|
| What kind of impact has Wynton Marsalis had on jazz in the last 15 years?
| Date: | 16-Mar-1999 09:02:26 |
| From: | The Late Great LOUIS ARMSTRONG |
| | NONE !!!!!!!!!! |
| Date: | 17-Mar-1999 10:21:38 |
| From: | K. L. Fricke |
| | Minimal as far as furthering and expanding upon this musical art form. Large though if you consider his care and involvement in the stewardship and preservation of Jazz as an historical art form. Wynton strives for and reaches a very high level of musicianship and musicality with every live and recorded endeavor. I only wish he put more credence in all the wonderful music that has been made by artists such as Albert Ayler, Sun Ra, Air, The Art Ensemble of Chicago, Etc.
|
| Date: | 18-Mar-1999 00:41:39 |
| From: | Nathaniel Crockett (jasbo@cyberdude.com) |
| | Wynton's individual playing has been so-so; however, his musical imput has been outstanding; and the best is yet to be. Primarily because of his educational programs for the masses, appreciation in general. His greatest contributions will be in years to come, as his out reach program come to fruition. Last summer at the Ravinia Jazz Festival Master Classes, he led an audience and student musicians in an interactive seminar that was informative, entertaining, and stimulating. One might disagree with his approach; however, the sincerity of his effort can never be questioned. Although, I must admit some of his composition are a bit too presumptious and Way too long. But this cat is about spreading the word. Music! |
| Date: | 18-Mar-1999 09:16:48 |
| From: | reuben jackson (jackson-r@nmah.si.edu) |
| | Having seen Mr. Marsalis pull off the seemingly impossible
task of both enthralling and quieting an auditorium of high school age-students here at the Smithsonian, I cannot completely "dis" his impact on opening the hearts and minds of those who might otherwise not consider, say, Tadd Dameron's wonderous legacy.
I do, however, decry the border crossing stance Marsalis ( along with his Boswell, the ever truculent Stanley Crouch) has taken regarding what is and what is not jazz.... ("Let's hold Cecil Taylor in a cell for questioning, Stanley)
The music has always thrived on its ability to incorporate
a myriad of influences... Why close the borders now, Wynton?
Such myopia is tragic... It downright stinks. |
| Date: | 18-Mar-1999 13:14:50 |
| From: | Mike Zickar (mikeyz1@altavista.net) |
| | The first jazz CD that I bought was Wynton's Standards vol. II or 3. That made me go out and buy other jazz CDs. Since then, I've sold most of my CDs with a Marsalis on them so I guess you could say I've moved on. But without Wynton, and the media hype about him, I might not be listening to Julius Hemphill's _Reflections_ which is presently on my CD player. Thanks Wynton! |
| Date: | 19-Mar-1999 15:35:20 |
| From: | Darryl G. Thomas (dgthomas@digizen.net) |
| | Unlike Mike, I've kept all of my Wynton CDs and will continue to buy them in the future. I think the most important impact Marsalis had on jazz is that he helped to bring young black musicians back to acoustic jazz. It seems to me that in the '70s the majority of the young musicians were turning to fusion. I think being able to see a young, articulate man playing music that was viewed as too complex, or even worse corny, turned a lot of young musicians around. I also think he helped to raise jazz's profile in the non-jazz press. As for his views as to what constitues a legitimate jazz performance, well they are too conservative. But I've learned to take Wynton's opinion, like most other's, with a pinch of salt. |
| Date: | 24-Mar-1999 13:35:08 |
| From: | Tom Fleming (mojonawl@aol.com) |
| | Regardless of the opinions expressed above, Wynton Marsalis is the only musician of his generation to face up to the monumental task of going through the musical accomplishments of Morton, Ellington, Mingus, and Monk from a compositional perspective and through Oliver, Armstrong, Eldridge, Gillespie, Miles and others from a trumpet mastery perspective. His musical impact upon other musicians of his generation is unmatched. Of course, he, nor anyone, is on the level of Ellington, but he is probably the only one currently willing to confront the full breadth of Ellington's output. Being different for the sake of difference (without musicality)is not heroic in any sense (ie. Art Ensemble of Chicago). Wynton, fortunately, is primarily engaged in developing and expanding heroic musical statements. |
| Date: | 31-Mar-1999 09:46:36 |
| From: | Bruce K Woods (wphilly@ix.netcom.com) |
| | He has with his fabulous playing, his down to earth personality..(I go by MY interaction with the cat...not some whacked jazz journalist)...and the fact that a blueprint on how to Market a jazz musician was FINALLY initiated...Marsalis was as HUGE as any Jazz musician in HISTORY, in term of impact.
Your opinions of his playing are just that...your opinions...which isn't the issue. All i know is that I can go anywhere, mention say Dave Douglas...and get blank stares.. That's impact! |
| Date: | 02-Apr-1999 13:16:18 |
| From: | Ken Dryden |
| | Wynton Marsalis' impact on jazz is mixed. There is little question that he is an outstanding player and works hard as
as a jazz educator. As a composer I feel he is inconsistent,
the exclusion of deserving older musicians (of all races- in favor of nothing but young lions) from the grants in the Lincoln Center series is silly, while his criticism of
jazz styles that he doesn't care for is a waste of time.
Musicians are better off letting the critics be the villians
than to be as vocal as Wynton has chosen to be. Sitting for
a blindfold test is about as far as jazz musicians can go
before they start hurting themselves with their negative comments. |
| Date: | 16-Apr-1999 15:04:56 |
| From: | Debbie (dap54@netscape.net) |
| | In the 1998 JAZZIZ Readers Winners Poll Wynton was voted #2 as the most overrated (Kenny G #1 and Harry Connick Jr #3). I guess that makes Wynton the Kenny G to the serious jazz. Obviously he has had an impact - good or bad, positive or negative. |
| Date: | 16-Apr-1999 15:13:02 |
| From: | Debbie (dap54@netscape.net) |
| | In the 1998 JAZZIZ Readers Winners Poll, Wynton was voted #2 as the "Most Overated" (Kenny G was #1 and Harry Connick Jr #3). I guess that makes Wynton the Kenny G to the serious jazz fan. Obviously, he has made an impact - good or bad, positive or negative. |
| Date: | 18-Apr-1999 13:30:40 |
| From: | Yana (Yana185856@aol.com) |
| | Wynton Marsalis impact on Jazz has been fabulous!
Yes, it's true he has been promoted by Columbia but, it's that's the idea, the job of the record company - to promote it's artists -- all it really shows is what a poor job the other record labels have been doing with their artist rosters.Why is Wynton carrying the blame for this! There is certainly enough room! As to his playing and educational programs well he has certainly brought a lot of attention to the fact that there are very few Jazz programs in the high schools. He has even had a few seminars (I call it) to teach music teachers how to implement jazz programs within their music courses. That's a lot to take on -- not to mention assisting with getting instuments etc. in some of these high schools. Hey, let's be real about Wynton doesn't have to do any of this - He has already done enough to say he was involve but, he continues & lot's of young musicians and their parents wait around after his performances, classes to speak to him. He has paided for alot of young musicians to attend music camps as well. Now how many people/musicians are doing this? 5% huh? Lighten up please! Even better get involve a little more & join him.
Let's all keep it going! Yana |
| Date: | 23-Apr-1999 19:05:36 |
| From: | B. Stevens |
| | I hope that the stories I've heard about Wynton Marsalis and race are not true. Surely everyone realizes that the vast majority if not all of the major innovators in jazz have been black, and certainly the majority of the great musicians. But it's a long way from accepting that reality to stating, as W.M. is alleged to have done, that "whites can't play jazz". I would not say that Wynton should institute some kind of quota in his bands so there are a certain number of each race, either. He should pick whoever he's comfortable with personally and musically, and if he wants to have a band of all black musicians, that's obviously his choice. But jazz has a universal appeal, and it can be played, at the top level, and enjoyed, by people of all races and backgrounds. |
| Date: | 25-Apr-1999 02:02:36 |
| From: | bob brookmeyer (brookmusic@aol.com) |
| | The worry from a lot of us older and more experienced musicians is that the standard is getting lower and lower - it is becoming just that.....a "standard." The re-creation of the past is patently impossible and if we have to talk about jazz history, that means we haven't lived it. The encouragement of new music and NEW thinking musicians is very prevalent in Europe, where I work. Nobody worries about old Wynton over there. Here, he has become a very large industry and is impossible to even consider any changes. Composition lessons WOULD help, but that's hard when you are in the big time. |
| Date: | 28-Apr-1999 20:32:40 |
| From: | Skip (jamphibian@aol.com) |
| | First let's figure out what jazz is before we can say how anyone can do anything. Duke Ellinton hated the term. Bird was not fond of it either. Nor Miles. In all discriptions it is improvised music. I don't understand the hoopla. Wynton is a good guy but the fact that we have to ask ourselves whether he has made an impact or not should answer that question. Bird is still educating people on how to play what is called Bebop (a phrase that a journalist gave to Dizzy) John Coltrane, Monk and Ornette are still teaching us and will continue until the end of time. Infact they taught Wynton. People are jealous of Wynton and should just let him do what he wants and you do what you want. He doesn't own "Jazz" (whatever that is) so why all the hoopla. |
| Date: | 01-May-1999 03:58:28 |
| From: | John Kaufman (jkaufman@cforcetech.com) |
| | I had heard of winton in the early 80's, and being a musician was interested. Lucky me, front row seats in pittsburgh, but the dude was scary, what most I remember is the intensity, at which he played. Since then, enjoyable listenings, wild fast, and colorful, and soflty played standards that truly cast my vote. I've only 1 regret, as reading the newspaper, the review of the tribute to the Duke, on his 100 centenial, would I have loved to be there. |
| Date: | 08-May-1999 01:53:43 |
| From: | Nick Meyer |
| | I saw Wynton Marsalis in concert in Madison about a year or so ago. The concert was billed "Morton, Monk, & Marsalis."
I enjoyed the concert, especially the band's performance of Morton (which was terrific - he should record a Morton CD), and the soft, rounded, romantic Monk interpretations. But when it came around to the Marsalis compositions they were almost instantly forgettable, especially in contrast to the other two giants - the drop-off was striking. Marsalis played with a good ensemble band, weak soloists - he was the best of the bunch. But Marsalis lacks imagination and a sense of drama/solo development. There are literally dozens of better trumpet players around (white or black). I liked the guy, very good stage presence, funny, personable, but jazz immortality?? I doubt it. Would he even have been second trumpet in the great Ellington or Basie Bands? Would Cat Anderson, Clark Terry, Buck Clayton, or Cootie Williams etc. have to move over for Marsalis - I doubt it. Marsalis' high level of competence is a long way from greatness. |
| Date: | 09-May-1999 05:49:22 |
| From: | Helge (helgess@telnett.no) |
| | I don't have a problem with Wynton Marsalis and what he is doing. I have a problem with the perspective many jazz people have on this WORLD music called jazz; I have a problem with how they perceive what's going on. I have made no scientific research, but these people seem to be from the U.S.A. Many of them live in N.Y.C.
