ftp.xmission.com/2014.06.ftp.xmission.com.tar/ftp.xmission.com/pub/lists/zorn-list/archive/v03.n430

Internet Message Format | 2001-05-15 | 22KB

From: [e-mail] (Zorn List Digest)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Zorn List Digest V3 #430
Reply-To: zorn-list
Sender: [e-mail]
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Precedence: bulk


Zorn List Digest        Wednesday, May 16 2001        Volume 03 : Number 430



In this issue:
-
       RE: NYTimes.com Article: Michael Dorf of Knitmedia, the Entrepreneur of the Musically Avant
       CD sale
       Re: Consolidated Queer 2
       Re: Miles the Pimp
       ?s re:dolphy/mingus
       Re: ?s re:dolphy/mingus
       Re: Review: Evan & Jah Wabble
       RE: Consolidated Queer 1
       Odp: KC alumni association (was RE: Odp: Soft Machine)
       Re: Consolidated Queer 2

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

Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 10:46:24 -0400
From: "Steve Smith" <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: NYTimes.com Article: Michael Dorf of Knitmedia, the Entrepreneur of the Musically Avant

I missed this earlier.  Sorry to have reposted when I saw the Knit piece.

Steve Smith
[e-mail]

- -

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

Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 12:36:17 -0400
From: "Bruno Bissonnette" <[e-mail]>
Subject: CD sale

Hi fellow Zornlisters,
Here's a bunch of discs I'm selling, but would also accept trades of
interesting items in the noise genre (Merzbow, Borbetomagus, Masonna,
Hijokaidan, Aube, almost anything on Alchemy Records, etc..), free improv
(but mostly Bailey and Evan Parker) or some items on the Mego label.  I'd be
willing to trade a few of my discs for one good item in some cases.
I might be interested in other genres, just try.
Prices are in $US but since I'm in Canada I will accept the converted value
in Canadian funds if you wish.  Shipping (within North America) is already
included.
Priority may be given to orders of multiple discs.
All discs are in great shape, no defects.

Aaly Trio + Vandermark: Live at the Glenn Miller Cafe - $8
Ali, Rashied/Belogenis: Rings of Saturn - $6
Ascension: Five Titles - $9
Atman: Tradition - $7
Bad Brains: Quickness - $5
Branca, Glenn: Symphony no.6 - $6
Brotzmann/Hamilton: Zulutime - $7
Butcher/Graewe: Light's View - $8
Eskelin, Ellery: Jazz Trash - $8
Eskelin/Bennink: Dissonant Characters - $10
Great Atomic Power: Mushroom of Destruction - $5
Henry Cow: Legend - $6
Hise, Steev: Original - $7
Korekyojin: s/t - $8
Lacy, Steve: The Rent (2CD) - $11
Lounge Lizards: Voice of Chunk - $7
Maher Shalal Hash Baz: From a summer... - $10
Morris, Joe w/DKV trio: Deep Telling - $8
Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan: Mustt Mustt - $7
Previte/Ducret: In the grass - $7
Ruins: Symphonica - $8
Rypdal, Terje: Works - $5
Shining Path: No Other World - $5
Zorn/Sharp/Previte/Horvitz: Downtown Lullaby - $8

Thanks for your time,
Bruno Bissonnette

_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.


- -

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

Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 13:01:00 -0400 (EDT)
From: konrad <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Consolidated Queer 2

On Wed, 16 May 2001, Jeton Ademaj wrote:

> Konrad: it's almost like u mean "u better have a good reason to piss people
> off" because it does seem you're raising the bar for discussion of
> historical figures. by your logic, this forum presented a perfect
> opportunity to seperate out the homophobia: Someone said something bout
> dolphymingus, it pissed steve off and when relating it he half explained and
> half winked at what were presumably (and then effectively) shared
> conclusions.

I assumed you had a good reason, and i think you take the risk of
overinterpreting because of that reason, whatever it is.  In this case
(you're attacking primarily language use on the internet, after all) i
believe you should ask before you accuse, especially someone you don't
otherwise know.  There may be MANY MANY clues about these people in person
that you are not privy to that could make you read their words
differently.  "Why the hostility?" is different than "do i detect
hostility?" and isn't the difference exactly measured in how hostile
(accusatory) the form of the question is? -- ironic being more than
sincere inquiry in this case.

Personally i'm of a "give 'em enough rope" school rather than the "nip it
in the bud" school but that may be just my style in this case, not knowing
the solo exchange or the original text or enough about Dolphy and Mingus's
relationship.  You seem to know more about the musical situation and the
fabric of homophobic rhetoric than i so tear away.

FWIW now that i've had a chance to think about it in terms of who Mingus
was, which i know more from reading his novel than his music tells me, i
don't think the interpretation is that wild.

