[Dixielandjazz] Phil Napoleon & more
Stephen G Barbone
barbonestreet at earthlink.net
Thu Jun 2 06:48:02 PDT 2011
If you read Elder's review and Stearn's liner notes, you will come to
the conclusion that they are virtually identical. It is almost as it
Elder's review copied Stearn's ,liner notes. I thought that you would
immediately see that and is one of the reasons I forwarded the Elder
review to you..
Other than that, your sense of conspiracy as to motives is rather
incredible. First you say Stearns had no knowledge about the music,
now you back track and say because of his knowledge he misleads us on
The bottom line is relatively simple. Phil Napoleon was not trying to
recreate a style. He was playing HIS style, developed at the beginning
of the jazz age.. On the other hand, Pete Daily was trying to re
create a style that he had not played before. Listening to who played
what in any depth should convince you of that.
As to who had how many "original" players, Napoleon had 2. Himself and
Tony Spargo. Their contributions to jazz are well documented. Daily
had 2 also who were much less influential on the development of jazz.
Your original post rakes Stearns over the coals as a know nothing. I
am simply correcting the record in that regard. He was far more
knowledgeable about jazz history and the music than you will ever be
as a "fan", with a flair for jumping to conclusions without any back-
Then you say you read Stearn's book and dismiss it with "So?". Of
course,you ignore the huge scope of Stearn's research and
accomplishments within the jazz genre, and the fact that he personally
knew, was friends with, and had business dealings and research
projects with many of the jazz movers and shakers that you can only
read about. Your apparent sense that you know more than he does about
the music is stunning.
As to Elder, I think he is from OZ. Ask Bill Haesler about him.
> On 2 June 2011 04:42, Stephen G Barbone
> <barbonestreet at earthlink.net> wrote:
>> On Jun 1, 2011, at 3:46 PM, Marek Boym wrote: (in part)
>>> Dear Steve,
>>> Semantics or not, I beg to disagree.
>>> We do not quite know what Daily played in 1930. The review does not
>>> prove anything. It even claims that "Napoleon's outfit features a
>>> of original players from the 1920s." This alone casts serious doubt
>>> on the reviewer's knowledge of jazz history and understanding of the
>>> music itself.
>> Dear Marek:
>> Not to belabor the point, but music critic Marshall Stearns whose
>> you first questioned
> Not the review - the liner notes.
>> "This alone casts
>> serious doubt on the reviewer's knowledge of jazz history and
>> of the music itself" is a leap to an erroneous conclusion.
> Not Stearns' - Elder's.
>> Far be it from me to defend a critic, however Mr. Stearns besides
>> being an
>> author of books about jazz,
> I have "The Story of Jazz," and have read it more than once. So?
> and writer about jazz in numerous magazines like
>> Variety, Downbeat etc., founded the Institute of Jazz Studies in
>> his NYC
>> apartment, then negotiated its relocation to Rutgers University in
>> NJ. The Institute now claims to be the largest and most comprehensive
>> library and archive of jazz in the world. Here is Mr. Stearns mission
>> statement, circa 1953.
>> I suspect that Mr. Stearns knew more about the music itself than
>> you and I
>> put together.
> Perhaps. But he still gave the wrong impression. Because of his
> knowledge I suspected that he might have done so on purpose.
> And the last posting, the one which you have answered, was about Bruce
> Elder, the reviewer.
More information about the Dixielandjazz