I don't think we can blame Wynton Marsalis personally for this situation.
-What kind of impact has Wynton Marsalis had on jazz in the last 15 years?. Who can answer that question without checking what's going in jazz? Bob Brookmeyer knows what he's talking about. |
| Date: | 09-May-1999 21:11:40 |
| From: | Victor Williams |
| | The United States is now the minor leagues of jazz with some exceptions. It certainly isn't Wynton's fault - meaning the whole situation or his status as the cover boy for the minor leagues. Get used to it. This country is getting dumber and dumber. Jazz isn't dumb. Why should good jazz stick around when there are more appreciative/sophisticated audiences elsewhere? Wynton's a pretty good player. Influence on jazz? Good educator in the narrow range of his interests. |
| Date: | 10-May-1999 12:13:18 |
| From: | Evan Scott |
| | Seems to me Wynton is a good player but has come to represent what is wrong with jazz in this country, and that's why people are so bent out of shape. He's conservative, business savvy, and aversive to much of what has developed in jazz over the past 40 years. This puts him tempramentally at odds with a lot of people who are not so conservative, have other than market-place values, and are not so intellectually risk aversive. He in some ways represents what this country has become. I think these are the underlying issues. If they weren't, a pretty good jazz trumpet player wouldn't be generating this attention and fuss. There is also simply a lot of jealousy - he's articulate, and in the spotlight. But I can understand why better musicians are a bit irked. Public perception of what jazz is does impact on the opportunities to play and record. There are reasons that Europe is now the center/home of the more accomplished, innovative jazz. Jazz truly is now a world music. Maybe in the long run that's a very good thing for musicians if they are willing to no longer see this country as the only possibility. |
| Date: | 11-May-1999 18:08:58 |
| From: | Pippy |
| | I think Wynton's the bees knees and a right-o daddy. You're just a bunch of arm chair players nursing your minds that have turned green. He's cool, he's sexy, he's smart, and he can play trumpet. Hey,isn't that enough? |
| Date: | 11-May-1999 18:57:58 |
| From: | Helge (helgess@telnett.no) |
| | Pippy, what makes you think that the Wynton Marsalis threads are about Wynton Marsalis??? |
| Date: | 12-May-1999 00:09:48 |
| From: | Pippy |
| | Now, don't get metaphysical on me! Well, maybe a little . . . |
| Date: | 29-Jun-1999 15:59:07 |
| From: | Pippy |
| | HELGE - its been weeks!! How long do you think a girl can wait?? |
| Date: | 04-Aug-1999 13:31:23 |
| From: | Beatty |
| | Pipe and Helge have killed this thread. It is impossible to respond or to make a meaningful comment in the presence of such thought. Try it, you'll fail too. And so what becomes of Wynton? If a musician has great imapct but nobody is there to hear it, is the impact still there? |
| Date: | 04-Aug-1999 22:00:59 |
| From: | Pippy |
| | I have killed nothing. Only Helge can answer for his heart. |
| Date: | 07-Aug-1999 12:50:21 |
| From: | Zeke |
| | Violins, please. |
| Date: | 13-Aug-1999 23:26:40 |
| From: | Bobbie Magee |
| | Who cares about Wynton - what's happening with Pippy and Helge? |
| Date: | 14-Aug-1999 03:39:59 |
| From: | Paul Abella (Pabella3@aol.com) |
| | Wynton's impact on jazz has been incredibly good AND unspeakably horrifying. Let me explain... 1) Good: He almost singlehandedly brought straight ahead jazz back to the masses. Who knows how many stories there are of "The first jazz album I bought was a Wynton album." Not to mention, that first album, with Sister Cheryl, is quite impressive. 2) Horrifyingly bad: He brought back straight ahead jazz, but the straight ahead jazz jazz that came back is repertoiry music. It very rarely moves forward. Now, for example, anything with a Rhodes sounds "dated." His influence has made jazz somewhat myopic and focused towards old white males who think June Christy was the last great vocalist. That's not right.
As for his own stuff, I am very impressed with a lot of his stuff. I thought In this House, On this Morning, for example, was very impressive.
So, yes we will be talking about Wynton in 50 years. what we will be saying about him though, is entirely up to Wynton. |
| Date: | 14-Aug-1999 20:00:36 |
| From: | Gene |
| | If Wynton didn't have the PR behind him he'd just be another fairly well known trumpet player. He is a great politician, no doubt, and he is technically excellent, but where's the fire and the imagination? Where's the development and vision? I'm still looking - he's got all the advantages a musician could imagine - and a fraction of the talent of a Don Cherry, or an Art Farmer or dozens of others. Do you really think that people will be listening to him 50 years from now? |
| Date: | 15-Aug-1999 15:48:11 |
| From: | Walter W. |
| | DON CHERRY = an advanced technical noodler
ART FARMER = a very talented but sometimes misguided dupe of the modernists, has done good work
Wynton Marsalis = a talented but stale cream puff spoiled by superficial fame and the easy lifeYou want real trumpet/cornet/fluegelhorn players: Roy Eldridge
Louie Armstrong (earlier version)
Buck Clayton
Harry "Sweets" Edison
The Ellington horn section players
Henry "Red" Allen Now these guys could play trumpet with heart, soul, and balls. None of this technical noodling/fake retro stale cream puff stuff. CLEAN OUT YOUR EARS !! |
| Date: | 25-Aug-1999 14:12:24 |
| From: | Al |
| | Walter, Don Cherry and Art Farmer are great players. Perhaps, YOUR earwax has fossilized? |
| Date: | 26-Aug-1999 14:51:43 |
| From: | Beatty |
| | Hey Walter and Al, quit your bitchin' Actually I have a sense you guys have more in common than you think. Just trust me, I know these things. Have you guys ever met? How do you know? |
| Date: | 26-Aug-1999 14:58:53 |
| From: | Duane |
| | I'm only eight ( I wasn't even born 15 years ago) but my Dad says Wynton is no big deal. |
| Date: | 26-Aug-1999 18:15:55 |
| From: | Pat |
| | Duane: your Dad knows what he's talking about. |
| Date: | 28-Aug-1999 08:59:34 |
| From: | Vee |
| | Since this thread seems to have run out of useful things to say there is another source worth checking out. Ted Gioia's "The History of Jazz" which is in paperback has a long discussion about Marsalis that even handedly assesses his strengths and weaknesses. This is a very good, well written overview of the history of jazz that is appreciative of an extraordinary range of players and styles. |
| Date: | 21-Oct-1999 18:10:37 |
| From: | Ned |
| | Wynton was once very good and very promising. He's now good/ok. A tame cat. He never was among the greats. Lacked fire, and imagination, and soul. |
| Date: | 16-Nov-1999 09:54:15 |
| From: | Doc S |
| | Wynty's da bomb yo |
| Date: | 16-Nov-1999 10:00:37 |
| From: | Nurse S |
| | Doc S be one fly nigga. word
while wynton's technical skill may not be as good as the great, older musicians (such as my nigga-hepcat, Lou-Bomb Armstrong), he's kept jazz alive in the public eye and caused many to delve deeper into jazz who heard some of his work first. while those people may end up moving on (to, say, Rob McConnell and his Boss Brass [with Rude Jude Kay] or Lee Morgan), it will be marsalis that introduced them to the genre.