> again, i'da been happy to have read or participated in an exchange re:
> intense platonic relationships, but some people seemed a bit too pavlovian
> in their reflexive defense against the latest multiculti Other to crash the
> party. that may include you, since u feel u already have my "pc
> shit-starter" number...also, my queries of "why the hostility" were
> rhetorical, because the 'y' was obvious. SWM's burden.

Thanks for pointing it out, but i'll carry my burden in another fashion.

I still think that if you put people on the defense, it's harder for you
(and third party observers) to tell how they really think.  I similarly
don't believe that if you get someone drunk he will really speak the truth.
The reason you think Bill's confession is banal is that it was forced, in a
way.  The best you might do (which is pretty good in some way) is raise
consciousness about rhetoric, w/o changing the underlying attitude.  You
said it several times that you KNEW what was up, so maybe revealing rhetoric
is enough for you.  Maybe changing the underlying attitude is a pipe dream.
While i'm not completely persuaded about your method, i respect that a man's
gotta do what a man's gotta do.

> Bill: [snip] To a certain
> extant u and konrad seem to agree that there's not enough restraint used
> when offering these hypotheses, and that such extravagance feeds
> reactionism. almost like you're saying "don't go calling someone gay or even
> slightly gay w/o good proof or u'll rouse the wrath of those it makes
> nervous------> a position i understand. just be aware that such
> circumspection costs u less than others.

Your point is well taken re: style, venue and timing and the risks/gamble
of pissing people off.  Those of us buoyed by the status quo don't like to
rock (or like someone rocking) the boat.


konrad

^Z




- -

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

Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 12:23:51 -0500 (CDT)
From: Tom Benton <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Miles the Pimp

Steve Smith wrote...

> For the record, my girlfriend reminded me tonight that Robin D. G.
> Kelley, writer of the "Pimp Miles" piece in the Sunday New York Times,
> is in fact a man.  I felt the need to mention this primarily because I'd
> stated that it was refreshing to see the Times allow two women to write
> about jazz in the first place, whether it was bad writing and thinking
> or not.

And this reminds me to ask: what were your big objections to this piece,
Steve?  You've mentioned your distaste for it on a couple of occasions and
though I'd certainly file it under the what we've apparently dubbed
"damnable comp-lit", my reaction otherwise was more or less "well, um,
duh" (as opposed to my full-on eye-rolling at the other Times piece).
Maybe I've just been watching too many episodes of MTV Cribs (imagine a
hip-hop version of 'Life Styles of the Rich and Famous') or just didn't
read the thing closely enough.  Anyhow, Steve or anyone else, please
share.

- -T


- -

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

Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 12:28:14 -0500
From: "Robert A. Pleshar" <[e-mail]>
Subject: ?s re:dolphy/mingus

I'm not going to attach quotes and am going to paraphrase in an attempt to
keep this as short as possible, but the whole discussion about Mingus &
Dolphy's duet (which I am apparently one of the few here who have actually
listened to it) and it's possible sublimated homosexuality brings up some
questions.

I think Mr. (?) Ademaj said something to the effect that people postulating
sublimated gay readings are trying to find the truth, or maybe a truth or
their own truth. Also some statements like sexuality is everywhere. OK, so
we could say sexuality, race, gender, etc are all everywhere, floating
around the cosmos surrounding us all. Does that then mean that everything
is in some way about sexuality or race, etc.? If so, what does that really
mean and how does it get us closer to any truth? I mean if everything is
about sexuality, what exactly is the revelation?

We can't ever know the truth of what that particular duet meant to Mingus
and Dolphy while they were playing it or even after. They've never to my
knowledge said what it meant. So, is the truth really being looked for or
are waters being muddied? Is someone just making this reading based on
their own personal biases? If so, what sort of truth is it? Couldn't it
just as easily be postulated and "proved" that this particular duet
describes Mingus and Doplhy's sublimated feelings about French Franc and
German Mark exchange rates? I'm not trying to be flip here, I'm really
trying to understand this type of study. Perhaps I am too scientific in
nature, but it seems to me that in these kinds of cultural studies
(especially those made well after the primary participants can no longer
make any clarifying statements), one could theorize nearly anything and it
can be neither proved nor disproved. If someone doesn't agree with your
theory, then you can just shout them down with name calling. I'm not quite
sure how this approach leads to the truth about anything.

