Archive for the ‘Miscellaneous’ category

Wrong From the Top: Me on Justin Moyer on Jazz

August 9, 2014

Yesterday, The Washington Post’s Justin Moyer posted a spectacularly ill-argued and misguided screed against jazz, which I will herewith proceed to expose for the drivel it is. I would not do this here except that (a) this happened in the Post, meaning it is central to the DMV musical experience (maybe); (b) I used to freelance for Jazz Times, and still listen to jazz a good amount; and (c) the article is just that bad. Now let’s proceed.

Although he begins by baldly stating “Jazz is boring. Jazz is overrated. Jazz is washed up,” Moyer does not pose an argument that actually synthesizes various strains of thought to support these statements; instead, he makes five points that build on each other in no way. While the listiclish format will not endear him to ancient scholars of rhetoric, it does make it easy to set ’em up and knock ’em down.

Moyer’s first knock on jazz is as follows: “Jazz takes great songs — and abandons the lyrics that help make them great.”

When I was in high school, I told someone that classical was my favorite type of music, and she replied with scorn that classical was the easiest music to compose because it had no words. I never thought I would encounter an argument quite like this again, but Moyer brought it back!

The obvious error is of intention. If you want to hear songs with words, you can go to a show with a vocalist — even a jazz show, as there are many vocal jazz concerts. If you want to hear talented musicians exploring the basic harmonic possibilities associated with that song while weaving in fragments of melody and occasionally arriving at serendipitous moments of synthesis, you should go to a jazz show. It appears Moyer prefers the former type of show, but this does not invalidate the existence of the latter.

Perhaps Moyer was conscious of this flaw in his argument when he followed Point No. 1 with “Improvisation isn’t all it’s cracked up to be.” States Moyer, “The knowledge that great music is improvised makes it more remarkable. But the fact that music is improvised doesn’t make it great.” This would be a devastating argument if only everyone who loves jazz didn’t already agree with it.

You see, most people acknowledge that there exists both great jazz and bad jazz. In great jazz, the musicians achieve the full possibilities of the improvisational form, the eye-opening combination of exploration and synthesis mentioned earlier. In bad jazz, they’re just noodling around and they don’t do any of that stuff.

Later, Moyer says he doesn’t like Wes Montgomery’s music. That’s fine! It further appears that many people disagree about what constitutes great jazz and bad jazz. Montgomery is not some people’s cup of tea; others appreciate what they perceive as elegant and deft musicianship that doesn’t call attention to itself but repays the attention you give it. But nobody is saying it’s great because it’s improvised, except the straw man Moyer created.

“Jazz stopped evolving,” complains Moyer in Point No. 3. He then discusses artists who have continued exploring the boundaries of jazz (leaving out about a million other people) and then says they don’t count because he doesn’t like them. So there, modern jazz artists! (Also, don’t front like back in the day you weren’t bumping “Rebirth of Slick,” which of course featured rapper Ladybug Mecca, a native of Silver Spring. See, this post relates to the rest of this blog somehow!)

He also says that “jazz is being kept alive by nostalgic Americans” who have the temerity to continue enjoying the music of their youth. One day, Justin Moyer, you too will be old, floundering in a world of new music that sounds like noises and trash to your different-era ears, and on that day you will take solace in a recording of music in a style traditional to you, and Justin Moyer III will laugh his head off at your grandpa music. But Justin Moyer III might still be listening to jazz, because jazz artists continue to evolve the genre in ways Justin Moyer doesn’t like.

Ready for the next devastating indictment of a musical genre? “Jazz is mushy.” It turns out that there are a bunch of artists playing jazz and they do it differently! Moyer quotes famed jazz traditionalist Wynton Marsalis as saying that “too often, what is represented as jazz isn’t jazz at all,” and then complains that Louis Armstrong, Kenny G, Charlie Parker, and John Zorn don’t sound like each other. This is right after he complained that jazz stopped evolving 50 years ago, folks. I can’t even figure out what wrongheaded piffle I’m supposed to be rebutting here.