peace out
so what do you guys think of Nietzsche's Superman theory? |
| Date: | 21-Nov-1999 18:19:54 |
| From: | Jon Huron (JDHuron@txlutheran.edu) |
| | Being a music major myself I believe that Wynton can easily stand among any of the greats. He has stood on the shoulders of the fore-fathers of jazz and simply continued and kept the spirit of jazz alive. His playing is almost unmatched by any person alive, and his creativity will be remembered long after he is gone. How can anybody not give Marsalis the recognition he desrves. Don't comment on Marsalis unless you have listened to it all, and studied his achievments. Only then can you comment on how he plays, or what he has done for us. Everyone here at Texas Lutheran University supports what Wynton has done, and what he will do. |
| Date: | 13-Dec-1999 21:30:13 |
| From: | jazzybest (blckpride@aol.com) |
| | Wynton is a o.k. player. I just think he needs to expand
his horizon. I agree that wynotn has been spoiled by the
good life of fame which as effected his playing in a not so
good way. WAKE UP WYNTON AND CLEAN UP YOUR A |
| Date: | 15-Dec-1999 08:26:56 |
| From: | Rolfe |
| | Armstrong,Eldridge,Gillespie,Navarro,Morgan,Clifford Brown, Don Cherry - sorry, but no way does Wynton belong in that group. The guy is a great technician and a master of public relations but he's not among the immortals no matter how many empty headed rave reviews he does generate. |
| Date: | 15-Dec-1999 13:38:49 |
| From: | Alan |
| | Wynton's lack of real creativity as a jazz musician or composer is the issue. However technically well he plays his solos aren't particularly memorable nor are his compositions. Perhaps there are reasons that he rarely records with great musicians - the contrast would be too obvious. Take a look at a Miles Davis or an Art Farmer or a Clark Terry - they almost always played with other great musicians and they more than just held their own, undoubtedly being pushed and improved by the experiences. Since his young days, does Wynton record with a James Carter or a Tommy Flanagan or a Marty Ehrlich or a Brad Mehldau or a Wayne Shorter or a Lee Konitz or a Kenny Barron? I'm still looking . . . Wynton is the type of musician who would do well in an academic environment - intelligent, correct, and risk aversive. |
| Date: | 15-Dec-1999 17:45:47 |
| From: | Zippy |
| | John Huron: He's good but he ain't great. This isn't just my opinion. Go to another thread on this site - the one about the most influential musicians of the century and there's NOT a whole lot of mention of Marsalis. But I did notice a lot of other trumpet players repeatedly mentioned. |
| Date: | 26-Dec-1999 20:39:35 |
| From: | Zimbo (zimbo.geocities.com) |
| | Hey, he's gotten a thread all to himself on this site and mention in another title. He is a phenomenon of sorts - like the Benny Goodman of our times??? He's conservative, very popular, and can really play at times. |
| Date: | 29-Nov-2000 17:13:25 |
| From: | wayne |
| | WYNTON IS good enough to stand with great players.He is not a innovator but who was.There were only a few.Armstrong Bix Berigan Red Allen Cootie Buck James Gillipie Shavers Clifford Miles Hubbard Little Mitchill and now Marsales Yes that sounds right.JAZZ IS not going to evolve anymore because it has reach its peak.Just like rock and the blues all music comes to a point were it has been maxamize.Thanks to musicans like Marsales Jazz will not die.Lets enjoy her and the great players we have now. |
| Date: | 29-Nov-2000 19:15:39 |
| From: | Marcus (Marcpres@aol.com) |
| | Is he Miles? No, absolutly not. but he is young, and has tremendous potential. But his greatest controbution thus far is that he has opened up the world of jazz to a younger generation. Marsalis actually took me to his apartment and taught me my first jazz sond on the piano, and i have loved it ever sence, 10 years later. The work he has done with children has been unmatched, and he has givin a new generation the gift of exposing us to one of the greatest artforms ever to come out of this country. |
| Date: | 06-Jan-2001 17:27:39 |
| From: | Tiki |
| | Wayne: jazz or jazz trumpet has peaked with Marsalis? It's not going to evolve anymore? I not only disagree with you but these are riduculous statements. |
| Date: | 06-Jan-2001 23:20:14 |
| From: | Michael Caldwell (editor@trumpetguild.org) |
| | Wynton Marsalis is simply a singular individual who
loves to play the trumpet. I do not think it is his intent to
be what he has become or to be subjected to the
amount of fame and/or criticism that he attracts. Anyone
who has spent more than two minutes around him will
verify that he is a gentle person, living entirely in the
moment. He lives life to the fullest and goes all out in
every thing that he does. I believe the impact he has
had on jazz is greater than any other moden player,
because he has made the average listener aware of
jazz, where eveyone else, especially in the 1970s, failed
at this. He brought jazz back from an art form that was
only flourishing in college music departments to being
a widly popular and successful art form. Without
Wynton, there would have been no swing dance craze,
no jazz musicians every night on Leno and Conan, little
jazz in the movies. While these things are commercial,
they get people out to hear live music. It is disappointing to me when I read cynical comments
from established musicians. It says more about the
person making the comments and tends to make the
work of that particular artist invalid. That has happened
to Wynton and I am sure in many ways he regrets the
immature comments he made when he was younger. I
am surprised when I read comments from veteran
musicians talking shots at him. I guess some people
feel that when they are aging they only have a little bit of
time left to set everyone straight. I enjoy Wynton's playing and writing and I also try to get
something out of everyone I hear. It is NOT because I
do not know the difference. It is because I believe in
God anf that allows me to see the good things in life
and not flood my mind with negativity. |
| Date: | 07-Jan-2001 17:05:39 |
| From: | Ralph Reno (Renor@hotmail.com) |
| | Well, perhaps someday Marsalis will someday be able to be as generous. Perhaps, someday he will appreciate and acknowledge jazz musicians that were/are far more talented and important than he will ever be - I'm talking about in the long run. Musicians such as Bill Evans, Scott LaFaro, David Murray, Julius Hemphill, Anthony Braxton, Muhal Richards Abrams etc. etc. Marsalis has a very crude mind, with far more interest in his own momentary personal power than with jazz or art or truth. |
| Date: | 10-Jan-2001 21:33:14 |
| From: | Holly |
| | A very crude mind and spirit. |
| Date: | 10-Jan-2001 23:39:49 |
| From: | Jimmy Bones |
| | Ya |
| Date: | 16-Jan-2001 17:11:43 |
| From: | Gordon (gman@scientist.com) |
| | MP would be OK if he hadn't been handed the role as the Foremost Authority on Jazz, then turns around and disses or ignores so many greats. Jazz is different to everybody, and a phrase of wisdom is, "de gustabus non disputandum est". But in his role as the wfaj, he has totally defecated on the last 40 years of the most creative music this world has ever heard. Sure, classics, straight ahead are fine. So's classical music, classic rock, whatever. But creative music did not end in 1961! A lot of the music is so far out that most people will never get it. So what! That is art. MP is stuck in the past, and seeks to nail the lid on the not yet dead art form. Yeah, he can play. And Stevie Ray Vaughan could play Hendrix so you couldn't tell who was playing. But MP, talented as he is, is a punk as far as I'm concerned, and has not helped the future of creative music.Please send him home. |
| Date: | 18-Jan-2001 01:03:59 |
| From: | Kevin Quail (byas@home.com) |
| | Wynton has had a detrimental influence on Jazz just by acting as its spokesman. He has also been very successful financially. Unfortunately, when record companies see dollar signs, they turn an art form into so much dreck- it all becomes about the hype rather than the substance. And his quotes in Ken Burns' "Jazz" documentary- like about Armstrong: "He could take what could be and make it what is. He could make the invisible visible." WHAT? Was he just sitting there making shit up? He's not my spokesman. |
| Date: | 21-Jan-2001 14:34:46 |
| From: | Philly Trumpet |
| | I've never thought much of Wynton's playing and I find I think even less of his intellectualizing (assuming it ain't Stanley Crouch pulling his strings). And, frankly, I had hoped that the racial divide of my youth would, well, if not go away, maybe get better. I hate to say this, but I think Wynton (and now Ken Burns, who could probably make sex boring if he did a documentary on it)has got to take some credit for reopening old wounds, rehearsing old myths, and generally making a lot of people wonder just what it is about this guy that has brought him such success. Jealous? Sure. Disgusted. Even more so. Great musicians (and this proves I'm not one) do their talking with their horns. I guess Wynton just doesn't have anything to say. |
| Date: | 23-Jan-2001 01:25:25 |
| From: | mesabb |
| | Wynton's helped keep it alive! Thank God for him! Just having a Ken Burn's Jazz to beat up on, this very dialogue, a Stanley Crouch article or interview, whatever. It's all good. All Jazz. Long live jazz and jazz lovers of all stripes. |
| Date: | 23-Jan-2001 10:25:23 |
| From: | Rich |
| | Wynton is having a huge impact on jazz. He and Ken Burns are helping us neophites get our arms around this music.
He's just telling his story, we should be smart enough to understand that. |
| Date: | 23-Jan-2001 18:12:02 |
| From: | April |
| | Hey he's a great trumpet player, why don't you give him a break? I'm only 15 but I love his playing. You guys are overcritical about what counts about jazz--it sounds good and people love it! Who cares if he hasn't made the impact the Duke has? Obviously you all have heard of him, so he's made his mark somewhere along the line. |
| Date: | 24-Jan-2001 11:25:42 |
| From: | downstairs (streetwld@hotmail.com) |
| | i liked the ken burns jazz series; it was very ambitious but felt they should've had more of the living artists to give quotes and soundbites...where was Freddie Hubbard, Horace Silver, Joe Zawinul, Billy Cobham, Joe Henderson, Dollar Brand - who is a direct descendant from Ellington and Monk, where was Sonny Rollins, Bob James, Yusef Lafeef, Steve Gadd, Wayne Shorter, Ramsey Lewis, this was a shame because all of these musicians have had over 30 years in the game...there was not a single mention of CTI Records, where was Wes Montgomery, Grant Green, Jimmy Smith???? where was Johnny Griffin, McCoy Tyner, Elvin Jones????nothing...there was not a single jazz critic from Europe or Japan and no one can deny that there are tons of good jazz critics there....where was Chick Corea, Arturo Sandoval, Paquito D'Rivera?????Hank Crawford, Brother Jack McDuff, Kenny Burrell, Oscar Peterson????? and not a single mention in 17 hours of Sun Ra????who started out as an arranger for Fletcher Henderson.... the series should have been called "intro to jazz" instead of "jazz" and Stanley Crouch & Gary Giddens got way too much play???they should have given some play to the great jazz photgraphers who have documented the music over the years...they used so many of their photos but did not do a segment on jazz photography...and if you grew up with jazz, you would have come in contact with 'downbeat' magazine (love it or hate it..) i will buy the ken burn jazz book just for the photos, but like someone said earlier, America is now the minor leagues for jazz. without Europe and Japan many jazz artists would starve to death or be forced to take day jobs... hopefully, after the series, non-jazz fans will begin to appreciate the importance of the music...jazz never died, it will continue just like the blues.... |
| Date: | 26-Jan-2001 12:32:34 |
| From: | JJJ |
| | When the Ken Burns "Jazz" series was first mentioned as a possibility, I was excited as could be. As the years and months rolled closer, I became more excited. The CD's came out, the book came out, then the series. I partially knew what to expect. Telling the story of jazz is challenging enough, let alone carving it up into decades for TV consumption (supported by GM which is another story . . .)so I was sort of prepared for a history of jazz that was more suitable for my mom, let alone the jazz fan/critic/musician. As I began to read some early reviews, I was upset at what I perceived to be another cat fight of jazz critics who still blame "those damn Beatles" for taking away our share of the consumer market. However, upon viewing everything through the 8th episode, it became clear that not only is this a terrible history of jazz, it is terrible history in general. It seems to me that Ken Burns got some bad advice and fell for that old historical pitfall of allowing too few to dictate too much. Wynton Marsalis will always be Wynton Marsalis and love him or hate him, he's just our Glenn Miller (now Branford . . .there's a cat I like), but by not allowing the living "primary sources" to speak, Ken allowed this to become "Stanley's and Wynton's Jazz." As a drummer, I keep wondering when Louie Bellson, Roy Haynes, Elvin Jones, etc. will show up? What a waste, but I guess I shouldn't be surprised because this series reflects Duke's take on swing "Jazz is music, Swing is business." Ken Burns and Wynton Marsalis are all about business. |
| Date: | 26-Jan-2001 17:15:46 |
| From: | Scott Vander Werf (vanders@gvsu.edu) |
| | As a jazz radio programmer I've had to give a listen to all of Wynton's recordings for the past 8 years, and frankly I find his compositions and playing extremely dull. The first time I saw him perform was with his sextet in my small midwestern hometown, and they seemed to be resting on their laurels, and phoning their talents to the audience. A few months later Wynton was at the Chicago jazz fest and the same group was burning! (No holding back when you're in a big city, I guess.) I wish I could be more complimentary, because I met the man and he was extremely gracious and personable. But most of the jazz that I've cherished in recent decades has been either put-down or ignored by the guy. Obviously, the strong opinions people have for the man are because of the high-profile position he has in jazz ---a lucrative recording contract, the control of a prestigous Cultural center, and loud bull-horn. |
| Date: | 26-Jan-2001 18:55:06 |
| From: | Andreas |
| | As far as his own music is concerned, I've never heard any heard any of his stuff that really thrilled me. I do own a couple of hos brother Branford's CD's, which I like. I think the influence of his records has been minimal or nonexistent. As has been mentioned, and as anyone who has been watching the Ken Burns series can tell, he is a very charismatic and witty person who is very knowledgeable about the history of the music. I have seen him previously on a music education mini-series on PBS made for school kids. I thought he was excelent in that. He has been very helpful because of his ability to connect to people and to gain their interest. Of course the other aspect of Mr. Marsalis is the dogmatic narrow-minded stance of the Marsalis/Crouch/Lincoln Center axis, which in my opinion has only served to limit the advancement of the music as a living and evolving art. Any art form that stops evolving dies. At every stage of its development when the music started getting stuffy it was infused with a new vitality by some outside influence, whether it was blues, latin music, gospel, classical, r&b or whatever. Jazz, in turn has had a global impact. I travel to Brazil often and when I listen to the radio there I'm struck by the fact that a lot of the music there has at least some jazz influences (chords, harmonies, etc.)(By the way, bossa nova and Bird's recordings with Machito's orchestra, which are fantastic, are a type of jazz fusion, aren't they?). Unfortunately in that regard, Marsalis's influence on jazz has been detrimental. In part I guess you can chalk up his reactionary attitude to his classical training, which does not exactly reward innovation and creativity. I just hope that jazz never gets as stuffy as that scene. For all of Marsalis's "jazz at Lincoln Center, I'd much rather hear jazz in a small hole in the wall with plastic chairs. |
| Date: | 27-Jan-2001 19:20:13 |
| From: | WTK |
| | Positive: He has been a tireless proselytizer and educator dedicated to bringing jazz to a wider audience, especially young people.