Rob


- -

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

Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 10:36:57 -0700
From: Skip Heller <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: ?s re:dolphy/mingus

> I'm not going to attach quotes and am going to paraphrase in an attempt to
> keep this as short as possible, but the whole discussion about Mingus &
> Dolphy's duet (which I am apparently one of the few here who have actually
> listened to it) and it's possible sublimated homosexuality brings up some
> questions.
>
> I think Mr. (?) Ademaj said something to the effect that people postulating
> sublimated gay readings are trying to find the truth, or maybe a truth or
> their own truth. Also some statements like sexuality is everywhere. OK, so
> we could say sexuality, race, gender, etc are all everywhere, floating
> around the cosmos surrounding us all. Does that then mean that everything
> is in some way about sexuality or race, etc.? If so, what does that really
> mean and how does it get us closer to any truth? I mean if everything is
> about sexuality, what exactly is the revelation?
>
> We can't ever know the truth of what that particular duet meant to Mingus
> and Dolphy while they were playing it or even after. They've never to my
> knowledge said what it meant. So, is the truth really being looked for or
> are waters being muddied? Is someone just making this reading based on
> their own personal biases? If so, what sort of truth is it? Couldn't it
> just as easily be postulated and "proved" that this particular duet
> describes Mingus and Doplhy's sublimated feelings about French Franc and
> German Mark exchange rates? I'm not trying to be flip here, I'm really
> trying to understand this type of study. Perhaps I am too scientific in
> nature, but it seems to me that in these kinds of cultural studies
> (especially those made well after the primary participants can no longer
> make any clarifying statements), one could theorize nearly anything and it
> can be neither proved nor disproved. If someone doesn't agree with your
> theory, then you can just shout them down with name calling. I'm not quite
> sure how this approach leads to the truth about anything.
>
> Rob
>
>
> -
>
Kind of the way I look at it.  Bottom line -- two people (of any sex or
sexuality) can be attracted strongly to one another is ways that have
nothing to do with sex.  Imposing an obligitory sexual grid on things
doesn't mean that you're taking things to any sort of deeper level.  It just
means you're speculating about sex and doing it in a way that has nothing to
do with art and everything to do with justifying one's own viewpoint and
maybe even polarizing people.

A jazz solo is like any other snapshot.  It grabs and preserves one tiny
piece of a moment, and is subject to all the limitations of snapshots.  This
is an important thing to remember when you're purporting to, for lack of
better words, go deep.

skip h


- -

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

Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 12:37:33 -0400
From: Rich Williams <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Review: Evan & Jah Wabble

>the first 15 minutes or so of last night's Jah Wabble/Evan Parker
>gig was great. Evan was on fire, kind-of doing his shtick (a shtick
>I happen to love) and livening-up the drum & bass groove. it was
>pretty hypnotic and intense. after that, Jah Wabble's sound guy,
>probably the worst I've ever heard, took the controls and went
>haywire. some folks were watching him move the controls up and down
>with the groove, get insane feedback, then throw his headphones
>down, as if blaming them for not being able to do sound. rumor has
>it the Jah Wabble gig with Laswell had *really* bad sound. glad I
>missed it.
>
>Following that cool 15 or so minutes, two horn players got on stage
>(I guess they're with Jah Wabble), and a few minutes into it I fel
>asleep in the first row (sorry Evan). he was playing great, but I
>guess it wasn't enough to tune everything else out, probably because
>the stupid sound guy had such a huge reverb/delay on Evan the whole
>time that... argh.. I don't wanna think about it. there were quite a
>few people around that, like me, had either fallen asleep and walked
>out or just walked out.
>
>I can't imagine the nightmare if I find that it's the same sound guy
>doing the next 2 nights of Evan at the Knit (no chance, because he
>works for J-W, but it's fun imagining the nightmare nonetheless).
>
>Cheers,
>Dave

    Well, since no one else has yet offered up their take on
monday nites show, heres an excerpt of an e-mail I sent to a friend
describing it;

My head is still vibrating!  Laswell did indeed show up last night,
and between him and Wobble, the Knit probably has some severe
foundation damage. Even with the attenuators, my minidisc still
couldn't handle the levels. hell, the PA couldn't handle the
levels!.....Strange gig......Wobble came out and started playing a
thunderous,throbbing trance-type bass line, then joined by the
drummer, and 2 guys playing all sorts of ethnic flutes,bagpipes etc,
about 10 minutes in ,Laswell joins them, since Wobble is totally
dominating the bottom end of the sound spectrum, Bill ends up doing
ambient spacey bass effects, even using an ebow to get skysaw bass
sounds.(You know, I've always wondered if an ebow would work on the
bass.....guess what new toy I'm buying this weekend) It sounded like
all the instruments excluding Wobble were being pumped through a
delay line that was set to match the tempo of the music, so the whole
thing was like a giant dub echo chamber effect. The band pounded and
throbbed non-stop for an hour and a half, then did a 20 minute encore.
    All in all, a decent show, but The excessive volume did
detract somewhat, the PA overloaded several times, and the horn
players didn't seem to be all that well acquainted with the
instruments they were blowing into. It would have been REAL
interesting if tomorrow nights guest; Evan Parker, had played in this
band.

