From: owner-joni-digest@smoe.org (JMDL Digest) To: joni-digest@smoe.org Subject: JMDL Digest V2011 #238 Reply-To: joni@smoe.org Sender: owner-joni-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-joni-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk Unsubscribe: mailto:joni-digest-request@smoe.org?body=unsubscribe Website: http://jmdl.com JMDL Digest Wednesday, August 17 2011 Volume 2011 : Number 238 ========== TOPICS and authors in this Digest: -------- Re: authenticity (little) JC [Mike Pritchard ] Aha Moment - Brian Blade [Paul Castle ] Re: NJC John Martyn Tribute CD NJC [Paul Castle ] Authenticity [Sharon Watkins ] Re: authenticity (still a little JC) [Miles Parks Grier ] RE: JMDL Digest V2011 #236/ AUTHENTICITY & COLONIZATION [Mary Morris ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2011 11:22:06 +0200 From: Mike Pritchard Subject: Re: authenticity (little) JC Miles commented, some editing and comments from m(ik)e: >>One of the interesting things about the authenticity debate is that it is often stoked by people who are *not* from subordinated groups. The jazz wars (Dixieland vs. bebop), for example, were carried out by white record collectors and critics<<. An excellent point that I was just about to raise. I feel that probably I should have included the critics as being especially aware of (or at least bringing up) issues of authenticity. It seems these issues, in GWs case (Im conflating Gill and Dave here, apologies to him) mostly came from the critics, principally Anne Powers and Robert Christgau. >>After all, how could the black musicians playing bebop be any less authentically black than their predecessors who had played Dixieland?<< They couldnt be less authentically black, but they could be less authentic *geographically*. Rhetorically speaking, if the Mississippi Delta is the home of the blues and New Orleans is the home of jazz, what rights, respectively, do blues musicians from Chicago and, heaven forbid, west coast jazzers have to play the blues and jazz? >>So, my questions would be: how many miners, farmers, or the like have objected to Gillian Welch? How many people who work in the country or bluegrass genres appreciate what Welch does as an homage from a talented person who works in their style?<< I imagine very few have objected, and that many appreciate what GW has done. >>I think what bell hooks was talking about was slightly different from what Welch is doing. Welch is not on a crusade to speak for miners agrarian workers, as far as I can tell. I have never seen her put herself out front, on a pedestal, speaking for other people.<< I agree that Welch is not on a crusade; I was not talking of how she *presents* herself in her songs, only of how she may be *perceived* by others (be they miners, agrarian workers, fellow musicians or critics) due to the extensive use of the first person narrator. Gill could write in the third person but obviously often chooses not to. Thanks for all the feedback. mike in barcelona NP David McAlmont & Michael Nyman: Secrets, Accusations and Charges ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2011 18:59:57 +0100 From: Paul Castle Subject: Aha Moment - Brian Blade Found this short audio interview with Brian Blade on the Studio 360 podcast talking about discovering Joni via Hejira when he was 16, actually playing at 'The New Daisy' and more http://bit.ly/pxfckH To all going have fun tomorrow night - I'll be with you in spirit! best to all PaulC ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2011 19:03:54 +0100 From: Paul Castle Subject: Re: NJC John Martyn Tribute CD NJC Anita G wrote: > I read at the week-end that a tribute album to John Martyn 'Johnny Boy > Would Love This' is to be released on August 15th. It features > interpretations of the great man's songs by Beck,Snow Patrol, David > Gray, Vetiver, the Swell Season, Beth Orton, Lisa Hannigan, Paolo > Nutini, Phil Collins, Robert Smith and Vashti Bunyan. > Anita Just released today http://bit.ly/rpKin4 - been listening to it on Spotify - My faves so far - Cheryl Wilson (with John Martyn on guitar) - You Can Discover http://youtu.be/-er_mJpnBgo Beth Orton - Go Down Easy http://youtu.be/lgNULiRYDzA Morcheeba (feat. Bradley Burgess)  Run Honey Run http://blip.fm/~16vd6g The Swell Season - I Don't Want To Know http://youtu.be/6Gctbtp2l7Y (wonder what Glenn will sing at Joni's Jazz tomorrow) Sabrina Dinan - Certain Surprise http://blip.fm/~16vkow best to all PaulC NP John Martyn - Woodstock (njc) - http://blip.fm/~16vdxw ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2011 15:10:00 -0400 (EDT) From: Sharon Watkins Subject: Authenticity Hello Everyone, irst