> Someone MUST have mentioned this before as a source but just in >case... Greil Marcus' Lipstick Traces has some really fascinating
Just a couple of weeks ago I finally got a copy of the "Lipstick Traces" CD and was pretty blown away, especially since being familiar with about half anyway I didn't realize how much difference the context would make. Too bad it's long out-of-print and not likely to have a US release.
Lang
- -
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 13:51:50 -0300
From: Linares Hugo <hulinare@bemberg.com.ar>
Subject: RE: Han & the Minstrels
> np: tomasz stanko "from the green hill" (thanks to dino saluzzi's
> prominence on this, it sounds delightfully like astor piazzolla meets
> the art ensemble)
>
>
I do agree that Saluzzi sounds delightfully, though I doubt
Piazzolla "doing the sideman thing" as Saluzzi does.
Piazzolla was great, so was his personality.
Anyway, I enjoyed the Stanko recording and specially the violin
player (can't remember her name but her beautifulness is always present...).
> Just a couple of weeks ago I finally got a copy of the "Lipstick Traces" CD
> and was pretty blown away, especially since being familiar with about half
> anyway I didn't realize how much difference the context would make. Too bad
> it's long out-of-print and not likely to have a US release.
>
> Lang
>
> -
>
>
I may have miss this on the list, but what is on the Lipstick Traces CD?
ciao,
- --
Tosh Berman
TamTam Books
http://www.tamtambooks.com
- -
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 12:12:20 -0500 (CDT)
From: Tom Benton <rancor@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu>
Subject: Peter Epstein
> Also, I finally got around to getting one of those Peter Epstein quartet
> CD, "The Invisible." I can't remember which got the highest
> recommendation but this has some really great parts.
Indeed it does. And as much as I enjoy it, I'll confess to digging
'Staring At The Sun' much much more. Perhaps my favorite album of
1999. It's same band (with Jamie sticking to accordion!) and trods on
similar ground, but I'm hit much harder on this one by the strength of the
writing (which isn't to say the tunes on 'The Invisible' aren't good, it's
just that most of 'Staring At The Sun' I find completely sickeningly
beautiful).
> Like just about everything with Jim Black he sort of defines the sound,
> with those odd-time backbeat rhythms.
I think it was "Jim Black + accordion" that inspired me to originally pick
up the first record. There are some moments on there where he's playing
with (I think) his bare hands and the recording captures it so amazingly I
don't even know what to say about it.
An amusing (to me, at least) but otherwise useless note: a couple of days
ago my roommate picked up my copy of 'The Invisible' and, after looking at
it for a bit, said to me: "I think this is the first time I've seen a
picture of Jim Black. He looks like a dork!" I don't know. Damn, it was
funny at the time...
- -
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 10:21:05 -0700
From: Tosh <tosh@loop.com>
Subject: Re: burroughs (was: all of these little things)
on 9/21/00 10:03 AM, Patrice L. Roussel at proussel@ichips.intel.com wrote:
>
> On Thu, 21 Sep 2000 11:24:33 -0500 Matthew Ross Davis wrote:
>>
>> Yes, I find the cut-up extremely similar to Zorn's own jump-cut method of
>> constructing stuff. It's certainly good good reading for anyone
>> interested in the early days of de/reconstructionist art. :)
>
> But there is a big difference (at least for me): I get it [cut-up] in music
> and completely miss it in literature (I read NAKED LUNCH but barely understood
> a word). This for a simple reason: music by itself does not express anything
> (to use Stravinsky's famous statement), as opposed to writing which is sup-
> posed to convey some meaning (assuming that being confused is not your top
> priority when you decide to open a book). This constraint of the writing (you
> have to say something), as opposed to the total freedom of music (free of any
> such constraints), makes the comparisons either naive or totally wrong.
>
> Patrice "back to basic" Roussel.
>
>
> -
>
>
Patrice's comments are interesting in regards to literature and music. For
me personally music and literature hits me the same way. I don't agree with
the concept that writing is supposed to convey some meaning. Not in a
strict sense. Come to mind the works of Tzara and Kurt Scwitters, plus some
of the early literature of the Futurists - where lot of it is sound based.
As for Burroughs, I can't read his work without hearing his 'voice.' I
think Naked Lunch as a variety show on paper. But people due have separate
standards for music listening and reading. I personally don't. And this
might be only a matter of personal taste.
- --
Tosh Berman
TamTam Books
http://www.tamtambooks.com
- -
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 13:31:13 -0400
From: wlt4@mindspring.com
Subject: Lipstick Traces
> I may have miss this on the list, but what is on the Lipstick Traces CD?
There's a listing and Jon Savage's liner notes at
http://www.eyecandypromo.com/GM/Lipstick.html
but it doesn't include Greil's brief notes and source info on each track. In case anybody cares, some of my artwork is used in the book, it's the detourned Beetle Bailey comic.
Lang
- -
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 12:53:07 -0400
From: Joseph Zitt <jzitt@metatronpress.com>
Subject: Re: burroughs (was: all of these little things)
On Thu, Sep 21, 2000 at 10:03:19AM -0700, Patrice L. Roussel wrote:
>
> On Thu, 21 Sep 2000 11:24:33 -0500 Matthew Ross Davis wrote:
> >
> > Yes, I find the cut-up extremely similar to Zorn's own jump-cut method of
> > constructing stuff. It's certainly good good reading for anyone
> > interested in the early days of de/reconstructionist art. :)
>
> But there is a big difference (at least for me): I get it [cut-up] in music
> and completely miss it in literature (I read NAKED LUNCH but barely understood
> a word). This for a simple reason: music by itself does not express anything
> (to use Stravinsky's famous statement), as opposed to writing which is sup-
> posed to convey some meaning (assuming that being confused is not your top
> priority when you decide to open a book). This constraint of the writing (you
> have to say something), as opposed to the total freedom of music (free of any
> such constraints), makes the comparisons either naive or totally wrong.
Does writing have to "say something"? Isn't that precisely what the
cut-up artists were playing with/against? How about sound poetry, etc?
Too many people try to "understand" music similarly, by shoehorning it
in preconceived categories of meaning.
(Though I must admit that I don't "get" any but the simplest or more
most representational visual art.)
- --
|> ~The only thing that is not art is inattention~ --- Marcel Duchamp <|