Neutral: His virtuosity is indisputable, but his compositional and improvisatory skills are derivative and not particularly compelling.
Negative: He advances a vision of jazz that is ultraconservative and exclusionary. |
| Date: | 28-Jan-2001 03:18:25 |
| From: | Tony (a-stevens@raytheon.com) |
| | Wynton is exactly what Jazz has needed at this time in this place. Has anyone noticed that the quality of contemporary music and musicianship is in nose dive for the worse. Remember that most popular is derived from early jazz. For all music lovers, a person like Wynton is needed to help redirect young musicians and music lovers to a musical artform that is of a more enduring quality than what is currently being produced for mass public consumption. I personally reached the point twelve years ago when I had lost interest in all popular music(R&B, jazz fusion(Kenny G, Miles Davis(Tutu)), rap, et al.) It never occurred to me to listen to straight ahead jazz or classical music; I did not know about it. I stopped buying music and listening to the radio. This went on for about 10 years. Then, one day I saw Wynton being interviewed on television. I was immediately impressed with his passion for his craft(I had never heard him play-it did not matter). He was talking about all the things that I felt regarding music and art today, about the general decline in people's(particularly young people's) interest in things of real value. He immediately struck a chord with me. To make a long story short, I bought one of his albums, then another, then another, then another(Hot House Flowers), then another, ....,(I am up to about twenty now). Then I started listening to Miles(So What-I was almost in tears listening to this beautiful music). I bought myself some Coltrane(4 CDs so far). My inventory has continued to grow. THEN, Wynton began to discuss the music of Duke Ellington......My life has been transformed forever. Now, Wynton has introduced me to Louis Armstrong.....who knows where I'll be next. I've have bought myself a trumpet(at age 34) because of Wynton...which is basically for my son who is now 3. I don't know if Wynton has an impact on Jazz at all but the above is the impact that he has had on me. He is a true professional who is passionate about his craft as well as a serious thinker about the impact of his work on society as a whole. As a Black man who is about three years younger than Wynton, I instantly identify with the man and am glad he is who he is. |
| Date: | 30-Jan-2001 19:01:23 |
| From: | Philly Trumpet |
| | Well, to repeat, the series is atrocious. One of the reasons there's been so little attention paid to so many mausicians, white and black, is that so much attention has been paid to so few. Look, as a trumpet player, I idolize Louis. But I'm not kidding myself. I really don't think he played much after 1930 that really moved the music forward. There were other cats--hey, Ken, did you ever hear of Roy Eldridge--whose contributions were more vital. Dizzy came out of Roy (according to Dizzy), not Pops, even though, frankly, we all came out of Pops at some level. Ellington: to my ears, many of his "major" orchestral compositions sound mannered or busy. His bands were frequently ragged. The prima donnas he employed had their own ideas about intonation. So why spend so much time worshipping Duke? Hey, you could profitably listen to Erskine Hawkins (or Artie Shaw's 1949 band, which was his best), or Woody Herman (mentioned in passing as a junkie Heaven) and learn as much if not more. This "series" is about icons and myths. It is about the cultural politics of Wynton, Stanley, and Gary. It does the music scant justice. I must make one admission: I had never seen that clip of Clifford Brown playing on the Soupy Sales (!!!) show. It is the first and only time I've seen him play. It made me cry. Wynton: good for the music, but no credit to it. |
| Date: | 31-Jan-2001 12:27:03 |
| From: | Andreas |
| | The essay "Jazz, A Very Long Film by Ken Burns" by John Grabowski, feattured on AAJ, nails it right on the head. I would be laughing if it weren't so true!
|
| Date: | 01-Feb-2001 11:33:52 |
| From: | Miles Davis (from beyond) |
| | ZERO! GET HIM OUTTA HERE. |
| Date: | 02-Feb-2001 17:44:23 |
| From: | Leon Wieseltier |
| | Who's afraid of Wynton Marsalis? Except for people with ears and brains, everybody. Or so it would appear from the reception of Ken Burn's stupefying "Jazz," for which Marsalis served as "senior creative consultant and as senior on-camera exegete. In a symposium in the Arts and Leisure section of The New York Times, the centrality of Marsalis in Burn's epic provokes resentment from a jazz historian ("...with Wynton Marsalis arriving like a jazz Dalai Lama, after the deaths of Elliington and Armstrong...") and "angry blues" from trumpeter Jon Faddis, who is incensed that the "philosophy" of Marsalis is "presented as fact, rather than opinion or interpretation." Faddis is also "angry that the music from 1961 until now was given only one episode of two hours.": this is the old complaint about the neo-classsicism of Marsalis and its allegedly reationary character. Meanwhile The Weekly Standard reached all the way to The Washington Times to find someone to aaccuse Marsalis of racism -- pardon me, of "racialism." The writer, who seems to think that Mel Powell was the equal of Thelonious Monk, cites the "searing" opinion of the freelance philistine Terry Teachout that Marsalis propounds "an ideology in which race is a primary factor in the making of aesthetic judgments," and reports that the "racialist ideology has played out in a series of jazz programs [at Lincoln Center] based on the work of black players, composers, and arrangers." Jazz programs based on the works of black players, composers and arrangers? Imagine! In truth, the attempt in recent years to deny African Americans pride of place in the evolution of jazz has been stupid and ugly. Bix and Benny and the rest notwithstanding. And the imputation of racialist standards to Marsalis's view of jazz is a willful misrepretation of his music and his institution. In this regard, his livid brothers on the left understand him better than his livid brothers on the right. It is precisely because he has chammpioned an aesthetic point of regard toward jazz -- as a serious art that is pledged, like all serious art, to the beauty of structure and the morality of structure -- that Marsalis hs not pioneered a reconsideration of the achievement of Albert Ayler. Unlike the downtown expressionists, Coltranes's idiot children, Marsalis does not consider feeling the enemy of form. But formalism is a variety of universalism. It establishes itself at the highest level of generality: at the level of the human. For this reason, an aesthete who is a racialist is a bad aesthete, but an aesthete who is a democrat is a good aesthete, and Marsalis is one of the most accomplished aesthetes of his time. "God don't like ugly," he wrote in Blood on the Fields. Maybe God don't like the Weekly Standard. Is it really controvesial to suggest that jazz is historically more black than white but spiritually neither black nor white: that personal expression is the beginning but not the end of art; that spontaneity is hardly a promise of truth; that improvisation is an activity of the intellect; and that the alto playing of John Zorn represents a falling off from the alto playing of Johnny Hodges and Lee Konitz and Jackie McLean and Ornette Coleman? But fall off, I say, fall off. This is a free country, and everybody can produce any noise that he wishes to produce. Still the noises will be judged, because judging is what minds do. From the standpoint of pleasure, the judgment will not be severe: my pleasure is not more valuable than your pleasure. Indeed, I will confess gladly to the pleasure that Lester Bowie's version of "The Great Pretender" brings me. But I will not mistake my emotional attachment to that slumming masterpiece for its musical excellence. For decades Chet Baker's singing has furnished the soundtrack for my imperfect man's heart, but I will concede that, artistically speaking, it is just junk that I love. Distinctions of quality may be nothing more than classifications of delight, but still they must be maintained. And no apology need be offered for the belief that the art that asks more of you is the art that should be more precious to you. We are here for more than fun. In Burn's 19 hours of hollow hagiographies, Marsalis stands out like a soloist whose rhythm section is lost somewhere behind him. His is the only analytical voice in this interminable startstruck rhapsody. (His little lesson about "Episrophy" alone is worth a sea of sepia.) Sure, there are good things on these tapes: I will not soon forget the sight of Coleman Hawkins watching Monk sublimely poke the piano; or of the battered and lovely Lester Young stepping up to play a pellucid chorus of "Fine and Mellow" before the battered and lovely Billie Holiday; or of Soupy Sales introducing Clifford Brown. But Burns suffocates the jazz tradition in his superlatives. He deadens everything with his wonder. He had come to be ravished. A helpless hero-worshiper, his success thrreatens to make hero worship into a respectable historical standpoint. He is really just a fan: Bob Costas with an NEA grant. In the book that accompanies "Jazz," Burns admits that "when I began the project, I had perhaps two jazz records in my fairly large music collection," and it shows. The music in these progrms is mainly the background for its edifying narrative; I do not remember a single piece that Burns allows to be given in its entirety. Alas, you cannot have the mystic chords of memory unless you have the chords. So piety stands in for comprehension, and the music is made into a parable of everything good and beautiful and true. Jazz is freedom, love, joy, sorrow, creation, destruction, risk, responsibility, sex, friendship, the body, the soul. Burns's series is another document in the religion of jazz, which is a fine bulwark against the experience of jazz. After eight hours or so of these doxologies, I wanted to reach for Journey's greatest hits, for anything with the integrity of being only what it is. But jazz for Burns is, above all, America. This accounts for the vaguely official tone of Burns's script. This is the story of our nation told by a national trasure. "in 'Jazz'" he says, "we complete our trilogy on American life," after The Civil War and Baseball. His trilogy on race in American life, he should have said. IN any event, Burns finds "in the music's lines and phrases and riffs...not only a meditation on American creativity, but a joyous and sublime celebration of its redemptive future possibilities...[J]azz has kept the American message alive." There are many such homilies. They sound rather like the citations on presidential medals. There is also too much celebration in "Jazz." For a fearful quantity of pain, individual and social, went into the making of this music. Burns is not comfortable with pain. He turns it into tragedy, which is the condition of triumph. Jim Crow was terrible, but here is Armstrong; dope was terrible, but here is Parker. Burns makes you almost grateful for their adversity, which is indecent. The happiness of sad people is ot so easily grasped. Jazz is the sound of stoicism, and it, too, is not so easily grasped. There are secrets even in the swing.