of all I want to say how much I have enjoyed all the varied discussion on MDL. As a new subscriber, I too have been somewhat intimidated by the high evel of discussion. However, seeing that you all are not only a highly intelligent but aring and supportive group, I have decided to throw my two cents into the iscussion. recent theme has been authenticity, and this got me thinking about two lectures I attended years ago. Both lectures led me to believe our authenticity, and certainly our take on someone else's, can sometimes be a very subjective matter. n a psychology lecture, I learned that Psychologists sometimes use a diagram called the Johari window to elp clients gain greater self awareness. The window consists of four panes abeled: . What we see about ourselves and what others see. . What others see about us that we are unaware of. . The subconscious seen by neither ourselves nor others. . Our pivate self which wech know but keep from others. This seems reasonable enough; so much of our "authenticity" seems outside our awareness or metacognition. And carrying this further, cognitive psychologists work with their clients to remove the the "authenticity" distortions that are making the client sad, angry depressed, etc. The other lecture I heard years ago was by Jim Corder, a distinguished professor at TCU. He ad written several memoirs, and his lecture topic was authenticity and truth in emoirs and autobiographies. He made the point that memoirs and autobiographies (including his own)are in many ways inherently untruthful, because even ones' own reality is subjective and iltered through our memories, feelings, opinions, prejudices, beliefs and misconceptions. By extension, his seems it would also apply to songwriters writing about themselves and their xperiences. This reminded me of the Johari window and how it illustrates some of the ways our perceptions of our reality can be skewed. So I guess the bottom line is that we cannot always be authentic for ourselves much less anyone else. egards to everyone. Sharon ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2011 15:28:50 -0400 From: Miles Parks Grier Subject: Re: authenticity (still a little JC) Hello, everyone: I'm not sure of the etiquette here. I am really enjoying the authenticity discussion, but I wasn't sure if replying again would be too much for other listers. Those of you who want no more, please disregard. - --------- Thanks to Mike for furthering this discussion. I've rarely had a conversation this sharp or subtle about authenticity. They usually devolve into either angry shouting or vague theorizing. I didn't know about Christgau and Powers, though I've seen them both at EMP conferences. I'll have to read their reviews. I'm not sure a geographic standard holds in the case of the Chicago blues, considering that Chicago had such an influx of Mississippians fleeing Jim Crow. We could say they brought Mississippi with them, no? The West Coast jazz example is a little to the side of what I was talking about -- which was how some white critics decried black bebop players as inauthentic. The question of how the West Coast jazz school (which was predominantly white) was viewed is not about Dixieland v. bebop. It's about an allegation that white musicians weakened, diluted, or stole the spotlight and profits from an originally black form. This reminds me: I may have forgotten after all these exchanges, but I don't recall anyone else mentioning race as an important engine in the authenticity debate. Ideas about how a certain race sounds seem crucial in conceiving of what their own proper, authentic music should sound like. Sometimes its broad (all music of the African diaspora is based on rhythm). Sometimes its narrower (like the way we associate heavy metal or rock with working-class whites and classical music--or even jazz now--with wealthier ones). Mike, you make an excellent clarifying point about Welch's presentation versus how she is perceived. Do you think perceptions of her that disregard her intentions are ok? I think people have to get some credit for what they are *trying *to do, even if we want to criticize the larger context in which they do it. For example, I don't like Kenny G's music. I hate that people think of it as jazz. But I respect that he has never called himself the greatest jazz saxophonist just because he's sold so many records. He has always been very humble and complimentary of the jazz greats. The desire for authenticity, paradoxically, can produce the opposite. At some live performances, Billie Holiday claimed that "Strange Fruit" was written especially for her. It was not. But many believed it because they wanted to believe that a performance that had such a powerful effect on them must be based in something historically true. The biopic *Lady Sings the Blues* took the story even further, having Holiday actually witness a lynching. This did not happen. Many people came to believe she *wrote *the song, but it's simply not true. What are we afraid of when we invest so much in the historical truth (versus the artistic or emotional truth) of a creative work? Are we afraid of being faked out? Two final questions, for those of a lit-crit orientation. 