by Jack Walrath

Dear Pariah,
I received such an interesting and poignant response to my diatribe Why Jazz that I felt it necessary to respond to Mr ? in kind. I hope that you find it entertaining and will clear up any misunderstandings in my first attempt, proving more lucid to future Mr. X's and fans of the "Jerry Springer Show"

MR. X'S RESPONSE:

Explain the contradictions of these two lines to me Jack and note my single quotes.

"Let Marsalis define the word in the sense that it applies only to his music and only that music that is sanctioned by him ---namely, attempted 'recreations' and thefts of the accomplishments of others."

"Marsalis 'never heard' any of these people, and judging by his perspective that is illustrated by his ravings doesn't know anything about their lives."

So, he does 'recreations' of people's works he has 'never heard'? How can you recreate what you've never heard? Are you an idiot or something?

Got a suggestion! Just stick to being the second-rate sideman trumpeter we all know you are and shut the fuck up! You're an incomprehensible polemicist at best. The above example is the perfect reason why.

I fail to see the significance of your argument about the connotations of some word called "jazz." OK, so you don't want to be called a jazz musician or whatever, and perhaps some musicians hated hearing that phrase in the past. But no label stopped them from creating what they wanted because, ultimately, it's just a name. Besides, they were reacting to the word's social connotation as opposed to its actual musical meaning.

If you and Marsalis agree that your tastes don't reflect jazz, then why bother with such a tirade? It seems to me that you clearly agree with him.

But that's not enough, is it? The truth is you're pissed because some of what you do musically (avant-garde) isn't looked up to by that troop or by the classical music society from which that music draws from heavily. They haven't given you the time of day either. But then again, that's always been the case, hasn't it? Marsalis is far from the only person who thinks a lot of that material is utter crap.

You talk of revisionist history, yet everyone agrees Ellington, Armstrong, Davis, Mingus and Morton, to name a few, are it's prime people, and the Lincoln Center clearly plays this stuff which tends to hurt the argument about these musicians being ignored if they returned to the earth. Check you're local record store. How stupid can you be?

Okay, so they don't play Anthony Braxton, Roscoe Mitchell, Butch Morris, Joseph Jarman, Lester Bowie, Julius Hemphill, Barry Guy, Cecil Taylor, Lennie Tristano to name a few. But then again, barely anybody else covers their material either. We've had more than 50 years to figure out that they're not writing any standards. People play Monk and Shorter, they don't play Walrath. Yeah, people rejected all the guys you mentioned, but eventually, they became accepted. But of course, we didn't have to wait 50-plus years for that to happen.

Furthermore, when people talk about the great trumpeters, why is it that your name never comes up? You've been riding that Mingus' ticket you punched back in the 70's for years. You're a decent sideman, but none of your solos stick out, even with Abrams. Wynton would tap your ass as well as Nicholas Payton, Roy Hargrove or Ryan Kisor.

If you're such a fucking big shot, why don't you go on the bandstand and blow the doors off of Marsalis? Why don't you go to the Lincoln Center and challenge him face to face instead of lurking on some web site like a punk? Last I heard, he's got an open-door policy. Tell him he doesn't know what he's doing. That he can't read intervals, doesn't swing, knows nothing of thematic development.

Also, if you really think Marsalis sounds like Mingus or Ellington, you're a complete moron and do damage to your association with Mingus. Honestly, you haven't really listened to that music or any of those younger musicians, have you? Your shallow comments tend to flesh that out to me.

In closing,

Jack, just piss off.

AND MY REBUTTAL:

Thank you for your diatribe to my diatribe! As is illustrated by the career of both Marsalis/Crouch, no press is bad press. It took much soul-searching to write the diatribe in the first place not only because society's perceptions nowadays of expressing a contrasting opinion is tantamount to having an attitude of "sour grapes", but, by expressing a contrary opinion do I only serve to draw more attention to Marsalis/Crouch and in the long run empower him?

I will try to address your concerns and impassioned defense of poor suffering Marsalis/Crouch. I welcome your comments and suggest that you and Wynley should get a room. Normally I wouldn't feel the need to respond to such an eloquent and persuasive critique of my piece, but hey, I like to write! It gives me a chance to practice what I want to say even if it falls deaf ears.

