RoR: Forum

Rebirth of Reason

Forum : Article Discussions : What's Wrong with Bebop? Reflections on Ayn Rand and Jazz

Thursday
November 17, 2005

What's Wrong with Bebop? Reflections on Ayn Rand and Jazz by Roger E. Bissell

An objective analysis of the value of music in general, and on bebop jazz in particular, focuses primarily on the presence and quality of memorable melody. For that reason, bebop jazz, while not without redeeming virtues, is of lesser rational value than, say, Dixieland jazz. Avant-garde jazz, however, like avant-garde music in general, is beyond the pale! (Read more...)
Discuss this Article (59 messages)

Friday, November 18, 2005 - 12:21pm

Roger,

Except for the 1949 sides that Ornette has said he made with Clarence Samuels' rhythm and blues band (done when he was 19, these were never released, and appear to have been lost), all of his extant recordings show him playing in the style for which he became known. "Peace" and "Ramblin'" were taped in 1959, the year he moved to New York City. They were released on LPs titled "The Shape of Jazz to Come" and "Change of the Century," and helped to make him famous (or infamous, depending on who you ask).

In the 1960s, Ornette experimented with some "farther out" procedures, most notably playing instruments that he had no training on (i.e., non-saxophones). After he'd worked with the trumpet for a while, he made some meaningful statements, on slow pieces that weren't too challenging technically. But his violin playing never got any better--it was the instrumental counterpart to Yoko Ono's singing. Could your acquaintance have inflicted one of those violin numbers on you?

If you're not used to "free" jazz, it generally helps to listen to the artists' earliest recordings first, because they will give you a better sense of where the music is coming from. For Ornette Coleman, the 1958 recordings for Contemporary and the 1959 sessions for Atlantic are definitely the place to start (and the 1959 sessions are one of his artistic peaks). Another one I would recommend is his set of lyrical duets from 1976 with bassist Charlie Haden (titled "Soapsuds, Soapsuds").

Pete,

Before you consign all free jazz to the pomo-wanking bin, you might want to try Ornette's 1959 sessions, items from Sun Ra's Chicago period (1956-1960) and his early New York period (1961-1963), and Cecil Taylor's sessions for Candid (1960-1961).

Robert Campbell

Friday, November 18, 2005 - 12:35pm

Robert, any album titles you recommend? I'm willing to give it a fair shake.

Friday, November 18, 2005 - 8:33pm

As a proud owner of around 15 Ornette Coleman records I feel I have to come to his defense. I consider this essay to be (to borrow the author's words), "neither great, good, mediocre, nor bad. Just Crap."
I would urge you to go to http://www.amazon.com and take a listen to the audio samples from the Ornette Coleman records "Tomorrow is the Question", "The Shape of Jazz to Come", or "Something Else!", and then see if you can reconcile what you actually hear with what Mr. Bissell has written. I suspect you'll be surprised to hear how melodic, light-hearted, and fun Ornette's music can be.
When I first heard his music as a teenager, it was love at first audition, and at the time I had no idea his music was considered sacrilegious by some. His is the kind of music I like to relax to on sunny Sunday mornings (my "tiddlywinks" music). If Mr. Bissell prefers more prosaic, pedestrian fare that's his prerogative, but when he calls Ornette Coleman a "con-artist", and compares him to the Unabomber, the essay just comes across to me like a denunciation excerpted from a Soviet-era issue of Pravda.
Mr. Bissell mentions John Coltrane (whom many, myself included, consider to be the greatest jazz musician ever), saying "We could certainly distinguish in a blindfold test between Coltrane and a less talented amateur�h. Surely that is just a feeble attempt to damn an undeniable genius with unbelievably faint praise. Coltrane's tone is instantly recognizable, and though his playing is hugely influential, it is inimitable. The very same can be said for Coleman. It is interesting to note also that most of Coltrane's music after 1965 went far beyond anything in Coleman's oeuvre in terms of gloriously passionate intensity, and uncompromising envelope pushing. Check out some of Coltrane's moderately challenging free jazz records like "Living Space", "Sun Ship", or "First Meditations" and you'll see what I mean.

