Ornette on NPR - Insulted again ?

[LutherBlissett]

jazz brethren just listen to this on NPR :

[URL="http://http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6624885"]

By David Was
Ornette Coleman: The Samuel Beckett of Jazz

December 14, 2006 · Musician David Was says the Texas tenor sax player Ornette Coleman is sort of the Samuel Beckett of jazz -- misunderstood, maligned and, after almost five decades since his debut, still making news. A new Coleman CD collection has been released called To Whom Who Keeps a Record.

this ties in with a reissue of the recording "To Whom Who keeps a Record", having listened to it I cant believe nearly 5 decades after his arrival one of the greatest figures in African American music is still being talked about like this; like some weird nutter from the lunatic fringe, most listners today will hear this classic 4tet session from 61 as a highly creative joyous session of freebop from its great pioneers. Samuel Beckett analogy is pure crap, "Waiting for Godot " nothing ! what fuckin fatuous nonsense !
David Was is a truly clueless twit ! Also OC is an alto sax player not tenor sax on this disc. He describes Ornette as a maligned misunderstood Sam Beckett figure , in fact Coleman is a highly acclaimed, highly respected, master of Jazz honoured and recognized the world over by musicians and listeners alike. I find this NPR piece a joke I dont know if anyone agress just thought I'd say something about it, it annoyed me

[Sergio Zamora]

Comparing Coleman to Beckett seems rather odd and arbitrary, but I don't see what's so offensive about it.

[Pete C]

I should think an analogy to Samuel Beckett is the highest form of compliment. Samuel Beckett is highly acclaimed too. Granted there may be some inaccuracies in the piece but it's hardly an insult. It's not like a Ken Burns-sponsored hatchet job of Cecil Taylor.

If you're this sensitive about a piece that celebrates Ornette, how would you react to a pan?

[Squaredancecalling Steve]

Except for the sagging soar of line, undoubtedly superb as far as it went, there was nothing to be seen, for the kite had disappeared from view. Mr. Kelly was enraptured. Now he could measure the distance from the unseen to the seen, now he was in a position to determine the point at which seen and unseen met. It would be an unscientific observation, so many and so fitful were the imponderables involved. But the pleasure accruing to Mr. Kelly would be in no way inferior to that conferred (presumably) on Mr. Adams by his beautiful deduction of Neptune from Uranus. He fixed with his eagle eyes a point in the empty sky where he fancied the kite to swim into view, and wound carefully in.

[Captain Hate]

When did NPR insult him before?

[GoodSpeak]

Originally Posted by Captain Hate

When did NPR insult him before?

That's what I was wondering, Hate.

Something of an avant-gard playwrite and poet who examines the darker side of the human experience, Beckett would be a fine comparison to Coleman's work.

See also:http://www.britannica.com/nobel/micro/59_4.html

I agree with Pete, too...if a Beckett comparison is insulting, Luther must go ballistic when somebody puts Ornette Coleman down.

Yike!

[Paul B]

Agree with all of the above...If Beckett is "nothing," then so is Ornette. But we all know better (though Luther apparently doesn't). I'll never understand why some jazz fans are borderline illiterates when it comes to other art forms.

[LutherBlissett]

Originally Posted by Pete C

I should think an analogy to Samuel Beckett is the highest form of compliment. Samuel Beckett is highly acclaimed too. Granted there may be some inaccuracies in the piece but it's hardly an insult. It's not like a Ken Burns-sponsored hatchet job of Cecil Taylor.

If you're this sensitive about a piece that celebrates Ornette, how would you react to a pan?

The piece doesn't celebrate OC, thats my point; Was doesnt put OC in any context poetic or literary, he doesnt say anything about either artform or how they might be related, OC is simply an avant garde kook bringing his weird jazz to NYC, which after nearly 4 + decades is a just a pain + silly to hear.

The absurdist, pessismistic plays of Beckett are not the equivalent of OC's music , if there are any parallels to be drawn with poetry Whitman might be better, or maybe others. Coleman + Whitman both American originals, romantics and humanists. The whole literaure/art analogy used to describe music is ok if writers know enough about both artforms but the NPR piece I thought was a bit shallow.