First off, Mr. X, I wonder if you understand the language of English, much less that of "jazz". I will try not to degenerate into name-calling and into using four-letter words in the manner that you have expressed yourself, which probably illustrates your lack of vocabulary. However, I must point out that I can understand how my "shallow comments" must seem just that by judging from your shallow comprehension. Therefore I will try to express myself in a language that even you can understand. In any case, go get your dictionary---here we go!

I didn't say that Wynton Marsalis did recreations of works that he never heard, but of people that he likely, never heard. It has long been the understanding of musicians and fans alike, that if you only heard an artist on a record, you haven't really heard the artist. (By your constant referrals to recorded music, I wonder how many you have heard. I can see that you are one of these people who think that a recording is the final definitive testament as to a person's art).

In Marsalis' defense, he has likely never had the chance to hear many of the musicians or at least many musicians in depth that he claims to be expert about simply because he was too young. His bemoaning of Parker style jamming on the bandstand in the recent JazzTimes interview illustrates his lack of the experience of live music. As moronic as I am, I understand that I can only listen to recordings of Morton, early Ellington, early Armstrong and anybody for that matter and perhaps only imagine what it really sounded like. (perhaps you have heard of recording studio terms such as "overdubbing", "editing" and "splicing"?) I am this first to agree and make it a point to point out that Marsalis doesn't sound like Mingus or Ellington. I, however, have had the blessedness to have played with Mingus and yes, even Ellington's band, I can say that I know enough about their music to know when someone one is stealing their licks and in the case of "Blood On the Fields" repeats/imitates them and calls it "original composition".

I am to conclude that you have not only heard any of the masters live or read anything of their lives but in addition haven't read any of Marsalis' comments or ravings about what is valid and to be considered jazz. Perhaps you should get a copy of the JazzTimes interview with Marsalis where he dismisses the aforementioned concept of Parker and just about everything else that doesn't go along with "his own agenda" (Interviewers' note). If you can't see the incomprehensible "polemicism" behind this, I would have to think that the workings of your brain cells are incomprehensible (or, reprehensible?) or that you are 1) a producer from a major record company 2) a yes man for a major corporation 3) a worker on either the Bush or Gore campaigns 4) a writer for the Sunday Times or 5) the secret lover/concubine of Marsalis/Crouch. I would almost think that you are Wynley because you seem to take this piece as a personal attack. Even Marsalis, who also has a weakness for four-letter words and Crouch who possesses a wonderful vocabulary but writes like that student in class who doesn't know the answer to the question and tries to disguise his ignorance by rampant verbosity---even he (Marsalis/Crouch) shows more class. In the event that Wynley who seems to want to control the musical thinking of each and every jazz fan, would have a tendency to at the most poo-poo my article and read it while simultaneously laughing his way to the bank!

One thing that I am sure that you don't know is that by having 25-plus records released under my name, helming the Mingus Dynasty, Mingus Big Band and doing projects for WDR, NDR, UMO, etc. (ask someone who knows what these abbreviations mean, obviously you have never been out of the US---United States, or your room for that matter) I am also a second rate leader! I feel fortunate to be second-rate enough to be chose to play in the Mingus, Abrams, Monk Tentet and other bands. I shall practice hard so that someday I can be good enough to play in yours!

It is interesting how you see everything as a contest and that I should challenge Marsalis to a horn fight at Lincoln Center and challenge Ryan Kisor, Nicholas Payton or Roy Hargrove as well. This shows me that you put jazz music on the level of a basketball game, a gunfight, or a beauty pageant. The choice of Kisor is interesting, (since you seem to think I dismiss him) since I have been a champion of his playing ever since he was shelved by Columbia records so that he wouldn't be a threat to Wynton, which he most assuredly would be.

I am sure that because of Marsalis' classical technique (another music which you seem to ultimately disdain, even Marsalis respects this) and mastery of the chromatic scale, you would perceive him as "cutting" Chet Baker, Blue Mitchell and Kenny Dorham. A headline in your paper could read conceivably read: "MARSALIS BEATS HUBBARD BY TWO NOTES!" (Interestingly, Hubbard doesn't even rate the epithet "bullshit" as Marsalis was presumably leveling against Miles Davis' hip-hop CD "DooWop" in the JT interview. It seems that Hubbard has never existed.)