I find the quote "Bach to Bartok, knew better. They knew that without a remembered melody, the listener is lost, and further composition futile." interesting. Bach is my favorite composer, and he was a fount of beautiful melody, but much of his music consists of incredibly complicated counterpoint often intertwining 4 or more simultaneous melodies, i.e. nigh on impossible to remember, and yet I never find myself lost while listening to it. And while I very much enjoy Bartok's string quartets, his music isn't exactly famous for its whistleable melodicism. Coleman's music is more obviously melodic than that of Bartok.

The idea that composers and musicians ought to compromise their art by lowering the bar, by dumbing down their music so that the "average person" might understand, is one that I consider beneath contempt. While an artist should neither demand nor require appreciation of their work (and we are free to ignore their work if we wish), neither should an artist pander to an audience's expectation if in doing so they compromise their vision.

Arlo (long time listener, first time caller)

By the way , you can hear some of Mr. Bissell's work here http://www.gemtone.com/art_of_the_duo/ I personally find it highly soporific and stodgy but I'm sure some of you would enjoy it.

(^_^ )

(Edited by Arlo Cook on 11/18, 10:00pm)

Friday, November 18, 2005 - 9:52pm

[And the potato got heated up again and is tossed - who's getting it this time.........?]

Friday, November 18, 2005 - 10:35pm

Hot potato!
I do have to say that I am glad to see a few first time posters come out on musical issues, pro or con. It's important that musical issues not go blindly accepted, given the subjective nature of music.

Saturday, November 19, 2005 - 9:03am

Pete,

Cecil Taylor: The World of Cecil Taylor (Candid) and Jumpin' Punkins (Candid); the first is the more important of the two

Sun Ra: Sound of Joy (Delmark), Visits Planet Earth/Interstellar Low Ways (Evidence), Fate in a Pleasant Mood/When Sun Comes Out (Evidence)

Ornette Coleman: The Shape of Jazz to Come (Atlantic); Change of the Century (Atlantic)

And I'll add Jimmy Giuffre 3 (with Paul Bley and Steve Swallow): 1961 (ECM).

All of these are listed as available on amazon (Soapsuds by Ornette Coleman is apparently in print only in Japan, so better looked for used).

Arlo,

I also find much of Ornette's music sunny and lighthearted--and I've been a fan for 34 years.

No need to take a swipe at The Art of the Duo, though. It's excellent work in its own genre.

Robert Campbell

Saturday, November 19, 2005 - 10:16am

I don't know much about Coleman, except that he was associated with "free jazz." I personally like rhapsodies and improvisation, but if they are referring to "free jazz" in the sense that Varese and co. spoke of freeing sound from structure?
I did a little listening at the iTunes store, and my immediate impression after listening to random tracks was the the supporting music was alright, but his sax lines by themselves were ANNOYING. Grating, even, although there were a few songs that sounded ok, like he was playing it straight. It actually reminded me of Alex Lifeson of Rush, how I like the songs, but can't stand his guitar solos; he purposely tries to do non-traditional sounding melodies. He's a space cadet. I can't stand his solo's out of context, but when I listen to them as part of the whole, I don't notice them because the bass and/or keys are providing a more melodic line or riff to focus on. But I think the difference is that in his case, the solo's are momentary, while in Coleman's case, his playing is a constant.
There is the fun element that Robert spoke of in jazz, anyone remember the goofy song from The Jetsons cartoon, "Beep bop bloop means I love you," or something similar? It was a parody of bop, sure, but in the context of a goofy song, the beeps and bloops work.

Saturday, November 19, 2005 - 3:30pm

Joe,

"Free" jazz isn't free of all structure. Music has to have some kind of structure.

In a jazz, the most basic meaning of "playing free" is not using the chord changes of the composition while soloing. (Bebop is hard to play, in part, because one chord change after another keeps coming at the soloist; most of the first-generation free players were reacting against bebop in one way or another.)

What Ornette Coleman and his colleagues normally do is find a scale or chord to play on during their solos, as long as they like, then switch to another as it suits them. Since one of the traditional functions of a piano in a jazz group is to keep feeding chords to the soloists, Ornette has made very few recordings with pianists.