Moyer also complains that people use the word “jazz” to refer to things that are definitely not jazz, like President Obama’s speaking style or Ralph Ellison’s prose. While I find this annoying as well, it has zero to do with jazz being boring, overrated, or washed up, which the lede lead me to believe this listicle was going to prove.

Here comes the clincher: “Jazz let itselt be co-opted.” For Moyer, the sign of a dying art form is that some of its practitioners (he doesn’t say how many, or what percentage thereof) have been able to secure academic positions rather than languishing in glamorous artistic poverty like all the respectable musicians. White people have begun to study this music in school like it’s worthy of further analysis or something. And look at people memorialising musicians they enjoy! Why, the horror.

In conclusion, Moyer failed in every conceivable way to prove the statements with which he led off his meandering, content-free musings. However, he did inspire me to read his article twice: Once so I could get mad about it and the second time so I could write this response. And thus, Moyer was likely successful in his overall objective. Sigh.

Here’s some good jazz to wash all that bad feeling away:

Yeah, no evolving happening there!

See It and Believe It

June 3, 2014

In case you missed the University of Maryland Symphony Orchestra performing a choreographed version of “Appalachian Spring,” the video is now available:

Not as cool as it was live, but still pretty darn cool. And good job to Maryland for documenting it. More on the performance here.

The Sign, the Note, and the World: What Art Form Speaks Most Clearly in a Cacophonous Time?

March 31, 2012

Welcome to thrilling Round 2 of the Spring For Music Great Arts Blogger Challenge! I am excited to have made it to the round of 16 and to check out the engaging company in this rarefied air. In DMV news, though I am happy to have discovered Cultural Tourism DC through this contest, we must all pour out a little liquor for Ionarts, which went down in the first round. I’m sure the crew over there can console themselves with the awesomeness of their blog, though.

The e-mail informing me of my advancement posed the following question, the answer to which will constitute my entry into the next round:

We live in an aggressively visual age; images dominate the popular culture. But which art form has the most to say about contemporary culture, and why?

Since I received this e-mail while I was drafting another e-mail to let its recipient know that I had texted a third person, a task that in turn was distracting me from my daily dose of document review, I do not know exactly how much our lived experience is dominated by images, rather than the endless roaring gusher of text that threatens to drown all of us, even when it is parceled out in tinier and tinier chunks.

But it is true that our popular culture relentlessly proffers visual images at us, because they can be taken in so quickly — a mere glance on the subway and we understand that Svedka is the vodka for you, if you are a robot, or would like to have sex with one. And just as we take them in, they can take us in — we understand that Svedka is also the vodka for me if I enjoy turning over in my head the idea of being a robot or having sex with one, which makes a slightly larger pool of potential drinkers of colorless, tasteless liquor.

Baby got plastic back!

I do enjoy visual arts, along with the other art forms that I will callously dismiss in answering this question. But with only images at their disposal, the visual arts can only go so far in making sense of popular culture’s onslaught of images. This is particularly true considering that visual art is presented in a distraction-free environment, giving it an unfair advantage over hardworking images like LOLcats and Beyonce publicity photos, which must compete with a plethora of other images to snap our eyeballs to attention.

No, we need something outside the realm of the purely visual to say something about, rather than to or instead of, popular culture. We need: popular music.

Why pop? Perhaps it will be easier for our image-addled brains to apprehend the reasons if I format them in a bulleted list:

