Grounds Rules: Reviews
I will, from time to time, review concerts, CDs, and even the occasional DVD, here.
Just in case anyone does read them, I feel I should establish the grounds rules and disclose such biases as I may harbor.
1) If a work is mentioned here, you may usually safely assume that I enjoyed, appreciated, or at the very least, found something redeeming in it. Only very very rarely will this be a forum for savagery, and even then will there have to be some extenuating circumstance; my perception that someone is 'getting over' or blatantly manipulating the audience, or that the work is so agregiously in commercial or cynical that, IMNSHO, it presents a hazard to the culture... like that.
2) As concerns Jazz– While I have some very deeply held beliefs about what jazz is and is not, I am (perhaps paradoxically to some) very accepting of genuine innovations (radical and incremental) to the genre; even of certain types of hybridization. All I can really say about such experiments is that it probably has more to do with the spirit or the approach than with the final product.
I also harbor some very strong opinions of what jazz should or should not aspire to; what its role or place in the culture is or ought to be. I will be at turns very critical and very defensive of this genre (and of other sectors of the culture).
I temper this with the realization that what I seek in music has little to do with music as an industry; that my ears are simultaneously very jaded and very innocent.
As a corollary, I understand that others listen to music for a variety of reasons; many of which perplex me... but then, as Murph recently reminded me, "It takes all kinds, even if sometimes you wished it didn't".
As a second corollary, I don't expect people to come around to my way of listening to or looking at things. I am putting them out here because I have to, I guess.
3) The construct which we've termed "irrational compulsion" has played very heavily on my mind, as I write this. Maybe, at some point it will have its own entry, should I ever arrive at a deep understanding of it.
Here's my minor admission of one that I harbor: I will be particularly critical of jazz vocalists. For a defense of this irrational compulsion, you'd probably have to read "Lounge v. Jazz", and also pick up bits of confessions scattered throughout this blog.
Here's another: I can't stand "Satin Doll". "Cherokee" also kinda bugs me. Yes, I will concede that Charlie Barnet's version is the least offensive that I've heard, but this is still a long way from the song actually moving me. The list goes on, but does not bear publication at this time, as it is wholly idiosyncratic.
A hopeful prediction – Some day, some musician, perhaps some singer, will find the treasure buried in either or both of those songs. If that happens, I will sing his or her praise.
Just in case anyone does read them, I feel I should establish the grounds rules and disclose such biases as I may harbor.
1) If a work is mentioned here, you may usually safely assume that I enjoyed, appreciated, or at the very least, found something redeeming in it. Only very very rarely will this be a forum for savagery, and even then will there have to be some extenuating circumstance; my perception that someone is 'getting over' or blatantly manipulating the audience, or that the work is so agregiously in commercial or cynical that, IMNSHO, it presents a hazard to the culture... like that.
2) As concerns Jazz– While I have some very deeply held beliefs about what jazz is and is not, I am (perhaps paradoxically to some) very accepting of genuine innovations (radical and incremental) to the genre; even of certain types of hybridization. All I can really say about such experiments is that it probably has more to do with the spirit or the approach than with the final product.
I also harbor some very strong opinions of what jazz should or should not aspire to; what its role or place in the culture is or ought to be. I will be at turns very critical and very defensive of this genre (and of other sectors of the culture).
I temper this with the realization that what I seek in music has little to do with music as an industry; that my ears are simultaneously very jaded and very innocent.
As a corollary, I understand that others listen to music for a variety of reasons; many of which perplex me... but then, as Murph recently reminded me, "It takes all kinds, even if sometimes you wished it didn't".
As a second corollary, I don't expect people to come around to my way of listening to or looking at things. I am putting them out here because I have to, I guess.
3) The construct which we've termed "irrational compulsion" has played very heavily on my mind, as I write this. Maybe, at some point it will have its own entry, should I ever arrive at a deep understanding of it.
Here's my minor admission of one that I harbor: I will be particularly critical of jazz vocalists. For a defense of this irrational compulsion, you'd probably have to read "Lounge v. Jazz", and also pick up bits of confessions scattered throughout this blog.
Here's another: I can't stand "Satin Doll". "Cherokee" also kinda bugs me. Yes, I will concede that Charlie Barnet's version is the least offensive that I've heard, but this is still a long way from the song actually moving me. The list goes on, but does not bear publication at this time, as it is wholly idiosyncratic.
A hopeful prediction – Some day, some musician, perhaps some singer, will find the treasure buried in either or both of those songs. If that happens, I will sing his or her praise.
posted by Chris Sampson at 1:10 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home