By Walter Price

You know I could start by calling Stanley "The Couch", but let me refrain from such slanderous name calling in the name of peace in the Jazz world. The vibe around AAJ is the talk of Stanley's behavior at the First Annual Jazz Awards at Alice Tully Hall and the after battle, I mean after party at the Knitting Factory. Just take a look at the Bird Lives Diatribe to get the gruesome details, but I would like to comment on Stanley and the hacks myself.

First, I wanted to do the most disturbing challenging task before I wrote this article that ranks right up there with going to the local DMV -- read some of Stanley's liner notes. Without further ado here is the concluding excerpt from Stanley's liner notes of J Mood by his favorite son Wynton Marsalis:

"They [Marsalis, Roberts, Hurst, Watts] also form part of the reaction against the arrogant sloth and snarling decadence that face us all, threatening to devour all craft and purity, and to push human beings into the hopper of hysteria, where they will be stripped of all but obvious responses. In that sense, J Mood is a declaration of war against the contrived and the worthless."

Can somebody please tell me what the hell does the above have to do with the music on this particular album. Stanley -- you hack, this is liner notes, not a manifesto on the jazz YOU personally hate. Miles was right -- get rid of those no nothing hacks, artists, and industry people (rats) who take up valuable space with liner notes. Give me photos, the artists that are playing what instrument on what tune, and maybe some personal thoughts from the artists THEMSELVES on the music!

Knowing Stanley's tired hack act, I ask the people at this Jazz Awards show -- "Why did you let Stanley on stage the first place?" Oh I know if you want to be a Jazz awards show you must mimic the other awards show by inviting hacks and industry rats to make presentations. May Charlie Parker roll in his grave in trying to come up with an original format. How about this next year jazz rats -- just let the jazz artists make presentations and so what if they are not perfect, rehearsed, or polished in their presentations -- it is not like this event is broadcasted live on NBC. Listen rats -- jazz fans like to hear from the artists -- the more of them and LESS of hacks and rats makes a better awards show. So why is it surprising to everybody that a hack like Stanley would want to grab the spotlight with his own agenda at an awards show in making his presentation. Wow, a hack who likes to editorialize, grab the spotlight, and showcase his personal agenda -- what a discovery (almost sounds like some jazz artists themselves)!

As for Stanley taking a swipe at Howard Mandel -- well again, that is what you get when you mix booze with a jazz hack -- a volatile combination to say the least! Stanley just is representative of what is bad with the whole jazz industry. Everybody is going to be finger pointing at him personally and what he specifically did when people should be finger pointing at what he represents! I can see the hacks and rats now saying, "Stanley is bad for jazz!" No hacks and rats, most all of your kind are bad for jazz itself!

Date:	07-Jul-1998 17:05:08
From:	Howard Mandel (hman@jazzhouse.org)
	I appreciate the rant, but there ought to be somewhere for jazz journalists between hackdom and ratdom. Why can't we aspire to writing valuable reportage, insightful essays, critical and speculative literature? I don't want to see my work reduced much further -- if I were just a hack, I'd probably be writing much more lucratively, like ad copy. The real story of the Jazz Awards was the Jazz Awards. Mostly artists presenting honors to other artists. Next year, we and Bird will have an original format. HM

 

Date:	17-Jul-1998 12:37:05
From:	David Whiteis (whiteis@ipfw.edu)
	This won't be an exact quote -- I'm reciting it from memory, from Mingus' original liner notes to BLACK SAINT & THE SINNER LADY -- but as a critic myself, I always go back to this whenever I start to think I'm important: "Critics are amazing people: they can write, they can talk, some of them can play music -- I even know one who can hear!"

 

Date:	19-Jul-1998 08:58:21
From:	george massouris (ms@cranny.schnet.edu.au)
	i agree. i love marsalis but he dont need stanley. let the music talk!!

 