|
| Date: | 04-Feb-2001 21:59:54 |
| From: | Philly Trumpet |
| | Lookit. There is Marsalis the virtuoso trumpet player. Qua virtuoso trumpet player, clearly A+. There is Marsalis the artist. Qua artist, no better than C. Lester Bowie said it best: He is totally miscast as a trumpet king or whatever. There is nothing original here. If you want original, you listen to Clifford Brown, or Lee Morgan, or even Freddie Hubbard. Unfortunately, to Ken Burns and his ilk, Wynton is a Major Artist. Now, from that questionable assumption flows another: that all artists have opinions worth hearing. Well, maybe. Some artists are intuitive in their art and have nothing more to say. Those that can and do are rare--Alfred Brendel, name me a few more. But having baptized Wynton as a Major Artist, he has now been anointed a Philosopher, a role to which he is equally unsuited. It isn't just what he says. It's how he says it. His take on the origins of the music, on the relative value of the contributions of some of its major exponents, or his own fat-headed insistence that he is heir to the Real Miles (come on, it's obvious he thinks this, isn't it? Miles dies, Wynton arrives. Christ, get me an airsickness bag)are partial, tendentious, insulting even. When you write history, you choose significant detail. No one disputes that jazz is (was) ethnic music. What pisses me off is that in the view of Wynton, Stanley et al, that's all it is. Bullshit. I think Whitney Balliet said it best: jazz may be black music, but it belongs to everyone. What makes the music magnificant is precisely its universality. Wynton's pathetic attempt to reduce it to the confines of his little world up there in Lincoln Center is simply sad. Come on, man. Anyone who writes for TNR knows better. Wynton is a punk, maybe we should style him "the jazz punk as media creation." At the very least, his history of the music is questionable. At worst--Keith Jarrett said this--it is illiterate. What a pity. You get all that air time and you do, what, the hidden life of Jesus--er, Louis Armstrong--long after anyone really cared (I've talked with musicians who played with Pops. They didn't think anything was going on musically). What a wasted opportunity. All of that to learn that Billie could sing, that Prez could play, and that Pops was the Man. Did you hear Lou Levy died of a heart attack last week? He probably had it watching "Jazz". |
| Date: | 04-Feb-2001 22:42:02 |
| From: | Gregory McNeill. (adampierson_99@yahoo.com) |
| | Michael, no one is doubting Wynton Marsalis' contribution to Jazz. I feel that he is wrong to say that contemporary jazz artists and rappers aren't talented individuals. Rap has helped keep Jazz alive. Look at rappers like the now defuncted Tribe Called Quest which used jazz beats including Guru of the rap group Gangstarr who has released 3 solo albums and has colaborated with jazz artists like Don Byrd and new bloods like Ronny Jordan. He does have a right to his opinon, but I feel that it is a narrow minded view. Also don't forget the contributions of the late Tito Puente and Grover Washington, Jr to jazz. I did see Ken Burns' Jazz series and I personally feel that the conclusion of the series was nothing more but a self promotion of Mr. Marsalis. If people like him and Stanley Crouch have their way, Jazz will stagnate. There is nothing wrong with remembering the contributions of legends such as Ellington, Davis, Parker, Holliday, Fitzgerald, and Wilson, Jazz must be modern as well. If it doesn't, Jazz will be extinct. Since he is the program head of Lincoln Center, I don't like it that him and the organization is telling people what is jazz and what isn't. We have a music police telling us what to do people. Jazz is about self-expression and having a good time. Although Mr. Marsalis is a talented individual, he is limiting what jazz artists can and cannot play from the heart. |
| Date: | 07-Feb-2001 14:11:29 |
| From: | Dawn Jacobson (dtjacobson@yahoo.com) |
| | Wynton Marsalis possesses a great gift; unfortunately, he also appears to possess a great deal of hubris. Just a thought: Perhaps he should have spent a bit more time at Julliard, where the older students might have taught him a few things. |
| Date: | 11-Feb-2001 19:03:10 |
| From: | ryan sundseth |
| | Being a trumpet player myself. I would like to say that Wynton is truley inspiring. He has wonderful tone and great technique. I look forward to seeing him live someday. Anybody that rips on this person is a complete jackass. |
| Date: | 13-Feb-2001 23:08:44 |
| From: | Rick Banales (riczen@hotmail.com) |
| | Wynton is one of the best classical trumpet players out there. I think that if he stuck with it he could have been more important than Maurice Andre in that regard. He is also an astute student of the history of jazz-of course he brings his own baggage to any discussion of the music, but his points are usually very eloquent. The point is, as far as being a great jazz musician, I think he still needs to prove himself. In comparing, for example, Wynton's tribute to Monk from last year with Dave Douglas' tribute album to Mary Lou Williams or James Carter's "Chasin' the Gipsy", I think the innovation and respect shine much brighter on the Douglas and Carter albums. I thank Wynton to opening my ears to giants such as Ellington , Monk and Louis so that I could find personal heroes like Don Byas, Fats Navarro, Ben Webster and Stan Getz, but I don't feel like Wynton has gotten close to making a great album on the level of current jazz artists, much less Ellington, Monk, or Armstrong, |
| Date: | 15-Feb-2001 17:20:55 |
| From: | Joe (jgwoulla@hotmail.com) |
| | Jazz must be dead. How else could Wynton appoint himself as main pallbearer at its funeral? It seems to me that Wynton spends more time bending the definition of jazz into a thing that fits his own personal tastes than exploring the world with unbiased ears. He has indeed had a major impact on jazz. However, jazz as I know it was killed by modern "young lions" like him in collaboration with the tendancy to cash in with cheap "retro" imitations of history. What exists now is quite different from the jazz before the mid sixties, and is more difficult to classify due to the exponential growth of the resources it can draw from. In my opinion, jazz has always had its main stream and the branches that challenge that flow. In better days, the mainstream and the tributaries tended to cross paths at different points, to their mutual enrichment. That started to fade with the challening music of the mid sixties, and people like Wynton would have us believe that at that point, the river just dried up until he emerged to start it up again, sans the "annoying" aims of creative risk taking.
He would probably call it "Jazz finds itself again," but I call it the true death of jazz as creative music. So I believe his impact has been as curator (and an extremely biased one at that) rather than innovator. Perhaps a better question is "Does the main stream of jazz continue to encourage innovation (either directly or by aversion)? Wynton has surely introduced many to Jazz who might not have ventured alone into such daunting waters. Hence the fascination with Armstrong, who did the same after his most striking contributions had long dried up and become old news. This is not an afront to history, just a statement that jazz has always been more vital when the "now" was stating both the glorious past AND the uncertain future. I've heard that many aspiring jazz musicians in the forties tossed out their horns when they first heard the level that Bird was at. Does anyone have that strong of a reaction, good or bad, when they hear Wynton's "genius"? Personally, I find most of his music quite boring, and not worthy of imitation or adulation. But he's an image that sells... |
| Date: | 18-Feb-2001 08:32:59 |
| From: | Tom (Tomdu@hotmail.com) |
| | As usual, it's usually the medicore who have the big mouths. If you can't play you can bull---- and who hasn't heard that? |
| Date: | 19-Feb-2001 17:58:16 |
| From: | Hal |
| | I refer back to Nick Meyer's previous contributin: Wynton had a U.S. tour called "Morton, Monk, and Marsalis." Talk about ego - as if he's anywhere near their class as a composer/jazz musician. I think that says it all - being an egomaniac means never having to say you're sorry. |
| Date: | 20-Feb-2001 20:34:43 |
| From: | PhillyTrumpet |
| | I just listened to a bootleg recording of Bird playing "Four Brothers" with Woody Herman's band in 1951. It was fascinating--Bird kept getting lost in the changes in the bridge. Wait a minute. I thought Bird was God (according to Wynton), Woodie had an Ofay junkie band, and nobody mentioned Jimmy Giuffre. I'm confused. |
| Date: | 26-Feb-2001 16:14:07 |
| From: | aldo |
| | If Wynton had half the talent of a David Murray I'd go out and buy one of his CDs. |
| Date: | 20-Mar-2001 18:18:39 |
| From: | Betsy (bbtime@hotmail.com) |
| | Mr. Marsalis is good. I enjoy his music. The Beach Boys are good. I enjoy their music. Marsalis isn't Charlie Parker.The Beach Boys aren't the Beatles. That's alright. |
| Date: | 21-Mar-2001 22:05:55 |
| From: | Bobby Blythe |
| | One thing I haven't seen mentioned in this thread is the
impact Wynton has had in the area of sexism. He never had a
regular female member in the Lincoln Center band and in an
interview in the Village Voice about this, he couldn't even
think of the names of any female jazz musician other than
singers. The writer even named some female jazz musicians
for him and he didn't recognize the names. Compounding
this, did you ever notice in his interviews how he likes to
bring up the topic of sex, without prompting by the
interviewer? He talks about his own flirting techniques, he
talks about Elllington's flirting techniques. Listen to him
talk about Ellington in the Jazz film. Geez, there was
supposedly precious little time in the film to mention
people like Bill Evans and Eric Dolphy but somehow Ken Burns
has enough time to let Wynton go on and on about Ellington's
skills at procuring the services of interchangable females.
Over the course of his career Wynton has spent more time
talking about females as sex objects than about any |
| Date: | 28-Mar-2001 21:03:46 |
| From: | Rob |
| | People are quick to dismiss Wynton as conservative or lacking vision because of what he says, or some of the recordings he has made with LCJO. If you listen to his original work, however, you would find quite a bit of inovation.
For those that say his improvisation is weak and conservative, listen to his solo on Knozz-Moe-King from the "Live at Blues Alley" recording. Give me another modern trumpet player that can perform that type of rhythmc displacement, chromatic harmony and still stay inside a form.
For originality of arrangement, check out We Three Kings from "A Crescent City Christamas Card." Is it Monk influenced in the harmony? Yes, but Monk didn't take it to that extreme, especially in the area of using extreme ranges to get new combinations of timbre.
