Klarinet Archive - Posting 000002.txt from 2007/06

From: Joseph Wakeling <joseph.wakeling@-----.net>
Subj: Re: [kl] Kell's Stravinsky
Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2007 10:10:22 -0400

Tony Pay wrote:
> On 27 May, mikeraz@-----.com (Michael Rasmussen) wrote:
>
>> For another instance of different, is it better or worse, see this recent
>> post by Sherman Friedland:
>> http://clarinet.cc/archives/2007/05/gerry_mulligan.html
>
> I looked at this post -- please, all of you, look at it -- and would be
> interested to know how you think it's relevant.

OK, here goes. :-)

> Is it that you want to say, we should consider ANY way of playing something
> acceptable?

I'd like to think we can _consider_ it, for sure. Whether we conclude
that it's acceptable is another matter, but there's a lot to be learned
from people who don't play things "properly" for whatever reason.

Reading that article makes me really want to hear what Gerry Mulligan
was doing. Maybe it wasn't right for Bach (say) but the effect might be
brilliant for a new piece of work which isn't Bach _or_ jazz.

It makes me think of a conversation with two friends, one a composer for
dance, one a professional dancer, about ballet classes the second was
giving to adult learners. There was much funny description of the
students, such as the old lady who captured the "ballerina" pulled-back
facial expression perfectly but couldn't do anything right with her
body, or the man with funny "jelly legs". And as my friend said---"It's
_amazing_, I'd love to use those moves in a piece, you'd never come up
with them if you were a trained dancer."

> Or is it that, if people think you're a great player in a particular field,
> whatever you do outside that field is justifiable to some degree BECAUSE
> you're thought to be a great player in the field?

I think that there are certain skills which you develop, in the process
of becoming great (or even just good) at something in one area which
stand you in good stead for doing good things in just about any other
area. A good jazz player would probably do something more alive and
interesting with Bach than a mediocre classically trained player, even
though the latter might be closer to accepted performance practice.

For example one of the things that marks a good player is that they have
some internal sense of the "life" of the music, whereas mediocre players
tend to follow "the rules" without understanding why they are there.

On the other hand one of the problems with not working in a field is
that your sense of the "life" will not be the same. It's interesting to
observe the differences if you ask either jazz or classical musicians to
improvise. Jazz musicians will tend to improvise in a harmonic/melodic
sense (if you're unlucky they will drop into some lowest common
denominator like the blues). Classical musicians will tend to produce
improvisations based on texture and sound colour, because when playing
music where the notes are given, those are the things you have to focus
on to bring those notes to life, so that's both where they feel
comfortable and where they have a sense of quality to follow.

.... so it may be difficult for a jazz player to really bring out to the
deepest degree the internal sense and structure of Bach, which is a
unique and very distinct form of musical life.

(But they ma. I can imagine that if he'd voiced his concern a bit
differently the conversation would have been much more productive.y
still do something very worthwhile. McCartney's song "Blackbird", for
example, comes from a Bach guitar piece:-)

> Or is it that we should have more respect for the great jazz musicians that
> we meet in music stores, however rude they may be to us? Or is it that we
> should have respect for the great jazz musicians that we meet in music stores
> that AREN'T rude to us, and have more respect for them than those that ARE
> rude to us?

Ahh, well. ;-)

Let's put it this way, when egos enter the conversation it's _always_
going to go downhill no matter what the musical quality.

I rather feel for the young Sherman who was obviously quite intrigued
about this alternative way of playing and didn't deserve to be jumped on
like that. Mind you, from the description he gives, Mulligan was
probably at the time too young to know better, too.

-- Joe

------------------------------------------------------------------

   
     Copyright © Woodwind.Org, Inc. All Rights Reserved    Privacy Policy    Contact charette@woodwind.org