Date:	29-Jul-1998 07:53:07
From:	Sangeeta Michael Berardi (geeta@ix.netcom.com)
	Well, I guess I just had to take that cheap shot in the "subject." Now on to better things: back in the late Sixties Crouch crossed swords with the wrong man when he challenged the great drummer Sunny Murray to a bout. Sunny unceremoniously broke a chair over Stanley's fatback. Apparently the fight was over the fact that failed drummer Stanley was playing all the shit he stole from Sunny's ESP records and Sunny took offense. At the time Sunny himself couldn't get a gig in the club Stanley the NonPlayer was "playing" in. I could see how a man could be pissed off to hear a no-playing lardass using his licks while he himself couldn't get a gig. Crouch tried to slobber his contempt over me one night in the Vanguard while Pharoah was playing and we both were standing along the left sidewall. Apparently my enthusiastic vocalizing offended the Great Grouch and he gave a little push in my back and a nasty glance when I turned. I ignored him because I already knew him for the bigoted moron he is. When Pharoah came off the bandstand he walked straight up to me and gave me a big hug, completely ignoring Stan the Man who was trying to get his attention. Pharoah asked, "Anything happening at the Loft tonight?" He was referring to my loft on Seventh Ave. where Pharoah, Rashied, Dave Schnitter, Joonie Booth, Idries Muhammad, Arthur Rhames, Reggie Workman, Art Taylor and many many more musicians came to play most every night. This was during the 80's when the manipulators, among them Crouch, were encouraging jazzers to look backwards, the era of Marsalis and his "nothing happening after 1964, not even with Trane," arrogance. Creativity was the only rule at the Loft. We played "free", bebop, improvisational funk, whatever the musicians wanted to explore. Pharoah had ended up there after a conversation with Rashied in which he talked about missing the way they played in the old days. Rashied gave Pharoah my number. I had sat in with Pharoah in California so we knew one another somewhat. In fact I was on the Lower East Side during the great rush of creativity in the Sixties and was in casual contact with many musicians, playing with others. Well, that night at the Vanguard I said to Stanley: "Hey, man, I hear you're a drummer. Come on up to the Loft and play with us." He didn't even acknowledge me and he left without a word to Pharoah either. There are some benefits sometimes to being one of the most obscure musicians in the universe. People are more likely to reveal their inner selves to a "nobody." Your jazz page is without doubt the best I've seen. I've just found out about it from my friend Steve Rowland and will be visiting it regularly. I really enjoyed Marty Khan's oh-so-true rant. Can you put me in touch with him? I'd like to write him directly about his diatribe. Perhaps because it's nice to hear someone else conclude that sometimes "nothing is better than something." I chose that route and do not regret it. I'm not well known, but will be in the new jazz encyclopedia being put together by Lewis Porter, a true jazz scholar, not a pretender like Crouch. However, musicians know who I am, even some of the younger ones like Eric Person who wrote me about the "purity of my sound" recently. Retaining that "purity" has been my motivation and reasoning behind some of my "biz decisions" which have seemed very off-the-wall to others. I have no regrets. Marty, at the end of his diatribe, mentions the formation of "alternate distribution" channels, etc. Could you have him, or someone, send me info on that? I'd like to send some tapes to the appropriate folks and see what's up. One of my recording bands is: Archie Shepp, Roswell Rudd, Rashied Ali, Eddie Gomez, Mario Pavone and me, Sangeeta, on guitar/compositions. Another is the same rythmn section with added percussion but with Joe Diorio also on guitar and Vea Williams singing. Another features John Esposito, Hill Greene, Peter O'Brien and Jim Finn and me. Any info you can email to me would be greatly appreciated. I want to bring these recordings out. Only the Shepp date was released and because of recent changes I am now able to take control of these recordings, all of them, without fear of reprisals. (That's a story in itself, but I'm afraid I've already taken up too much of your time.) Thanks for a great site. Peace & Music, Sangeeta Michael Berardi

 

Date:	28-Nov-1998 18:46:16
From:	Skip Norris (SKIPNORRIS@aol.com)
	I've read with great interest the many negative comments that have been generated about the writer Stanley Crouch. I'm very fortunate that I've known Crouch in excess of 15 years - I've found his friendship not only insightful, but tremendously stimulating as well. I know this may seem foreign to many of the critics of Stanley. But as a human being, you cannot find a better human being. He is truly a man to know. But let's deal with the grits and gravy. I agree that Crouch may be gruff in many of his opinions, but that happens when your mind is operating at a high level. I do not (and will not) condone bad behavior, but it's always a two way street with human beings. Howard Mandel could have kept his mouth shut and dealt with Crouch via the written word. But he chose to voice his opinion at the Knitting Factory. Being from Detroit, I know what it's like being "fronted off" by someone trying to prove a point to other people. Keep in mind that when you take the offensive in dealing with people, always be prepared for a backlash (or slap in this case). My point is two wrongs don't make a right. Howard could have dealt with it in a different forum. As far as Stanley's viewpoints on Jazz and Culture, he is probably the most insightful writer today dealing with the written word today. His admirers include Saul Bellow, Henry Louis Gates, the late Ralph Ellison, Richard Bernstein, Alfred Kazen, Poet Laureate - Robert Pinsky, and master writer Tom Wolf who himself says "Stanley Crouch is the jazz virtuoso of the American essay, the maestro of startlingly original variations and improvisations upon familiar themes. He is also an American Orwell: a completely independent voice, free of all cant and ideological etiquette." A big part of the problem that I see living outside the New York scene, is that writers like Gary Giddins, Gene Santoro, Howard Mandel, Chip Defaa, and several others are extremely jealous of Stanley's writing ability and influence within the New York jazz and cultural scene. What other reason could there be? Why make one person the focus of everything that you perceive to be wrong in Jazz? If I read it right Crouch is the reason why Wynton Marsalis is the way he is, why Jazz at Lincoln Center is jacked up, why record companies sign muscians who are "neo traditionalists," why Loraine Gordon doesn't book avant garde musicians, and why Mr. Bill had sex with Monica. Come on now, can one person have this much influence on the New York scene? I don't think so. In closing, I hope many of the folks who read All About Jazz bring real dialogue to the table in future message postings. I'm more interested in why cats like Greg Osby, Steve Coleman, and a couple of others do not swing when they play the music. That should generate more dialogue than the incident at the New York Jazz Awards. Always in 4/4

