Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
- -
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 19:16:41 EST
From: JonAbbey2@aol.com
Subject: Re: rec.music.experimental
In a message dated 2/13/01 5:47:43 PM, lartis@ath.forthnet.gr writes:
<< It's unfortunate that this list didn't get
wind of the RFDs, but oh well - what to charters mean anyway. >>
I actually pointed people here to it while the discussion was going on, but
the guy whose idea it was wasn't accepting many alterations. his own band is
mentioned in there, which is pretty funny.
Jon
www.erstwhilerecords.com
- -
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 20:01:29 -0500
From: ssmith36@sprynet.com
Subject: Re: tony scherman
No, that was Adam Shatz. Tony's usual beat is R&B reissues.
Steve Smith
ssmith36@sprynet.com
NP - new James Newton chamber music collection on New World
(PS anybody who's mailed me in the last few days and hasn't heard back - please excuse the tardiness, my computer died on Sunday - yes, this is a second computer this year...)
kurt_gottschalk@scni.com wrote:
>
is this the same guy that wrote that piece of tripe trashing zorn in the times a
year and a half ago or so? and the more recent mistake-filled sun ra/jazz
reissues piece? he's got a piece in last sunday's times on electronic music --
no less interesting and informative than the others.
kg
np: aretha franklin - queen of soul: the atlantic recordings (disc 4)
- -
- -
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 20:25:00 -0500
From: Nils <jacobson@frodo.mgh.harvard.edu>
Subject: Re: schutze
simon hopkins <simonphopkins@yahoo.com> wrote:
> ôPaul Schutze: where can you find his albums?ö
>
> David HodgsonÆs excellent Playing By Ear mail order
> service carries a lot of PaulÆs releases. Email me
> privately for details.
tone casualties has (re)issued six schutze records
plus some "new" improvisations from '97. they offer
a very attractive paintcan-fulla-schutze set of
these six records, as well as the individual recs
separately:
regard:music by film
the annihilating angel
deus ex machina
green evil
isabelle eberhardt/the oblivion seeker
the surgery of touch
while the paintcan is really only relevant for
devotees, green evil and deus ex machina are very
fine. visit tonecasualties.com.
n
- -
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 21:08:58 EST
From: Nudeants@aol.com
Subject: Penman poop, part 1
Sorry for a belated chiming in here.
In a message dated Fri, 9 Feb 2001 2:26:40 AM Eastern Standard Time, Steve Smith <ssmith36@sprynet.com> writes:
<< Hi, Skip:
> It would seem to me that, if a critic is going to do an essay that purports
> to be in depth, you should care deeply for the work about which you're
> writing, and should have some kind of high regard for the work in question
> (the better to make your points about which are the highs, which are the
> lows).
>>But isn't it equally valid to write a strong in-depth negative criticism of a
work or body of art, as well? Don't we render opinions both positive and
negative on this list every day?
Yes, we do, but not under the guise of a 'critic.' Discussing opinions and positives and negatives of various artists on a list like this does not equate to a critic or music journalist getting his rocks off in dismissing outright a huge body of work that has touched and influenced a large amount of people.
Essentially, I don't consider negative criticism, in a journalistic form, of art, to be valid. Positive criticism, even with caveats here and there from even ardent critic admirers (inevitable but not required) at least has the power to turn a reader on to something. Negative criticism merely 'presents the other side of the coin,' as if its necessary just because there is one.
> When I read a comment like "after reading this essay, I sold my collection of
> 40+ Zappa albums", I have to wonder about why somebody bought those albums in
> the first place.
>>Oh, that's simple, and I think I was clear about it. Those records meant a
great deal to me for a lot of years, and then, eventually, they didn't. I was a
huge fan, and then I wasn't. The only point I'm continuing to try to make
regarding ME and the essay is that seeing such an opinion in print finally made
me feel that my discontent was valid. At the time I was much more
impressionable, and definitely more concerned about being "in" on anything
construed to be important or significant, especially important with a whiff of
outsider appeal. When I read the Penman essay, I felt as though it was okay for
me to have come to a similar conclusion, even if not quite as vitriolic.
> And when I read a comment to the effect "I probably needed
> his music when I was seventeen, but now I'm past that", I find it even more
> objectionable.