Most Ornette Coleman performances conclude with a return to the "head" (the basic melody), and the solos are typically the same number of bars long as the head--or a multiple. He hasn't departed from preceding styles nearly as much as some people think he has.

If you find the alto sax lines grating, there are several possible causes. You might not like the sound of the instrument in general, or the sound that OC gets out of his in particular. (He bends a lot of notes up or down on purpose, and not just when he's playing the blues.) Or you may not like the invention (the solo line) itself. Try listening to his solos on "Lonely Woman" and "Ramblin'" several times each, and see whether they begin to come together for you.

Robert Campbell

Saturday, November 19, 2005 - 5:42pm

Groovy, thanks for the elaboration, Robert. (Glad to see you back, as well!) I think it may have been the line itself, being used to hearing skittery saxes in the likes of King Crimson.
(Edited by Joe Maurone
on 11/19, 5:43pm)

Saturday, November 19, 2005 - 7:08pm

Robert,

I didn't mean to denigrate The Art of Duo, I realise that it's a good album for its genre (the album is even endorsed by the likes of Dave Brubeck). I just wanted to say that personally it's not my cup of tea (subjective as that may sound), while I'm sure some would love it.
And I'd like to second what you say about Soapsuds, Soapsuds. That's a great album. And I would also add Sun Song by Sun Ra, too, although it wouldn't be considered very avant garde these days.

Joe,

Ornette Coleman used a plastic (!) alto saxophone because he couldn't afford a real one, and he liked the sound so much he stuck with it even after he had earned enough money to get a real one. That goes some way to explaining his unusual tone.

And I have to add that I agree 100% with the following sentence from the essay:
Let the (economic and intellectual) marketplace decide the value of our creations and utterances.

A lot of bad art would never have been brought into this world without the distortion of the market brought about by government grants.

Arlo

Sunday, November 20, 2005 - 12:13am

Much jazz that I've ever heard is simply slime, & for the life of me I cannot understand Objectivists' preoccupation with it (though I hasten to add�sigh� that I don't advocate the banning of either it or its discussion). It's winking & insinuation as far as I can tell.

As a matter of interest, why is it near-impossible to get a conversation going about Puccini & Rach et al, on SOLO of all places? Beats me.

Linz

Sunday, November 20, 2005 - 6:16am

Good idea, Linz.

Since we are on saxophones, do you know the Symphonic Dances, Op. 45 by Rachmaninoff? The first movement has one of the most beautifully wistful and nostalgic melodies in all of symphonic music. It is played by an alto sax.

In typical romantic fashion, when the melody comes back in the recapitulation, it is then turned over to strings in octaves. Every time I hear this work, I go into alpha and time simply stops. The world magically becomes a better place.

This was Rachmaninoff's last major work and the only time I know of that he ever wrote for saxophone. This composition is one of my personal favorites.

Michael

Sunday, November 20, 2005 - 7:00am

Michael, any recordings you reccomend of that Rach piece, I am not familiar with it. And if so, do you happen to know who the saxophonist was that played on it?

Sunday, November 20, 2005 - 7:07am

Rachmaninov wrote two versions of The Symphonic Dances, one orchestrated and the other two piano... my orchestra version is Sir Eugene Goossens and the London Symphony Orchestra, on Everest... the piano version is Ashkenazy and Previn, on London...
(Edited by robert malcom on 11/20, 7:08am)

(Edited by robert malcom on 11/20, 7:09am)

Sunday, November 20, 2005 - 9:35am

Pete,

I like a recording of Rachmaninov's Symphonic Dances done by a conductor you wouldn't normally associate with the piece--John Eliot Gardiner. It's on Deutsche Grammophon. As is usual with symphonic recordings, the alto saxophone soloist isn't identified.

Robert Campbell

Sunday, November 20, 2005 - 9:44am

Ok, why hijack this thread? Why not start a new one?