  • Unlike images, which we typically try to avoid by averting our gaze (or using ad blockers), pop is something people seek out to avoid or enhance everyday experiences. People plug in white earbuds to shut out subway chatter or slip a mix into their beater’s CD player to make the open road more enjoyable. We millions, we embrace it, rather than shying away.
  • Pop songs have lyrical content, which definitely allows for something to be said. However, songs that “say something” typically are not very popular, because people don’t like to be scolded in musical form any more than they like being scolded in any other context.
  • Yet even when nothing of any great import is being said, the manner in which it is said often provides a window into the contemporary mood. The renewed-strength Top 40 is machine-tooled, AutoTuned, and relentlessly danceable — intricately structured to get you to surrender conscious thought for physical release. That’s certainly saying something about what’s going on now, with our appreciation for the little-understood miracles of technology and our emphasis on the perfectability of the body. Or take T-Pain, of whom I am a fan; the conscious choice to make his own voice blatantly false, through the miracle of pitch-correction software, and the way it shades all his narratives of poor decision-making and failed courtship, as if he’s ashamed of his own sincerity.
  • Over the past decade or so, pop music has been radically democratized. Anyone can make music for the cost of a decent mike and a few pieces of software, and get a worldwide audience in minutes by uploading to YouTube. This allows for reg’lar folks to participate in the pop music conversation, and sometimes to drive it. They can be in dialogue with the mainstream or outside it, and sometimes they move from outside to inside.
  • Nowadays people have taken to using these tools not only to create but also to break down and build up other music according to their own plan; in other words, to remix. Anything can be claimed as material by anyone; for example, rap songs that white people may be slightly embarrassed to enjoy get slathered with layers of ironic appreciation through the medium of the acoustic cover. Or a remix can be a response, or a lesson. And it can all be done within hours, and apprehended fully within minutes. Popular music is joyously responsive.

Though they provide many satisfactions, other arts don’t measure up along the Spring for Music-prescribed axis of appreciation. (Warning: Absurd overgeneralizations approaching!) Most films speak authentically only regarding what an executive thinks someone else wants to see in a film; for films that go beyond that standard, the industry builds copyright and commercial walls against anyone responding in the same medium. Theater is hampered by the small number of people who can actually see any given play, due to cost and scale. Though I have enjoyed the small number of dance shows I have attended, I have never found them to be saying anything other than “look how good this dancing is.”

And then there is classical music, the reason I write this blog. As noted earlier, if I had to choose to listen to only one genre of music for the rest of my life, I’d pick classical. But for the most part it’s walled off from contemporary culture: It doesn’t reflect things that are happening in the world, its presenters don’t draw connections from the music to anything current, and its consumers are largely preoccupied with escape rather than engagement, shunning even the most anodyne contemporary works for Best-Loved Classics on repeat.

Right now, the music is on an island, full of time-tested, indisputably great art that’s survived the increasingly furious flow around it of our dynamic modern culture. Nevertheless, the music’s position in the common mind has been eroded. I don’t know whether the erosion can continue indefinitely, but part of the point of this blog is to help build a bridge. I’ll keep trying.

New York, New York, It’s a Helluva Town…As Far As That Goes

March 23, 2012

With this blog post I am entering the Spring for Music Arts Blogger Challenge. Spring for Music is a cool series presented at Carnegie Hall wherein various orchestras from around the United States (and, this year, one from Canada, the 51st state) show up and strut their stuff in front of an audience of presumably jaded New Yorkers, who have been enticed to attend by tickets priced at $25, even for the good seats. I would totally go, and the prize offered by the Challenge (free tix and $2500) would totally enable me to go, so here we go.

Spring For Music - Carlos Kalmar conducts the Oregon Symphony at Carnegie Hall, 5/12/11. From their website.

It must be acknowledged that I am not likely to win. There are more frequently updated blogs, blogs with more influential readership and commenters, blogs by greater eminences than me. But Spring for Music has cannily chosen a first blogging topic that I cannot resist!

New York has long been considered the cultural capital of America. Is it still? If not, where?

That’s some high-quality trolling! Especially with the grammatically ambiguous second question. I will answer the question SfM was not asking first: Yes, New York is still considered the cultural capital of America, at least by New Yorkers who move to the DMV for jobs, or because the DMV has multiple-room apartments at relatively affordable prices, or because they came down to attend college and stayed from sheer inertia. These people will extemporize on the superiority of New York in any arena, including the cultural one, given the slightest opportunity to do so.

For example, mention that you took in a cultural event over the past weekend, and the ex-NYCers will wax nostalgic for a parallel Gotham institution rather than asking “How was it?” Their two other complaints are:

  • The DMV’s pizza is inadequate, although it’s not like there isn’t a whole bunch of terrible pizza in NYC, and there’s some quite high-quality pie here; and
  • The subway provides subpar service, which is true enough, except that last time I was in New York I spent about ten minutes on one subway platform reading service-disruption placards before figuring out that none of them applied to me. Then I watched a rat attempt to wrestle an apple core into a hole next to the tracks for ten minutes. All subways are subpar somehow.