Im simply saying, check out the music yourself before you dismiss his compositional and improvisational skills. |
| Date: | 30-Mar-2001 17:54:19 |
| From: | Hal |
| | "If you listen to his original work . . ." His early fling with modernity? I would guess that was 20 years ago. |
| Date: | 05-Apr-2001 23:03:04 |
| From: | Al Trombone |
| | Wynton Marsalis is the Paul Revere and the Raiders of jazz. |
| Date: | 29-Apr-2001 17:34:46 |
| From: | Bob |
| | Al: I know you're not serious but Wynton is - the guy's had a huge influence on jazz in the last 15-20 years. Even if there are way better players/composers/bandleaders you can't take it away from the guy - he's a smooth operator! |
| Date: | 02-May-2001 21:21:59 |
| From: | Gerard Cox (stacked4th@hotmail.com) |
| | Wynton is largely a postmodern fiction. There is more about him that betrays pretense, idolatry, and pastiche than there is of any real substance to the history of jazz. The fact of the matter is that Marsalis will not be remembered as being a major jazz musician nor, hardly- a major contributor to jazz history. There hasn't been an ounce of urgency or timeliness in his music- frankly he is to jazz what Huey Lewis is to rock music. He is this hopeless synthesizer of old sounds who fails to do anything but present nostalgia in 101 flavors on a platter. He is also a pathetically transparent poser, what with all of his "Gumbo" talk and waxing philosophical about the Blues life having very little lived experience behind it. This cat rides around in limos, holds what is essentially an CEO day-job (JALC), and is married to a Soap Opera star, and yet somehow- he's so "Thick in the South" and comprehending of "The Majesty of The Blues." He may miss New Orleans, but to these eyes he has long been a damn yuppie who's main quest is not for the heart of the blues but for worldly fame and fortune.
Indeed if anything in this world is inauthentic it is Wynton Marsalis. So how has Wynton impacted Jazz over the past 15 years? He, in short, has made us all aware of how Jazz is as much an image game as it is an art form, and has exploited this former aspect to the hilt. This is how it goes: Wynton manipulates the symbolic history of jazz in such a way that he at last manages to draw attention to his own (supposed) greatness by implication of all of these associations. It should be transparent to folks that this was his agenda, but some are content to believe he's just some "romantic soul." He's about as Romantic for Jazz as Bill Clinton was Romantic for the Presidency. They say all the right things, go through the appropriate ritualistic motions, but in the end it becomes all too clear that what we thought was romanticism was actually a cynical self-interest shrouded in pandering to the larger cultures' hero worship. Clinton continually espoused great admiration for his predecessors, just as Wynton is always on the stoop to praise his jazz heroes, but what is really going on, again- is this postmodern game of manipulating symbolic history (heroes) to implicate oneself by association. If we hear Clinton talk enough about his reverence for the Presidency and for FDR and Ike and Teddy we'll eventually come to thinking he might be part of that whole chain...likewise with Wynton and his iconography of jazz history. Folks this is only such a postmodern form of fraud- and it is widespread. How often do we watch pro athletes or movie actors be indulged of comparisons to the former heroes that he/she supposedly emulates in their field? How often are these totally premature and just a bit ludicrous?? We surely like our little references don't we. Hype matters little in the end however, so long as scholarship and critical thinking continues to survice. See, everything is at last subject to comprehensive review and scrutiny- this is where the historian comes in. And just as Bill Clinton will be remembered as a mediocre president at best, Wynton will be sized up accurately as being a nominal figure whose bark was a lot, A LOT- bigger than his bite. In fairness to Wynton, he does play a valuable role as an advocate of jazz music to the greater public. He is the national spokesperson for jazz, love him or leave him, and I would be the first to admit there is a need for THAT. My only concern is that in Wynton's tireless advocacy for jazz, by everyone hyping his unparalleled credibility (e.g. Burns fiasco), the layman is not duped into believing that Wynton is somehow the consummate jazzman. He is NOT- he knows very little of what THAT, in that worldview, that experience and that lifestyle= the jazz life means. He's like the FBI agent who when asked if he ever worked a beat replied "Are you kidding? I went to Harvard to avoid all that shit?" Wynton went to Julliard and got a fat deal with Columbia. They set him up for life, ironically- modelling his career after that of Miles Davis, who actually deserved his fate and was something genuine. Last word- If Miles were to be resurrected today, he would surely kick Wynton's ass. I don't mean to equate Miles to God or Christ, but there was something deeply suggestive about the antagonism Miles harbored towards Wynton...furthermore the way Wynton snubbed Miles on stage suggested ALL Wynton was really about. Talk up Miles and then dis him in the worst way. Use that name Wynton...use "Miles" to get you there. Wynton is the Anti-Miles. That is his significance in Jazz history. - The Stacked Fourth. |
| Date: | 04-May-2001 11:13:18 |
| From: | Hal |
| | I agree he is a smooth operator - but he's far more of an operator than a first rate jazz musician. I don't dislike the guy but it's difficult to listen to him after listening to Louie, or Dizzy, or Clifford Brown. |
| Date: | 08-May-2001 10:36:30 |
| From: | Axel Melhardt (jazzland@chello.at) |
| | Wynton Marsalis came twice to my club JAZZLAND in Vienna to listen to Art Farmer and to sit in. For a very short time he tried to "outblow" Art, but he very soon realized that he had no chance - so he played with Art, and that was great. He is not a musician to bring any new ideas to jazz, but we have had and have great jazz-people who are not changing the face of our music but they perform in and find new variations of old and well known forms.
On one side it is great that Wynton brings new audience for Jazz on the other side his personal popularity overshadows the fact that there are other great trumpet players in USA today - Randy Sanke, Warren Vaché, Ed Polcer, Jon-Erik Kellso, Tom Saunders, Dick Sudhalter, Duke Heitger, Chris Tyle and many others play as (or nearly as) good as Wynton and have a much greater understanding of classic jazz than him.
But nonetheless - we should be happy that he is here.
Axel Melhardt - JAZZLAND - Vienna, Austria |
| Date: | 25-May-2001 13:41:58 |
| From: | bass |
| | I dislike Wynton for his anti-Miles comments |
| Date: | 06-Jun-2001 14:42:36 |
| From: | Albert Einstein's brother |
| | Wynton is 1) an excellent classical musician 2)a competent but not great jazz musician 3) a fair composer 4)a very talented politician. No matter how you cut it, he is a pretty interesting guy. |
| Date: | 06-Jun-2001 19:48:17 |
| From: | zPogo |
| | Wynton Marsalis is the Mezz Mezzrow of our time. |
| Date: | 08-Jun-2001 16:03:59 |
| From: | Nwabhu (mwanji@hotmail.com) |
| | I find Doug Wamble's claim that "women would only add sexual tension" disturbing. It's acceptable to have 15 strong-willed men on the road, but add a woman, and the possible "sexual tension" (apparently the only thing the woman can bring to the group), is unacceptable? It's disturbing to see women reduced yet again solely to whatever sexual role they can play. |
| Date: | 21-Jun-2001 13:14:05 |
| From: | Al Trombone |
| | Hey, is there a 15 piece woman's band I could join? Not that there would be any tension. . . |
| Date: | 26-Jun-2001 14:16:49 |
| From: | Zando Parmizzi |
| | I don't think Wynton Marsalis has had much influence on people like Steve Lacy, Cecil Taylor, Charlie Haden, Ornette Coleman, WSQ, David Murray etc. They're the ones that matter, ultimately. |
| Date: | 06-Jul-2001 22:14:37 |
| From: | Sam |
| | Wynton is the Hammarabbi of jazz. |
| Date: | 08-Jul-2001 15:17:13 |
| From: | Alan |
| | Wynton is the Gary Hart of jazz. |
| Date: | 14-Jul-2001 17:51:24 |
| From: | Justin (from a long way out!) |
| | I think the main problem with wynton's impact is he has perpetuated this belief that Jazz is something that happened in the past and is not something that is happening today. |
| Date: | 16-Jul-2001 16:37:47 |
| From: | Tom W. |
| | Wynton is doing the best he can with the level of talent he has. Considering everything, he's doing alright. Granted, he's not Clifford Brown, but he's certainly not Kenny G. Things could be worse. |
| Date: | 02-Aug-2001 10:46:19 |
| From: | Julie (julier@hotmail.com) |
| | I agree with the above statement. Marsalis is sort of like the much lauded new singer Jane Monheit, plenty of ability and has a beautiful voice but she doesn't do much with it in terms of improvisation and true creativity. There's a lack of depth which results in a surface brilliance. Surface being the key word here. |
| Date: | 09-Aug-2001 12:38:03 |
| From: | Ron |
| | Hey, Wynton plays pretty well. His CDs are pretty good. A lot of people have enjoyed his music. He doesn't have to be outright brilliant and play as well as Clifford Brown or Don Cherry to have contributed to jazz. |
| Date: | 25-Aug-2001 00:09:51 |
| From: | Rusty Cashman (rcashman@correlant.com) |
| | I am listening to Wynton's Marciac Suite as I type this. It is sufficient by itself to refute folks who say that his composition/playing is not original and memorable. I think he will definately be listened to 50 or 100 years since and I think he has definately had an impact on a generation of musicians. He has revived a great musical tradition. He DOES innovate but he bases that innovation upon that tradition. That tradition is the same one that produced Coltrane, Davis, Ornette Coleman and Cecil Taylor. Marsalis has just chosen to start with that tradition and go off in a different direction (one more consiously connected with that tradition) than the fusion or free jazz folks did. Some of his comments on free jazz and fusion are unfortunate, but it should be remembered that some of the older musicians (such as Miles Davis) who had gone off in other directions disrespected him first. Artists (even the greatest) are often jealous and down right petty. I think that it is good sometimes for an art form to look back and seek reconnection to and reinspiration from its traditions. Especially when that tradition is as inspirational as the music of Morton, Armstrong, Ellington, Gillespie, Parker, Monk and Mingus.
