futurecon at earthlink.net
Wed Apr 30 13:02:39 PDT 2003
Thank you for that explanation. Personally, as a philosopher myself, I think
the premise is full of holes. Using his premise, you can argue the
elimination of all that is not necessary to "progress," whatever that is. It
does not take into consideration the human spirit which "enjoys" that which
is pleasing to it. You can argue that, in the light of a progressive
evolution, the human spirit has no relevancy, but it is a specious argument,
except for arguments sake, because it excludes too much. I think we can all
say that in the past 50 years we've seen "progress," but are we better off
today than we were 50 years ago? No. True, progressive Evolution has
devolved in the chase for the almighty dollar. Profit has become the mass
motive. Music and the arts suffer when this happens. They always have and
they always will. Look at the cutbacks in the arts due to insolvency of
governments. To apply this premise to music is just intellectual BS.
Silver Dollar Jazz Band
From: Rob McCallum [mailto:rakmccallum at hotmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2003 11:16 AM
To: futurecon at earthlink.net
Cc: djml; Charlie Hooks; David Wickham
Subject: Re: [Dixielandjazz] "Revivalism"
Hi Burt and everyone,
Actually, that quote isn't mine (though I may be inclined to agree, as long
as I can keep my options open!!). I put it as a quote of the month at the
bottom of the post. The quote is from Don Rose who was using it to argue
against Nisenstien's premise in his book Blue the Murder of Jazz.
Basically, if Nisenstein's point is to argue that jazz today is somehow
inauthentic because it has ceased to evolve or is too far removed from "it's
place in time," Rose counters with the thought that innovation may no longer
be possible or neccessary seeing as some forms of jazz have pushed the
envelope so far in everything from the extremes of complex tonalities to
sheer noise. I think the quote, which may be taken too far out of context
on my post, is basically suggesting that musicians should just play
stylistically the way the like because "progress" (meaning, in this case
major stylistic overhauls) may not be possible or necessary any longer. The
complete article is on the Jazz Institute of Chicago website as a review of
All the best,
----- Original Message -----
From: Burt Wilson <futurecon at earthlink.net>
To: Charlie Hooks <charliehooks at earthlink.net>; Rob McCallum
<rakmccallum at hotmail.com>; djml <dixielandjazz at ml.islandnet.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2003 1:49 PM
Subject: RE: [Dixielandjazz] "Revivalism"
> I agree with Charlie. Rob's logic, followed to its ultimate conclusion,
> ask: "Are YOU really necessary any longer?" (with apologies to Jim BB)
> Burt Wilson
> Silver Dollar Jazz Band
> -----Original Message-----
> From: dixielandjazz-bounces at ml.islandnet.com
> [mailto:dixielandjazz-bounces at ml.islandnet.com]On Behalf Of Charlie
> Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2003 8:18 AM
> To: Rob McCallum; djml
> Subject: Re: [Dixielandjazz] "Revivalism"
> on 4/29/03 6:11 PM, Rob McCallum at rakmccallum at hotmail.com wrote:
> > So we must
> > first ask if 'progress'
> > is still possible - and then we must ask if it is really necessary any
> > longer."
> I realize that asking such questions is a necessary activity for
> musicologists and other strange creatures of the musical deep, but I enjoy
> being able just to play the music and to listen to the music, to shut down
> whatever sounds especially nonsensical that day, and to admire whatever
> appeals to me.
> I enjoy you, though, Rob. I'm just being a curmudgeon for Beebe who
> learned to enjoy owls. And peaceful small towns.
> Dixielandjazz mailing list
> Dixielandjazz at ml.islandnet.com
More information about the Dixielandjazz