Sunday, November 20, 2005 - 4:37pm

I recommend EMI's 6 CD box set of Rachmaninov's Orchestral Works. It has Symphonies 1 to 3, Piano Concertos 1 to 4, The Isle of the Dead, Rhapsody on a Theme of Paganini, Scherzo (in D min), Vocalise, and the Symphonic Dances (conducted by Mariss Jansons). About 7 hours of Rachmaninov housed in a 2 centimetre-thick box.
See: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00006HM8V/002-6866745-0392836?v=glance&n=5174&s=classical&v=glance

From the same EMI box set series I also strongly recommend the Complete Symphonies and Piano Concertos of Beethoven set conducted by Klemperer (9 CDs). It also includes the wonderful 21 minute Choral Fantasia (which later evolved into the choral mvmt of the 9th), an orchestral version of the Grosse Fuge, and the 3 Leonore Overtures along with the Coriolan and Prometheus Overtures.

And... the ABSQ Complete String Quartets of Beethoven (7CDs), and the excellent Complete Symphonies of Bruckner set (9 CDs (doesn't include the 2 unnumbered early symphonies)) both from the same series of box sets. The CD sets all thankfully come in compact boxes that are around 2 centimetres thick.

(Edited by Arlo Cook on 11/20, 5:42pm)

Sunday, November 20, 2005 - 5:41pm

Joe, you're right. I apologize - but MSK started it! :-)

Back to the subject at hand, Ornette Coleman in particular. My skepticism of his artistic merit is grounded in his so-called 'harmolodic' theory. At about the same time as I began to study jazz in college, I heard a fellow music student (himself a fine jazz saxophonist) mention how Ornette Coleman had devised a 'harmolodic' theory behind his music. At the time, not knowing anything about Ornette Coleman, the term sounded very sophisticated and my presumption was that there must be something to it given his stature in the jazz lexicon. I soon found, however, that nobody I knew could give me a clear explaination of what it meant, and the literature I was able to find was also no help. Now, to be fair, a physicist could explain to me E=mc2, and I still probably wouldn't really understand it, but music theory is something for which I happen to have an aptitude and I began to suspect that this was a case of the Emperor's new clothes (please forgive the repeated analogy).

My current evaluation of 'harmolodics' is that it's some sort of rationalization for a subjective approach to making and improvising music. Ornette's website, www.harmolodic.com, has a pseudo-explaination of harmolodic philosphy in the form of a slide show with audio. Click on the 'philosophy' tab towards the bottom of the home page, and see for yourself whether the harmolodic concept is a reality based innovation or a bunch of New Age pomo rubbish.

Sunday, November 20, 2005 - 7:38pm

Thank you, Pete.
Regarding Coleman's harmolodics: I was unaware of that, but you reminded me of another jazz-based attempt to redefine the rules of music: George Russell's
"Lydian Chromatic Concept of Tonal Organization"
( http://www.georgerussell.com/lc.html).

"GEORGE RUSSELL'S LYDIAN CHROMATIC CONCEPT OF TONAL ORGANIZATION,
first described in a self-published pamphlet in 1953, marks a radical expansion of the harmonic language for both composition and analysis and also marks an abandonment of the major-minor system which dominated Western music for over 350 years. Radical as it may be, the theory is more than one person's eccentricity, having considerable precedent in the work of Ravel, Scriabin, Debussy and in some of the learned works of Bach. The word "Lydian" is here derived from one of the classical Greek scale modes. Russell's root scale follows the natural overtone series and runs from C to C with F sharp, rather than the customary F natural of the major scale.

For searchers like Miles and Coltrane and Bill Evans, and many in the generations that followed them, Russell's theory provided a harmonic background and a path for further exploration. It also gave rise to the "modal" jazz movement that enjoyed great popularity in the 70's and 80's for better and for worse. "

A lot of these attempts were based, unfortunately, on black artist's attempts to define a new music that is not based on "the white man's" musical system. As if music has a racial component. But like the attempts at twelve tone rows and such, it wasn't based on what the mind needed. (Not necessarily Russell himself, and of course, many of the ideas came from people like Schoenberg and co.). But there was a feeling that Jazz was unique to the black experience, and there were attempts to make it into a black art, which is silly since music transcends race.
(Edited by Joe Maurone
on 11/21, 2:16pm)

Sunday, November 20, 2005 - 9:37pm

Joe, this looks interesting. I'm going to have to read this.