>>That's a fair reaction to an inflammatory and extremely subjective assertion on
Penman's part.
> Frank had his low periods just as anybody else has had when
> the make a ton of records over years. And, believe me, I'll jump over ten
> "Titties And Beer"'s to get next to thirty seconds of a "REDNZL". What made
> me laugh in jr high doesn't work so well anymore.
>>The only real difference I see between what you're saying and what I'm saying is
that for me the music itself holds little interest anymore, either. It's not
just that the personal philosophy of the man turned me against the music. It's
not that at all. If the music still held any appeal to me, I'm sure I could do
exactly what you're suggesting - overlook the bad and continue to celebrate the
good. Maybe I'd even have my old copy of 'Shut Up and Ply Your Guitar,' or I
could buy a CD burner and create my own custom compilations minus the jokey
stuff. But eventually I personally found the music just didn't say anything to
me anymore.
> On the other hand, the musical imagination, depth of craft, and personal
> vision that governs the best parts of FZ's work -- and there are certainly a
> great many such moments -- has earned him a great deal of respect, and to
> dismiss the stuff outright is kind of crass.
>>It's crass, but it's a valid piece of criticism. No matter how much you, I, we,
or the world may respect an artist and his/her work, there will always be
someone who does not. And they are just as entitled to sound off. And you are
equally entitled to say they're full of shit. Further, the respect you posit
for Zappa's work is widely-held, but hardly universal. It seems stronger here
than it is in the real world because we are a large closet entirely populated
with people who appreciate challenging music. But even when you have such a
microcosm, there are bound to be schisms. We see them every day in the subject
of Zorn and countless others.
Frankly, crass dismissal like that is not a valid piece of criticism, and just because they get paid to do it for a high profile magazine does not mean they're entitled to it. People certainly are entitled to their opnions, but in the context of music journals it has a purely destructive effect, and one that serves no purpose but to occupy its own space.
> Can you transcribe "Inca Roads"? Can you
> deal with the times signature stuff hands-on? It's unwise to dismiss stuff
> you can't do. Not liking something is one thing, but dismissal is another.
>>Here we're getting into the age old theory that those who can't do shouldn't
write about those who can. It just doesn't work. There have always been and
will always be those who cannot perform music or create art on a professional
level who nonetheless are able to write about such activities in a lucid,
informed, and deeply-invested way.
In a sense it does work, at least in the sense of being familiar with certain kinds of music. Zappa himself made a point, I forget where, bemoaning the fact that critics felt entitled to slam his music without going to the trouble to check out the touching-off points that he used himself. That is, they obviously hadn't listened to, or even heard, Elliott Carter, Webern, even Stravinsky, and they then turn around and criticize something like Greggary Peccary with zero awareness of the precedents for it. Honestly, pat dismissals such as Penman's merely further justify my penchant for never taking any music critic completely seriously.
- -
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 21:47:25 EST
From: Nudeants@aol.com
Subject: Penman poop, Part 2
>>Penman leavens his diatribe with just enough
musical context to make me feel like he does know his subject and a body of
other music in which to form a context for critique. And similarly, no matter
his originality and distinction, Zappa worked as a musician in a pop music
idiom, rendering what he sang as important in some ways as what he played. The
music works on both levels, and so does the critique.
I tend to disagree with the notion that the mere presence of words automatically makes them as 'important' as the accompanying music.
>>And I can't speak for Penman here, obviously, but yeah, if you handed me the
sheet music for "Inca Roads" I could certainly read it, and if I hadn't stopped
playing seven years ago there's even a chance I could stumble my way badly
through a performance, although not anywhere close to the hyper-talented
musicians Zappa generally employed to deliver his material. People still say
some very nice things about my criticism that makes me blush with happiness,
which makes me feel that the years of study and practice really do make a
difference. But that's really beside the point, especially when you're dealing
with music in a pop context and with a sociological view rather than the view of
strict musicological analysis.
> But Zappa is a great target, because the way he has been painted as a
> musician and as a thinker is unfriendly to a lot of people who hold their
> favorite stuff as the True Grail Of Musical Progressivism.