You could average the typical NYC-to-DMVer’s portrayal of the Big Apple with the vignette presented in Stevie Wonder’s “Living for the City” and still end up with an inflated sense of the wonders of the former New Amsterdam. So it is with a jaundiced tone that I must answer this question.

Now, is New York the cultural capital of America? Was it ever? There have always been outstanding cultural efforts in other cities: museums, musical ensembles, writers, critics, the whole nine. New York has had far less of a cultural hold over the masses than Los Angeles, which mastered the whole moving picture thing, and most significant innovations in pop music originated outside its orbit, especially jazz, which, as a former writer for Jazz Times, I am obligated to note is America’s classical music.

But there has always been an expectation in many artistic professions that, having proven oneself in other burgs and cities, the final yardstick for one’s talents is New York. Whether this expectation ever existed outside the minds of New Yorkers and people who want to live there is difficult to judge, but there are certainly a few earwormy songs that testify to it.

Does this expectation currently exist? To my mind, New York’s role of “national stage” has long since been replaced by YouTube, which by the present definition makes YouTube the cultural capital of the world, which is funny because it’s dominated by videos of cats and teenagers discussing what they just bought at Forever 21. Prominent performers almost always do end up hitting New York at some point, but I submit that this is due less to New York’s role as cultural capital and more to its big rolls of capital. If there is money for the arts, the artists will come.

So the answer to the questions SfM meant to ask are (1) no and (2) the place where good culture is happening and uploadable to YouTube. As a great New Yorker once said, “It ain’t where you’re from, it’s where you’re at.”

And now to return to the title of this blog, here’s a Trouble Funk song introduced by a passage from “In the Hall of the Mountain King”:

DMV classic, spiced with classical.

Swagger-Jacking the Great Composers

August 7, 2010

From a Vibe interview with Dr. Dre (via Rap Radar):

You mentioned a hip-hop album without rapping. Will we ever hear a Dr. Dre instrumental album?
Oh yeah, that’s in the works. An instrumental album is something I’ve been wanting to do for a long time. I have the ideas for it. I want to call it The Planets. I don’t even know if I should be saying this, but fuck it. [Laughs.] It’s just my interpretation of what each planet sounds like. I’m gonna go off on that. Just all instrumental. I’ve been studying the planets and learning the personalities of each planet. I’ve been doing this for about two years now just in my spare time so to speak. I wanna do it in surround sound. It’ll have to be in surround sound for Saturn to work.


  1. Who’s going to tell him?
  2. When Gustav Holst got this idea, and talked about it with his friends, did he admonish himself by saying, “I don’t even know if I should be saying this, but fuck it”? (This site doesn’t say.)
  3. How will Dre’s conception of the personalities differ from Holst’s? How will they be similar? I am genuinely extremely curious about this.
  4. After Dre’s planets enter our orbit, which orchestra will realize the dream of me sprinting to be first in line at their box office window by programming a DJ spinning Dre and a symphony playing Holst back-to-back? (“Gadzooks! Using interest in popular music to shine a new light on a past materpiece? We simply can’t have it! Give ’em the Figaro overture, Tchaikovsky’s first piano concerto, and Beethoven 7 again!”)
  5. Will any rappers attempt to sample Dre and end up sampling Holst when the realize the copyright has expired on the latter music of the spheres?

(definition of swagger jacking in case you didn’t know)

Part of This Complete Breakfast

August 21, 2009

I dunno whether it supplies your RDA of classical-music nutrition, but the Cereal List certainly has the snap, crackle, and pop you want from a blog. Plus it has an entire “Hotties” category (dangerously underpopulated for now, but then it’s new). It’s on my list o’ blogs to read now.

Also, the much-esteemed Ionarts was kind enough to link to me last Sunday. Thanks! You have to read Ionarts. I comment there frequently, under the name “Lindemann,” which is my comment name for everywhere else too (except The Classical Beat, where I am “Lindemann777” for reasons too boring to go into).