As far as challenging Wynton as Wynton Center, a story which I am sure that you never heard: A few years ago Wynton showed up with his horn and his entourage at Sweet Basil (that's a club in NY---New York) on Lester Bowie's gig (with Miles, he didn't even bother to ask) challenging him to a musical duel. Marsalis was upset by certain remarks that Bowie made about Saint Wynton, and he, being the Marsalis, of course, had every right to march up on the guy's bandstand. Bowie reacted with words that even you would understand, to the effect that "if you come up here I will kick your ass. If you want to battle me, let's do it on the stage of Lincoln Center!" Needless to say the event never happened, so, don't look for me any time soon.

Thank you so much for calling some of my music "avant-garde" which of course means "advanced". Your comparison of me to Mitchel, Morris, Braxton, Bowie, et al is interesting since I nowhere near illustrate the same philosophy or conception as the aforementioned.. It is indicative of your musical taste in your dismissal of Tristano, (whom you place in a camp of those producing "utter crap") whose contributions have been acknowledged for almost 60 years now!

Yes Mr. ?, I have listened to and kept up on the younger musicians. Through no fault of many because of the demise of the apprenticeship system, which you seem to be ignorant of as being such an important part of the "tradition" that you think I am attacking and that you are defending, I will have to quote Miles Davis, "What's the matter? Didn't we get it right the first time?"

I will agree with you in opposition to most of my peers, that Marsalis and Lincoln Center are doing exactly what they should be doing---exposing music on a beginner's level to the uninformed such as yourself and its rightful place in cultural history. However, by the press, who I am sure are paid off, (and who Marsalis/Crouch should get on his knees and thank God for) calling this "craftsmanship" creative art and using other Orwellian references to Lincoln Center projects and jazz in general.

Ex: "old is new" "straight ahead is tradition (in this case looking back) "groove is repetition", is exhibiting mindlessness and bearing false witness, which I am sure is lost on you. In addition, by your statements, you seem to imply that I think that Marsalis can't play or is producing something bad. No, this is just a case of the emperor's new clothes.

As far as not being mentioned as a "great trumpeter" and being a "big shot" I don't recall making these claims but if you listen to "Epitaph" which includes Marsalis in the trumpet section. I think I can say that I can hold my own. I suggest that you listen to it for my "second-rate solo" then mail me back and tell me which one of these solos was mistakenly attributed to another in the liner notes. Let's see if you have any ears. No fair asking anyone.

One last point: I am not lurking on the net. I have written a letter to the JazzTimes addressing the same issues as I have brought up here. Every time Marsalis speaks he gets 10 pages in print. Let's see if our side gets more than 30 words or less. I have already been told that I am being edited.

As to your charming names for me such as "idiot", ""moron". "fucking big shot", and pleas to "shut the fuck up", I am reminded of Nazi diatribes against those pesky Jews. Your name calling and your choices of names only tells me more about you than you truly knowing anything about me. Further, as to my lurking on the net, let us see if you write to the JazzTimes with a reply to my letter in the same language you have used here on the net.

In the end (another phrase which I am sure that you can relate to), you are correct when you say that Mingus and Ellington objected to the social implications of the work "jazz" which was synonymous with sexual intercourse and "nigger music". Apparently you don't know anything of what they said, or you would know that they also resented being categorized. They believed that their music and musical aspirations transcended mere labels. I am sure that you can't understand the fight against categorization because judging by your train of "thought" you probably define yourself in such a precise term such as "Corporate Apologist", "Republican", "Lackey" or "Aryan".

I hope that I have made myself more clear to you and wholeheartedly apologize if anything that I have said might have reduced you to tears.

(At least I have a name and am not afraid to sign it and stand by my beliefs. I will say what I want whether folks like you think it is "politically correct" or not.).

Visit Bird Lives weekly for web site reviews, our listening suggestions, and a new outrageous Diatribe from the Pariah. Comments/Questions to The Pariah