 

Date:	16-Dec-1998 11:21:23
From:	Dr. Bill
	typical, borish behavior by people with inflated egos. Their selfishness in wanting not only to be part of the jazz scene, but above it actually takes away from the music. Stanley Crouch is the most obvious (I refuse to read his liner notes, they are self indulging nonsense)but not the only self serving nut that feels the need to be heard and scene (hear me roar!).Shut up so I can hear the music. Please. I will decide whether I like Wynton's playing or not based on his performances, not the ravings of some self proclaimed expert.

 

Date:	18-Jan-1999 11:27:26
From:	Oliver Stenzel
	The problem with Crouch is that he mostly does not talk or write about music, but on jazz-ideology in reference to Albert Murray. Just take a look at his liner notes for Marcus Roberts` "The Joy Of Joplin"...

 

Date:	07-Feb-1999 12:33:27
From:	DW
	It could be worse jazz fans. Consider the the fate of fiction and poetry. They're the only arts wherein the academic critics actually claim that their criticism is art-- even worse, they claim that it is superior to "mere" poetry and fiction because "critical discourse" has supposedly "subsumed" both. The hubris of jazz critics pales in comparison to that. Of course, on the brighter side, nobody but other academic critics reads academic criticism, and they have little influence on who gets published. (On the darker side, the marketplace and its dirty little bottom line does.) Perhaps we can all take heart in Barnett Newman's famous one liner: "Artists need critics like birds need ornithologists." Musicians will keep making music, and smart listeners will ultimately find it--just so long as they're smart enough to ignore the hacks and just listen.

 

Date:	22-Sep-1999 12:40:10
From:	Anonymous
	Just about the same time Stanley Crouch jumped in Wynton's pocket, he was awarded the MacArthur Prize. Corporate conspiracy? Maybe not. But Crouch wasn't always a big Wynton booster. Looks like Wynton got a powerful and vociferous ally/flack/ghostwriter and Stanley got a big bag of money, prestige and a platform to advance his musical and personal agendas.

 

Date:	10-Nov-1999 14:06:26
From:	Tamsanqa (zozo@intekom.co.za)
	So What ? Stanley's is a different voice that is as refreshing or revolting as yours!

 

Date:	24-Nov-1999 00:52:14
From:	Peter Hirst (pghirst@capecod.net)
	You said it, Walter; or you appointed your webslavemaster to say it for you: Walter's "Rant". Look up the Webster definition if you must, but consider this one: unresolved anger, indiscriminately and artlessly spewed upon the stage, audience and crew alike, wanting insight. Hack, is it? Let's put any three lines from Stanley's earliest work with a dropped-stick snare riff and a plagairized lyric up against anything you ever wrote. Hack this. Peter Hirst

 

Date:	29-Oct-2000 22:38:26
From:	frankiepop
	walter wins.

 

Date:	06-Mar-2001 14:50:24
From:	Andreas
	Frank Zappa said: "Oh no, you gotta go Who do you write for? I wanna know I believe you is the government's whore And keeping peoples dumb is where you're coming from And keeping peoples dumb is where you're coming from Journalism's kinda scary And of it we should be wary"

 

Date:	20-Aug-2001 10:32:25
From:	pete l. silas (mozfonky@yahoo.com)
	So I see that while crouch isn't cutting down cultural heroes of all persuasions he's also alienating himself from the thing he seem's to love the most,Jazz. I've read several of Stanley books, when I was younger I was dazzled by him. With a few years hindsight, simply put, he pisses me off. At first I liked reading someone who referred to Malcolm X as a "bonehead" not because I agreed but rather I was fascinated by such a free thinking black man who would go on to call native americans "savages". That's when I started to wonder about the fat bastard. I'm indian you see and I take pride in a culture that I consider has more value than this mess we're living in. And also Malcolm, Elvis etc.. are people who i consider american heroes. how dare him criticize malcolm, a man who just about any other black man would consider significant. Malcolm is not here to defend himself which i'm sure he would be able to if he had the chance. He used to eat phony pseudo-intellectuals like Crouch for lunch. Somebody has bought and payed for this chump. I don't know what his problem is but I'm glad I'm not the only one he pisses off. Thanks, Pete.