|
| Date: | 26-Aug-2001 08:36:23 |
| From: | Randy |
| | Wynton ain't Triple A and he ain't on the All-Star team in the majors. He's a solid 280 hitter with a good glove. |
| Date: | 29-Aug-2001 23:39:36 |
| From: | God |
| | Your sins will find you out Wynton Marsalis! |
| Date: | 30-Aug-2001 16:25:47 |
| From: | Jay |
| | A solid 280 hitter with a good glove is certainly respectable, especially considering he IS in the big leagues and has to compete with some awesome trumpet players, past and present. |
| Date: | 01-Sep-2001 07:16:12 |
| From: | zPogo |
| | Wynton Marsalis is the Mike Douglas of jazz. |
| Date: | 01-Sep-2001 12:38:04 |
| From: | Sigmond |
| | To the YOUTH that have been in contact with Wynton. I have a question for you. How many of you have been touched by him? |
| Date: | 02-Sep-2001 01:29:22 |
| From: | The Blowfish |
| | I've never met the man, but after hearing some of the stuff he said on the Ken Burns film and listening to his records, I picked my trombone up to play again after not having touched it in nearly five years. That is enough impact for me to respect the man. |
| Date: | 02-Sep-2001 10:11:07 |
| From: | Jan T.F. |
| | Marsalis has presented early jazz in a manner that is interesting and respectful. He has championed Armstrong and Ellington and others who deserve the attention. He is a good jazz musician and a great classical player. Whatever his musical or personal shortcomings, he has done more than most to continue the traditions of jazz. For that we can be thankful. |
| Date: | 02-Sep-2001 19:25:08 |
| From: | Ogden |
| | Wynton's OK
He can play
Let's all give
him some slack
wudd'ya say? |
| Date: | 04-Sep-2001 00:37:11 |
| From: | Barnes |
| | What personal shortcomings? |
| Date: | 04-Sep-2001 12:53:51 |
| From: | Paul |
| | Delusions of grandeur, and lack of generousity concerning the talents and accomplishments of superior jazz musicians -that could be a place to start. |
| Date: | 04-Sep-2001 23:09:37 |
| From: | Benard |
| | Wynton helped himself to too much without asking. He has no scruples. For those with ears....let them hear. |
| Date: | 07-Sep-2001 12:41:15 |
| From: | Gregory McNeill (Adampierson_99@yahoo.com) |
| | I do respect Mr. Marsalis' crusade to educate people about Jazz, but cannot stand his opinons on what is Jazz and isn't. His brother is an equally talented trumpet player who doesn't get the credit he deserves and Terrance Blanchard. He does have a right to his opinon, but to totally ignore the contributions of other artists isn't right. Jack McDuff died 7 months ago and he tutored and influenced George Benson who is in my opinon one of the great jazz guitarists including Sun RA, Joe Sample, Chick Corea, Abby Lincoln, and others. I am totally disappointed with the documentary. I do like the fact it brought about a renewed interest in jazz. As far as Marsalis' contribution to jazz, its undenialable,but his arrogance and ignoring some of his peers will tarnish his legacy. |
| Date: | 08-Sep-2001 07:45:10 |
| From: | Roy |
| | What is his track record with women? |
| Date: | 08-Sep-2001 08:29:27 |
| From: | Al |
| | Let's keep it to jazz, please. |
| Date: | 09-Sep-2001 05:37:56 |
| From: | Roy |
| | Hey Al.....Maybe you should read a little more about Wynton's philosphy. Jazz from blacks, copying the greats, bad mouthing great jazz musicians, a chip on his shoulder, a big mouth, surrounding himself with students in the belief he is spreading the gospel of jazz ... he is really surrounding himself with those as emotionally and sexually mature as himself. To Marsalis jazz is sexual/spiritual all in one. Jazz is expressing something.....old jazz expressed one area (What Wynton copied) .....Marsalis'expresses.....libido....
Who is this man....What kind of life has he lived to express? What kind of tribulation what kind of joy? Wynton is a person that has the talent to play a horn. Wouldn't it have been refreshing for him to express
the trials and joys of life that a greater population could identify? |
| Date: | 09-Sep-2001 11:41:24 |
| From: | Al |
| | Roy: even as you describe Marsalis and those as "emotionally mature" as himself the description comes off as a description of a male teenager. As "emotionally immature" may be more a more useful phrase. I genuinely do think you are on to something - perhaps his limitations are essentially developmental, that somewhere he is stuck in his teen years. Perhaps, that is what has prevented him from growing as a jazz musician. I'm not trying to knock male teens, I was one myself but, being a teenager usually comes with a very limited outlook. Take your above statements and replace Wynton Marsalis with Clifford Brown or Art Farmer or Don Cherry and it simply doesn't sound right, this says something about these musicians, and maturity. |
| Date: | 09-Sep-2001 17:59:41 |
| From: | Andrew R. |
| | Roy: I generally do my best to avoid teenage philosophers. |
| Date: | 10-Sep-2001 01:40:33 |
| From: | Roy |
| | Andrew R.: Then, I am sure that you advoid Wynton Marsalis |
| Date: | 14-Sep-2001 16:43:49 |
| From: | God |
| | Wynton.....change your ways....tell people you are sorry for the horrible things you have done to them....do it soon......you know how your actions have crumbled lives |
| Date: | 22-Sep-2001 12:01:40 |
| From: | Todd R (toddr@hotmail.com) |
| | Maybe Wynton's like the Glenn Miller of modern jazz - talented, professional, slick but in the long run no heavy weight. But he'll always have a following. |
| Date: | 22-Sep-2001 23:10:23 |
| From: | Roy |
| | Yes.......slick and slimy.....I know him too well. |
| Date: | 23-Sep-2001 13:16:42 |
| From: | Rusty Cashman |
| | Well whatever you think of what he says, I still think Black Codes from the Underground was a classic album and I still play Marciac Suite as much as any other CD. In the end it is the music that will count. Jazz fans (and musicians and critics) have a habit of bemoaning how unpopular jazz is and then turning viciously on any artist who actually becomes popular. Heck even Dizzy Gillespie suffered from this effect. |
| Date: | 24-Sep-2001 12:50:41 |
| From: | Bob Terrell |
| | Wynton's no Dizzy Gillespie - not as a player, not as a composer, not as a big band leader, not as an innovator. Generosity is a word associated with Dizzy Gillespie. It is not a word associated with Wynton Marsalis - not toward his peers, not toward his peers who are superior musicians, and not toward his peers who have different approaches to the music. A little perspective here would be helpful. |
| Date: | 24-Sep-2001 15:03:30 |
| From: | Diki (diki@internetwis.com) |
| | Agreed, ultimately it is the music. I can't think of one Marsalis composition off the top of my head. I can think of many Gillespie compositions, many compositions that have become standards. I do realize it's unfair to compare Marsalis to someone of Gillespie's caliber, but . . . |
| Date: | 24-Sep-2001 15:15:27 |
| From: | Ned |
| | As I said before: Wynton was once very good and very promising. He's now good/ok. A tame cat. He never was among the greats. Lacked fire, and imagination, and soul. |
| Date: | 26-Sep-2001 21:04:59 |
| From: | Corey Mwamba (coreymwamba@btinternet.com) |
| | Wynton's impact on the public interest in jazz has been large; when he came in the 80's with his suits and his "high moral standards", he developed an image that a lot of musicians looked up to, including Courtney Pine in the U.K. What's interesting now is that although Courtney Pine has shown some movement in his musical direction, Marsalis is still content in writing the same lines for the same book. Courtney's ability to change direction was something he didn't appear to learn from Wynton Marsalis. In fact, I would go as far to say that it was other "young lions" like Steve Coleman, Don Byron, Uri Caine, Dave Douglas, Greg Osby and Wynton's brother, Branford, who have had that impact for musicians to look deeper into themselves. They are just as intellectual, driven, and committed to education as Wynton - however, their outlook doesn't fit Wynton scheme of jazz. It has a lot to do with control. The assistance of Stanley Crouch has lent credence to Wynton's spoutings, and the Ken Burn travesty has now presented a distorted history according to Marsalis to the masses. The United States slowed its creative output when Marsalis came on the scene; his method has been pedalled to several educational institutions, denying children the chance to hear innovators like Lennie Tristano (where was his name in the travesty?), Ornette Coleman, Toshiko Akiyoshi, Jan Garbarek... I have heard Wynton albums, and seen him live. There are several trumpeters from around the world (Tiger Okoshi, Guy Barker, James Morrison...) who can play/write that style of music as well as or better than Wynton Marsalis. It begs the question; why has the American public allowed him to becaome so famous? |
| Date: | 26-Sep-2001 21:05:29 |
| From: | Corey Mwamba (coreymwamba@btinternet.com) |
| | Wynton's impact on the public interest in jazz has been large; when he came in the 80's with his suits and his "high moral standards", he developed an image that a lot of musicians looked up to, including Courtney Pine in the U.K. What's interesting now is that although Courtney Pine has shown some movement in his musical direction, Marsalis is still content in writing the same lines for the same book. Courtney's ability to change direction was something he didn't appear to learn from Wynton Marsalis. In fact, I would go as far to say that it was other "young lions" like Steve Coleman, Don Byron, Uri Caine, Dave Douglas, Greg Osby and Wynton's brother, Branford, who have had that impact for musicians to look deeper into themselves. They are just as intellectual, driven, and committed to education as Wynton - however, their outlook doesn't fit Wynton scheme of jazz. It has a lot to do with control. The assistance of Stanley Crouch has lent credence to Wynton's spoutings, and the Ken Burn travesty has now presented a distorted history according to Marsalis to the masses. The United States slowed its creative output when Marsalis came on the scene; his method has been pedalled to several educational institutions, denying children the chance to hear innovators like Lennie Tristano (where was his name in the travesty?), Ornette Coleman, Toshiko Akiyoshi, Jan Garbarek... I have heard Wynton albums, and seen him live. There are several trumpeters from around the world (Tiger Okoshi, Guy Barker, James Morrison...) who can play/write that style of music as well as or better than Wynton Marsalis. It begs the question; why has the American public allowed him to become so famous? |
| Date: | 28-Sep-2001 14:10:22 |
| From: | Natalie S. |
| | Do you think Marsalis really thinks he is a great jazz trumpeter or do you think that he is fully aware of the fact that he isn't? How cynical or how narcissistic is Marsalis? What does he think when he hears a great Gillespie or great Clifford Brown solo? |
| Date: | 28-Sep-2001 17:07:55 |
| From: | Corey (coreymwamba@btinternet.com) |
| | Hi Natalie,
I think it's hard to guess WHAT Marsalis thinks of himself; when he first appeared on the scene, he said that he was "taking care of business", which gives me the impression that he sees himself as part of a "royal jazz lineage", from Keppard to Bolden to Armstrong, through to Gillespie, etc. I honestly do not think he's worthy. Traditionally, jazz has always had its leaders (Miles Davis, Ornette Coleman, John Coltrane), and I think he would like to be one of them; so a hint of narcissism from Wynton, I fear. I suppose the question is, what is he a leader of? Can a movement that accurately but rigidly plays music of the past be called innovative, or jazz for that matter? |