Paul B : Thanks for the condescension m8, you must be the Ezra Pound of jazz kazoo !

[Pete C]

Originally Posted by LutherBlissett

The absurdist, pessismistic plays of Beckett are not the equivalent of OC's music ,

I don't consider Beckett's work pessimistic.

[Gerardo A]

Yeah, "Mercier and Camier" had me laughing every page. Especially when they make an appointment to meet at a certain hour and one of them gets there in advance and the other is late.

[Sergio Zamora]

Originally Posted by Pete C

I don't consider Beckett's work pessimistic.

Me either, unless one insists on resisting the inevitable ridiculousness of it all.

[Sergio Zamora]

Originally Posted by LutherBlissett

The piece doesn't celebrate OC, thats my point; Was doesnt put OC in any context poetic or literary, he doesnt say anything about either artform or how they might be related, OC is simply an avant garde kook bringing his weird jazz to NYC, which after nearly 4 + decades is a just a pain + silly to hear.

The absurdist, pessismistic plays of Beckett are not the equivalent of OC's music , if there are any parallels to be drawn with poetry Whitman might be better, or maybe others. Coleman + Whitman both American originals, romantics and humanists. The whole literaure/art analogy used to describe music is ok if writers know enough about both artforms but the NPR piece I thought was a bit shallow.

I really think you're taking this way out of proportion and context. Was makes a single reference to Beckett in the opening of the review which while a bit out of place seems perfectly harmless. I couldn't find anything in the review where he implies that Coleman is a kook on the fringe. In fact he clearly states that Coleman continues to be an influence on younger player. Besides, the review was about recordings Coleman did in the early 60s so his comments were mostly about how he was perceived at that time, not today. Overall, the review was rather superficial (typical for NPR), but quite laudatory of Coleman.

[Enforcer]

Was is a good guy. Good local boy.

[Dennis Gonzalez]

If I'd heard the review on the radio, driving in traffic, say, I would've thought first: Wow...somebody's covering jazz! Ah, Ornette! I think I'll look for the CD; I know my boys'll love it. I will too!

I'd love to hear a story like that about my music on NPR.

[Captain Hate]

Luther, I really don't know why you're singling this review out; most articles about Ornette are embarrassing wastes of time in which he comes off as a childlike savant who happens to play the saxophone well. They almost always involve some "explanation" of harmolodics which only adds to the confusion instead of providing edification. I really wish they'd stop publishing them and just let the music speak for itself, which it always has.

[Pete C]

Originally Posted by Captain Hate

I really wish they'd stop publishing them and just let the music speak for itself, which it always has.

But it won't speak for itself to people who don't hear it, so press coverage is a good thing, no?

[Captain Hate]

Originally Posted by Pete C

But it won't speak for itself to people who don't hear it, so press coverage is a good thing, no?

I suppose except I can't comment on if I would feel more or less interested in hearing his music for the first time after reading the most recent article in All About Jazz (which is really stupid imo); probably less. What I *can* comment on is that the first Ornette record I bought was Dancing in Your Head which was a terrible first choice for hearing Ornette; it just happened to be the new release at the time.

[shrugs]

Originally Posted by Captain Hate

Luther, I really don't know why you're singling this review out; most articles about Ornette are embarrassing wastes of time in which he comes off as a childlike savant who happens to play the saxophone well. They almost always involve some "explanation" of harmolodics which only adds to the confusion instead of providing edification. I really wish they'd stop publishing them and just let the music speak for itself, which it always has.

the Cadence interview a few years back was awful.

[Gerardo A]

Originally Posted by Sergio Zamora

Me either, unless one insists on resisting the inevitable ridiculousness of it all.

[Paul B]

Originally Posted by LutherBlissett

Paul B : Thanks for the condescension m8, you must be the Ezra Pound of jazz kazoo !

You deserve it. You obviously have no f**king clue about what Beckett is about. If you don't agree that he and Ornette should be compared, there's no need to impugn Beckett--and show us you own glaring lack of intelligence in doing so. The comparison does seem a bit of a stretch (and Capt. Hate's comments are on the mark in that regard) but that has nothing to do with any lack on the part of Beckett. He's as important to 20th century literature as Ornette is to 20th century music. Your comments about Beckett are no different than the comments Ornette endured when he first surfaced. A bit of irony there, I'd say.