>>Didn't Zappa do exactly the same thing as regards his own favorite stuff, from
Varese to doo-wop? Don't we all, to a greater or lesser degree? We admire and
defend what we see to be great, but we don't all have to agree. I've got a
friend who's a classical composer of distinction as well as an outstanding
journalist, and he says that he has little use for Beethoven's symphonies. I
find that frankly astonishing personally, but it doesn't make me change my
regard for him and it doesn't make me feel a need to change his mind ultimately,
either. We can all agree to disagree. There's room for everyone.
I definitely agree with this, but I feel its not the issue at hand. My guess as to what Skip is saying is that the feathers of the people who dislike Zappa for his potty humor and the non-serious aspects of his work are especially ruffled when so many people praise his intellect.
> I'm thirty-five and don't feel like I've outgrown Zappa, Tower Of Power, Uri
> Caine's quartet with Joel Levine, the Minutemen, Bill Evans, or any of the
> other stuff that got my rocks off when I was seventeen. And there's probably
> no essay ever to be written by a critic that will make me think I was wrong
> for loving any music I love.
>>Once again, I personally never said I "outgrew" Zappa per se (in the sense of an
arbitrary cut off date after which he should be declared verboten). And yes,
that does seem to be what "Poison" Penman's positing - but I read this as a
literary shorthand that reveals his take on the mental/emotional level of his
caricature Zappa fan. It's rude, but it does get his point across succinctly,
and is bound to piss off fans while at the same time causing complete agreement
among others. Me, I continue to say there's enough room for both views.
I don't, however, think there's anything necessarily wrong with moving beyond
music that once meant something to you and now doesn't. I'm 35 and I still
listen to King Crimson, Bob Marley, the Clash, Black Flag, the Butthole Surfers,
and Ornette Coleman, as when I was 17 or 18. But you won't catch me listening
to the Osmonds as when I was 7, Journey as when I was 13, or even ELP as when I
was 17. Some things you do leave behind, but you do it for personal reasons,
not because someone said you should or had to.
This I totally agree with as well, though how is that different from 'outgrowing' something, other than being semantically different. Admittedly, and admirably, as well, I understand the avoidance of the word 'outgrow' so as not to offend those people over the age of 17 who still love Zappa.
>>I reiterate that the Penman essay was a sort of catalyst that helped me reach my
own conclusion and feel some validation for being out of step with countless
others - and remember, the essay is only five years old, which means I only
encountered it in my late 20s, a time at which my many Zappa albums were going
unlistened to while I strangely felt compelled to continue buying each and every
new one that came along, listen once, and shelve it. Clearly there was already
something wrong for me. My response was an entirely personal reaction and one
that I would never choose to impose on anyone else.
Ok, and I at least don't feel imposed upon, but reading things such as the Penman article, or most things John McDonough writes for DownBeat, do really feel like an imposition, and I feel that they have no place in music journalism.
>> But it does speak to the
importance of having a diversity of opinion in print. If all we saw was
officially-sanctioned and ratified "truth," where would that leave us?
Well, since people so often get so up in arms about 'well, that's your opinion' when expressing distaste for someone's thoughts on a subject, we'd obviously be aware of a writers's prejudices and predilictions (sp?) after a couple reads anyway.
>>And who
would we appoint to be arbiters of that truth? Critics don't deliver the
gospel. They state an opinion, back it up in argument, make a case, and then
leave us to decide for ourselves. The most important function they can serve is
to cause us to reflect.
Well, then you're among a rare minority of critics, then. The vast majority of negative reviews or assessments I read tend to be prejudices already formed about an artist that are then mutated into 'arguments' that really onyl cram that prejudice down the throat of the reader
Or, if they can't decide whether or not they like something, they waffle on the whole issue and give 3 stars or some sort of average assessment instead of saying 'I'm not sure.' In fact, I would love it if more critics DID say that! Does anybody really think that the altermative we have now is better? At least a big 'I don't know' or 'I don't fully understand' would serve to pique curiousity on a subject, something that I feel should be the true objective of music journalism anyway.
- -matt mitchell, who wrote part 1 also, and forgot to identify himself, sorry.
- -
>>
- -
------------------------------
End of Zorn List Digest V3 #283
*******************************
To unsubscribe from zorn-list-digest, send an email to
"majordomo@lists.xmission.com"
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 zorn-list-owner@lists.xmission.com