| Date: | 30-Sep-2001 10:58:03 |
| From: | Natalie S. |
| | I don't think it could be called innovative (which would remove him from the great trumpeter list). I think it can be called jazz, but a limited form of jazz - sort of museum jazz, not jazz in the "tradition" that demands growth and that you add something as you find your voice. |
| Date: | 30-Sep-2001 17:23:38 |
| From: | Corey |
| | Hello again, That's the thing, though; he truly does think that he's "in the tradition"! In a way, he has a lot in common with Jelly Roll Morton; both declared themselves innovators (indeed, Morton said he was the inventor of jazz) and yet both stuck to rigidly orchestrated styles. A lot of people are ready to argue that Walt Whitman's band wasn't jazz because of the exacting ocrhestration; why not Wynton Marsalis? Another point is that the path of jazz has shown growth and development, from the early scene in the U.S.A to its expansion to the rest of the world. If a young jazz musician rejects these things, how can that musician say that he/she is a true jazz musician, "taking care of business"? I am all for respecting and preserving the past, but to say that progress shouldn't be made, as it will never be as good as what came before, or because "I didn't get [Ornette Coleman's music]"...sounds like dangerous ground to me. By pushing the styles of jazz from his "museum" (good description) to others in the way that he has, the world has ended up with several uninspired, uninspiring, yet technically gifted instrumentalists with some compositional ability; and their first disc sounds like a poor (but technically perfect) copy of a Miles Davis 60's Quintet or a Jazz Messengers album. It's saddening to see a music to stride forward 100 years, only to find that it's regressed forty years. Marsalis' dated and stilted perception of jazz is too pervasive; America needs the true innovators in jazz, and not just native musicians, to show the U.S. the true face of jazz. |
| Date: | 01-Oct-2001 21:58:18 |
| From: | Andy |
| | Corey: did you mean Paul Whiteman? |
| Date: | 02-Oct-2001 16:19:36 |
| From: | albertw@hotmail.com |
| | Corey, I think you're on the mark with what you say about Marsalis. Refering to the prior comment, Walt Whitman is a 19th century American poet. Paul Whiteman fits your description all down the line. Good comments. Good thread. |
| Date: | 02-Oct-2001 22:15:24 |
| From: | Roy |
| | Corey,
You refer to Marsalis as having a "High Moral Standard"
Where do you get that idea? or is that a tongue in cheek statement? |
| Date: | 03-Oct-2001 06:14:10 |
| From: | Corey |
| | Hey,
Okay, hands up! I meant Paul Whiteman. The comment about "high moral standards" was most assuredly tonuge-in-cheek; I definitely don't ascribe to his point of view! |
| Date: | 07-Oct-2001 13:09:02 |
| From: | Corey |
| | Sorry to have two messages up in a row, but has anyone been to the Marsalis web site? Not especially interesting, but on their discussion board they have a topic like this. Apparently, they're having a healthy and fruitful discussion, and what THAT means appears to be hero worship. Thank goodness for this board, where people can speak and think freely. |
| Date: | 10-Oct-2001 01:38:36 |
| From: | Roy |
| | Corey, How does one get to the Marsalis Website that you are talking? Yes, you are right about hero worship. They just don't have all of the facts, they are denying, or they don't know Marsalis. |
| Date: | 10-Oct-2001 08:59:08 |
| From: | Sal Newton |
| | Oh come on, so the guy isn't great but he can play and play well if you compare him with most professional jazz trumpeters. Hey, I'm not a fan of either the musician or the man but in fairness he deserves some credit for his ability and accomplishments. Yeah, he's pretentious and overblown, but as a player he's a long way from being incompetent. |
| Date: | 12-Oct-2001 09:47:16 |
| From: | Corey (coreymwamba@btinternet.com) |
| | Sal,
I don't think anyone said that he was incompetent, but that isn't the issue (see question). No one actually doubts that he's technically very good; the query is what he has done with his status in jazz over the last fifteen years, and I think it is important for the jazz community to analyse these things. Jazz people are very good at not looking at their better-known proponents. It is easy for audience members to go to a local gig with unknown musicians and analyse every little thing about their playing and compositional flair, but (and this is true of Marsalis and Kenny G) as soon as a fan base is added to the mix, critique is stifled and proclaimed as "envy" by the enthusiasts of these musicians, no matter what is said.
Wynton Marsalis' website is www.wyntonmarsalis.net, if I remember correctly. The message board is dull, and there isn't much there, but it looks nice. |
| Date: | 13-Oct-2001 10:26:56 |
| From: | Sal |
| | Corey: I think there are several commentators on this thread who would deny his competence. Just scroll back. I didn't designate you as one of them. |
| Date: | 15-Oct-2001 04:08:43 |
| From: | Corey |
| | Hey Sal,
Fair enough, point taken. In addition, his technical prowess is probably where he has had positive impact in jazz; he might have "raised the game" for other trumpeters. However, his constant refusal to search for new ways of expression, and his cliched use of older elements in old structures, stop him from being up there with the leaders of jazz. It's his mouth that's put him there. As a musician myself, I find intriguing that young players are told to pay their dues for years, when Marsalis, who, to his great credit, did play with Art Blakey and Herbie Hancock, has nevertheless got himself where he is by talking a good fight. Perhaps his impact has been his approach to the medium of television? If anybody has seen most old footage of jazz musicians on TV, they just used to play; all except Ellington, who would charm his audiences. Perhaps Marsalis saw it and has used it to greater effect; he has become a media star, and America loves him. He has no need to show development or change; if he did, he could lose everything. So he stays as he is. Just a thought. |
| Date: | 15-Oct-2001 21:48:33 |
| From: | Roy |
| | Corey......well said. |
| Date: | 15-Oct-2001 21:51:24 |
| From: | Roy |
| | Sal......Yes.....Wynton IS INCOMPETENT when it comes to the moral fiber of the man. |
| Date: | 16-Oct-2001 06:14:24 |
| From: | Sal |
| | Roy: There is a difference between being incompetent and being amoral. I believe you mean the latter word. |
| Date: | 16-Oct-2001 08:18:31 |
| From: | Corey |
| | Sal,
Do you think Wynton's amoral in his dealings with the jazz community? |
| Date: | 16-Oct-2001 10:46:51 |
| From: | Sal |
| | My dictionary describes amoral as: "Lacking moral sensibility." I think that describes his slash and burn mentality fairly well. It's essentially self-interest yoked to a lack of humility. It's shocking really that he could have such a dismissive attitude toward so many of his contemporaries considering their efforts, achievemnents, and talent. We're not talking about a particular grudge against a particular musician. We're talking about a massive dismissal of many of the best musicians who ever played jazz! |
| Date: | 16-Oct-2001 18:13:39 |
| From: | Roy |
| | Sal, you just described his arrogance. Well said! BUT....THERE IS SO MUCH MORE!
1. amoral: adjective; neither moral or immoral, unconcerned with morals.
2. moral: noun; standard of right or wrong.
3. immoral: adjective; sinful, indecent
# 1. amoral: A descriptive of Wynton's relationship with the jazz community, friends, aquaintances, youth
# 2. In my opinion, Wynton's moral standard is LOW with
youth, how he approaches people, his relationship with people etc......
# 3. In my opinion, Wynton's sexual moves on youthIt could be a suprise as to how Wynton gets his rhymetic ideas.
Some of the young people need to start talking!!!!!
ENOUGH SAID?????????????
|
| Date: | 16-Oct-2001 18:18:32 |
| From: | Roy |
| | "rhythmic" |
| Date: | 16-Oct-2001 20:45:51 |
| From: | Sal |
| | Roy, on the scale of no-goodniks in the world Wynton is small change. He may disrespect his contemporaries and prevent them from getting an even break but it could be a lot worse. I think he's done a moderate amount of damage to jazz and to the future of jazz but I have confidence that jazz will bounce back. If history teaches us anything it's that jazz is resilient, and true innovators usually are ultimately recognized. Look at Monk or Ornette Coleman or Cecil Taylor. It takes time. Marsalis will be remembered in the way that Glenn Miller is remembered - talented, professional, but ultimately fairly insignificant. |
| Date: | 16-Oct-2001 20:51:45 |
| From: | Sal |
| | I should thank Todd R (see 9/22 comment) for the Glenn Miller analogy. I think it's on the mark. |
| Date: | 17-Oct-2001 10:59:37 |
| From: | Corey |
| | Sal is right on with the fact that our music is very resilient; however, Glenn Miller, although not that significant musically, still captures the nostalgic strings of several older people. Wynton is creating those people all over again, I fear, and in 2046 (when I'm 70) his music (but no one else's) may become part of a revival movement, like a rash of really awful trad bands pushing themselves as "new music". I have nothing against trad; I've played in trad bands. Nevertheless, you can't call it new, and Marsalis' music isn't so memorable that you'd want to hear it again. There are people who moan that musicians nowadays just noodle, and that Wynton plays tunes, but they said the same about John Kirby, Monk, Tristano, Parker, Davis Coltrane, Coleman, and others. In a way it's lucky we have the naysayers; how could we have change and rebellion without them? Louis Armstrong didn't get bebop, even though he paved the way for greater rhythmic flexibility and melodic freedom. It is only usually in retrospect that we realise the talent displayed. Sometimes, we see it straight off; Dave Douglas and Mulgrew Miller are examples. But it seems to take about 15-20 years to see it, and to look at Wynton Marsalis' career is to see a mirage; looks great from afar, but it isn't actually there on closer inspection. The fact that most of the discussion has focussed more on his public representation than his music shows that his music is of little importance to the world outside his little circle (Crouch et al.). With him, words overtook music as a form of expression. |
| Date: | 23-Oct-2001 16:36:18 |
| From: | Rusty Cashman |
| | Well I saw Marsalis and the Lincon Centre Jazz Orchestra a couple of weeks ago and I must say that they sound great. There is a lot of talent in that group and whatever you say the leader plays a mean horn. It is true that only a couple of the tunes were original (those were some of the most interesting) but a little Mingus, Monk and Ellington never hurt anybody in my opinion. I think Marsalis plays a valuable role both in appealing to folks who may find Cecil Taylor a little unapproachable and in repopularizing a great musical tradition. I also think he is a more gifted and creative composer than a lot of folks on this thread are giving him credit for. I mean do people actually not like Joe Cool's Blues, the Marciac Suite, Black Codes from the Underground, Big Train, and Blood on the Fields? Or are they letting resentment of Marsalis's commercial success and controversial statements affect their hearing? |
|
|
|
|
All material copyright © All About Jazz and/or contributing writer/visual artist. All rights reserved. | Privacy Policy
|