[GoodSpeak]

Originally Posted by Paul B

The comparison does seem a bit of a stretch (and Capt. Hate's comments are on the mark in that regard) but that has nothing to do with any lack on the part of Beckett. He's as important to 20th century literature as Ornette is to 20th century music. Your comments about Beckett are no different than the comments Ornette endured when he first surfaced. A bit of irony there, I'd say.

Exactly, Paul.

It has been my experience that NPR doesn't necessarily focus upon the way something is done in music or art or literature but more in the perceived value and scope of it then as it relates to now. Generally speaking, they tend to do what I call "thought pieces", that is, something to make you ponder over or go "Hm. I never knew that" or the like.

NPR is not involved in music criticism, per se. Ergo, I think the comparison is an interesting one inasmuch as it appears [based upon what I can gather here and my experiences listening to NPR] to make a parallel of an avant-gard artist to avant-gard artist and how things were perceived of their work or perhaps how they have become more understood now.

Personally, I'm sorry I missed it.



My two cents.

[GoodSpeak]

BTW...here's the link if you want to listen to the story:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...toryId=6624885

And for the record, David Was said in the interview Coleman is an alto player.

Other than the opening remarks about Beckett, the story is all about Ornette Coleman so I'm not sure what the complaint is, to be honest.

[Paul B]

Goodz, well said. On the whole NPR does as good a job as any to bring arts and ideas to the public. And I think you're right, in Ornette and Beckett they may see two "avant-garde" artists who have been underappreciated and/or misunderstood to some degree by the general public. More knowledgeable people in both lit and music will, of course, have different ideas--and don't depend on NPR for enlightenment. In any case, it's nothing to get riled up about, as the person who started this thread did.

[GoodSpeak]

I agree.

The piece seems fairly harmless to me....but makes an interesting point, nonetheless.

[Robert de St. Loup]

Well, Was is hardly the first critic to draw a strained comparison between a great jazz artist and a great artist from some other field. Greil Marcus is notorious for that kind of thing in the rock arena. And I remember reading a magazine article a few years ago in which some jackass compared Steve Lacy to everybody from James Joyce to Jackson Pollock. He may have thrown Ozzie Smith into the mix too.

[GoodSpeak]

Originally Posted by Robert de St. Loup

Well, Was is hardly the first critic to draw a strained comparison between a great jazz artist and a great artist from some other field. Greil Marcus is notorious for that kind of thing in the rock arena. And I remember reading a magazine article a few years ago in which some jackass compared Steve Lacy to everybody from James Joyce to Jackson Pollock. He may have thrown Ozzie Smith into the mix too.

Hm.

Maybe we need to move beyond this whole issue of who each musician is compared to and back to the loftier pursuit of finding a literary comparison to taking chances and going against the grain.

James Joyce, if he were a Jazz artist, would have been Avant-Gard.


No doubt....no doubt at all.

[Pete C]

Originally Posted by Robert de St. Loup

And I remember reading a magazine article a few years ago in which some jackass compared Steve Lacy to everybody from James Joyce to Jackson Pollock.

Especially since he should have been compared to Beckett & Mondrian.

[Pete C]

If Joyce were a jazz artist he wouldn't have known when to take the horn out of his mouth.

[Monte Smith]

Originally Posted by GoodSpeak

Something of an avant-gard playwrite and poet who examines the darker side of the human experience, Beckett would be a fine comparison to Coleman's work.

I'm just thrilled that an English teacher in our system has the guts to stand up for an avant-gard playwrite. Even if it's in the passive tense.

[Squaredancecalling Steve]

Given the prime target audience, Monte, too subtle by about three-and-a-half.

Originally Posted by GoodSpeak

Something of an avant-gard playwrite and poet ....Beckett

avant-garde playwright

Otherwise perfect, except that he was a great novelist (and dramatist) but a minor poet.

(Note my use of "dramatist" -- that's a synonym, a word you use when you're not sure how to spell the word you want to use.)