trying to fit every single
>12 letter word that they can into the letter.  Zorn doesn't do this
>either.  His wording is often even crude.  He swears, slangs and
>rambles.  His linear notes do hold a lot of valuable information,
>something that your notes lack.
>>
    Christ, don't you realize a joke when you sea one? Why are you Stoic
aestheticians so stern about everything? Sheesh!
    Are you being philologically subtle up their, or are you really that
homophonically challenged? Do my 12-letter words bother you? It's been
awhile since I saw a laconic essay, serious OR frivolous. The first thing
one does when he/she doesn't understand something (like a 12-letter word) is
deplore it, dub it useless and false. In response to my post I have been
called pretentious. Damn straight! Pretentious AND verbose. Bullseye. I've
heard tell by many that these are bad things, whether or not utilized
seriously or jokingly.
    Schopenhaeur had said that music was the "thing in itself", the most
independent of all mediums of art, drawing naught but from its own device,
while painting and literature framed reality and relied upon it for survival
while plagiarizing it, negating it, and sanctifying it simultaneously. But
that's Schopenhaeur. Had he forsaken 12-letter words and played Rainman,
we'd have on our hands a text whose picking-up would induce hernia.
    As for my metaphor of Zorn's "Classic Guide to Strategy", you are WAY of
base. I'm sorry; I dont even see you on the field. In defending my verbosity
(which was all a big intentional joke poking fun at "What Zorn Means to Me,
and Why You Should Listen", a rather good read, I'll admit), I was alluding
to his claim that what he does at times, both on the alto and as a composer,
is based on preconceptions, like the evolution of an inside-joke. It had
absolutely nothing to do with his prose. His prose is fine; but it means
nothing to me, as I am interested in his music, not his sartorial
trailblazings or family tree.
    Now, with the admittingly convoluted post of mine I was not trying to
deride musical exegesis; I happen to find these analytics very interesting,
and yes, very self-revealing. I was just a bit frustrated with always having
to wade my way through interminable self-portraits to get to something
useful, like "who's in town", "recent goodies", and "similiarities between
Zappa and Zorn". The eruption of my parodic volcano, as it were, was not
caused by innocent debates, which was why this list was established - and I
hope they keep on going -, but by intellectual bullying of those not
interested in exegesis by those who seem to monopolize the list with an
average of three to four posts a day. That I singled out Chris Hamilton was
admittingly ruthless, and I apologize.





- -

------------------------------

End of Zorn List Digest V2 #378
*******************************


 To unsubscribe from zorn-list-digest, send an email to
       "[e-mail]"
 with
       "unsubscribe zorn-list-digest"
 in the body of the message.

 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.

 A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
 subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "zorn-list-digest"
 in the commands above with "zorn-list".

 Back issues are available for anonymous FTP from ftp.xmission.com, in
 pub/lists/zorn-list/archive.  These are organized by date.

 Problems? Email the list owner at [e-mail]