- -

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

Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 13:07:30 -0700
From: "Benito Vergara" <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Consolidated Queer 1

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [e-mail]
> [mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of Jeton Ademaj
> Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2001 10:10 PM

> This is where u err when u say that sexuality is not as universal as
> gender/race/religion:

<snip>

> i think u confused sexuality with sexual
> oppression

No, I didn't. Please read my statements again (expressed in two e-mail
messages) -- sexuality *isn't seen*  (by the "mainstream") as being
"universal" or as important as gender/race/class. *I* certainly think it is.
The point I'm trying to make is that, perhaps for many, heterosexuality is a
clearly unmarked, normative and naturalized state of being -- which, as
anthropologists have long known (of which I am one), is certainly not the
case.

Later,
Ben

ObZorn: "The Gift" may not be great Zorn, but it sure is great Exotica (even
the folks on the Exotica mailing list like it as such).

np: m. gira, "the body lovers"

http://members.tripod.com/~tamad2/
ICQ: 12832406


- -

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

Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 00:59:13 +0200
From: "Marcin Gokieli" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Odp: KC alumni association (was RE: Odp: Soft Machine)

- ----- Original Message -----
From: Steve Smith <[e-mail]>

> Here's one for you, Marcin: what can you tell us about the band
Kormorany?

OK you won ;-). never heard of (but i'll try to get some info)


- -

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

Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 16:54:17 -0400
From: "Dave Smey" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Consolidated Queer 2

>
> Dave Smey: that's quite a laundry list u've got there, the whole array of
> Other has invaded your space with it's incessant cries of "you don't like
> me, why don't u like me, Straight White Man?!?".

Not sure what you mean here (other than a compliment -- hey, I try to be
thorough!)  My complaint is that I don't want my colleagues to
be "Others" -- because actually they don't seem very dissimilar to me --
they toil in the same profession, have lots of the same experiences as me,
we read the same stuff, listen to the same music, etc.  Yet some don't want
to communicate with me as a peer, they want to marginalize me instead, and
it seems that this strategy is motivated by mostly selfish (or merely
self-indulgent) intentions.

>how would u relate your
> sentiments to particular examples, like dolphymingus, pedozorn, milespimp,
> or afroauralrape?

Well, as I mentioned, I just recently sat through a rehash of Ellie Hisama's
work on what you call "pedozorn" (though she put it purely in terms of
racism and sexism, no issues of pedophilia per se were involved.  She used
the term "asiatophilia" (or "asiophilia" or something) to mean a pernicious
sexual interest in Asian women.)  And aside from my general impression that
the critique was very sloppy, with no real consideration of possible
antitheses, I was particularly bugged that she implied that Zorn fans and
scholars who take Zorn seriously are *ignoring* the issue, that it is
insensitive of them and that her concerns should outweigh any kind of
aesthetic enjoyment of the work.  (To be accurate, the "-ism" we were more
explicitly being accused of was "formalism," though these days that smacks
of the other isms as well.)  This is (supposedly) true if you listen to
Spillane or Forbidden Fruit, the two particular pieces she (sort of)
discussed.  This was particularly ironic because minutes before I had just
been enthusiastically recommending Zorn to a fellow grad student doing her
diss on collage techniques, oblivious to the fact that I was about to be
characterized as an insensitive jerk in the keynote paper.

If you are really interested, I could discuss more of the social
critique-type work that I find unreasonably inflammatory (McClary,
basically), irritatingly self-indulgent, kind of neutrally dumb, or
intelligent and responsible (Gary C. Thomas on Handel is my fave
counterexample).  Off-list.

>in the few months i've been reading posts i can't recall you or
> anyone advising the poster 'fagmusic' of your objections

As I indicated in the post, I just got here.  Duh.

> i do hope
> u'll be so forward with those who use fag, nigger, etc. in an UNIRONIC,
> 'straightforward' sense...

Well, I can't say I've been in a discursive-type situation with any such
people in my adult experience.  The vast majority of people know better,
period.  The last time I heard "faggot" used unironically it was like four
years ago and the slur was aimed at me, by someone who didn't like the way I
was shopping for sneakers -- not really a good opportunity for finger
wagging.  (I just got the hell out of there.)  In the mean time, I hear the
word fag tossed around by some of my gay friends who think they are being
clever, and I let them know that it bugs me and seems ill-advised, as I did
with you.  It was nice of you to return the favor by guessing that I must be
a hypocrite.




- -

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

End of Zorn List Digest V3 #430
*******************************


 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]