1) Do you think it is possible for their to be a stable "I" to write from? I think it's a bit of a stretch to think the self is that solid, that unified. Even an autobiographical song may capture how you're feeling one year (one day, one hour) but not the next, right? 2) Why is it that we are accustomed to literary writers using first-person voices but we tend to expect singers to be singing about themselves? Is it because of the difference between the voice (which comes from a body) and the written word -- which can travel away from the body who wrote it? Confession: The first time I heard "Magdalene Laundries," I thought Joni was singing about herself because it was so vivid. I've learned better: I was only about 17! But it doesn't take away from or add to the song if it's a true story from JM's life or anyone else's, does it? On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 5:22 AM, Mike Pritchard wrote: > Miles commented, some editing and comments from m(ik)e: > > > >>One of the interesting things about the authenticity debate is that it is often > stoked by people who are *not* from subordinated groups. The jazz wars (Dixieland > vs. bebop), for example, were carried out by white record collectors and > critics<<. > > > An excellent point that I was just about to raise. I feel that probably I > should have included the critics as being especially aware of (or at least > bringing up) issues of authenticity. It seems these issues, in GWs case > (Im conflating Gill and Dave here, apologies to him) mostly came from the > critics, principally Anne Powers and Robert Christgau. > > > >>After all, how could the black musicians playing bebop be any less > authentically black than their predecessors who had played Dixieland?<< > > > > They couldnt be less authentically black, but they could be less authentic > *geographically*. Rhetorically speaking, if the Mississippi Delta is the > home of the blues and New Orleans is the home of jazz, what rights, > respectively, do blues musicians from Chicago and, heaven forbid, west coast > jazzers have to play the blues and jazz? > > > >>So, my questions would be: how many miners, farmers, or the like have objected > to Gillian Welch? How many people who work in the country or bluegrass > genres appreciate what Welch does as an homage from a talented person who > works in their style?<< > > > I imagine very few have objected, and that many appreciate what GW has > done. > > > >>I think what bell hooks was talking about was slightly different from > what Welch is doing. Welch is not on a crusade to speak for miners > agrarian workers, as far as I can tell. I have never seen her put herself > out front, on a pedestal, speaking for other people.<< > > > I agree that Welch is not on a crusade; I was not talking of how she > *presents* herself in her songs, only of how she may be *perceived* by > others (be they miners, agrarian workers, fellow musicians or critics) due > to the extensive use of the first person narrator. Gill could write in the > third person but obviously often chooses not to. > > > Thanks for all the feedback. > > mike in barcelona > > NP David McAlmont & Michael Nyman: Secrets, Accusations and Charges ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2011 19:16:09 -0400 From: "Jim L'Hommedieu" Subject: Sugarland Stage Collapse, njc Apparently the stage manager held up the show because of the incoming storm, essentially saving the band from the storm. >Tour manager Hellen Rollens looked at the sky and decided to hold the band backstage. A minute later, 60 to 70 mph wind gusts toppled the roof and the metal scaffolding holding lights and other equipment on Saturday night in Indianapolis.> Here's the article from Associated Press. http://tinyurl.com/4xm4yyt Here's some video of the collapse... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LaSOVPOVSg I guess it's a grisly reminder that a stage manager has an awesome responsibility to keep their performers as safe as possible. Do you have anything to add, Paz? I'm no engineer but it looks like the tarp across the roof and the canvas across the back were too strong; they should have broken away before they did, preserving the scaffolding even as they turn to shreds. Instead, I think the tarp acted like a sail and blew the structure toward the right (as the audience looked at the stage). I don't see any cross-bracing for those spindly towers. It wasn't designed for a cross wind at all. Uggh. Even amateur short-wave radio towers have cables to secure them in cross winds. Jim L'Hommedieu ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2011 16:58:40 -0700 (PDT) From: Mags Subject: Re: authenticity a little JC mike wrote: I agree that Welch is not on a crusade; I was not talking of how she *presents* herself in her songs, only of how she may be *perceived* by others (be they miners, agrarian workers, fellow musicians or critics) due to the extensive use of the first person narrator. Gill could write in the third person but obviously often chooses not to. I am writing way behind the times, but this little clippit above of Mike's caught my attention. It's something Ive learned over the years. Perception is in the eye of the beholder, I suppose. To use the *I* in song or story writing is powerful because it gives the listener, reader the opportunity become the *I*, thereby making a song/story more personal. Joni is rather successful at this literary trick of light in that so often, she's singing about *I* and thereby makes her stories ours. Hopefully this makes sense. ;-) I am enjoying reading what I have been able to on the subject of authenticity. I've boat loads more to say, however, no time or energy. thanks for the inspiration, Mike x Mags ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2011 19:09:45 -0700 From: Mary Morris Subject: RE: JMDL Digest V2011 #236/ AUTHENTICITY & COLONIZATION Like a dog who's lost her bone, this authenticity thread has gnawed at my craw the last couple of days. I agree with most of what everyone said, however the following thread about "colonizing" the unwilling, has some serious flaws for me. As Mike in bcn has opined & referenced: >>No need to hear your voice when I can talk about you better than you can speak about yourself. No need to hear your voice. Only tell me about your pain. I want to know your story. And then I will tell it back to you in a new way. Tell it back to you in such a way that it has become mine, my own. Re-writing you I write myself anew. I am still author, authority. I am still colonizer, the speaking subject and you are now at the center of my talk.<< I think often there might be very much more going on at the center of the author's talk then mere mirroring back or outright stealing. I would like to offer Joni's work as evidence of getting back cut diamonds from several rough ones. Is she not allowed to express her own experiences because they were shared with others ? Is the artist's viewpoint not her own ? I think this paragraph assumes great arrogance on the part of the artist/writer which is not always true, other- wise we would never be able to create or enjoy art, or even have an opinion, afraid of ripping someone off. Not everyone is a colonizer or plagiarist. Though it has often been said that an artist is just a thief - but a thief who sees something before anyone else or in a different light then previously expressed and hands a new package back to you. If they validate our experience, fine; if the work opens up new territory so much the better. If they are revealed to be outright thieves out only for their own gain, then we need not pay them any mind. If we are to accept wholeheartedly that expressing ourselves is merely colonizing something else then no piece of original art would ever be produced. Intention is part of art making: what am I trying to say and is it coming from the part of me that is authentic, that I can speak to, or be so moved by someone's experience that it becomes something teachable to me and passed on through my own filters. GREETINGS FROM THE TRIPLE M Down a gravel road, where the barb wire meets the sky. MARY M. MORRIS ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2011 21:25:17 -0700 From: "Mark" Subject: Re: authenticity (still a little JC) - -----Original Message----- From: Miles Parks Grier Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2011 12:28 PM To: Mike Pritchard Cc: Anita Tedder ; Dave Blackburn ; Jim L'Hommedieu (Lama) ; joni LIST Subject: Re: authenticity (still a little JC) I've been enjoying this discussion as well and feeling a bit intimidated by the level of intelligence and knowledge of many of the responses. But I couldn't resist making some kind of response to this post. I'm not sure a geographic standard holds in the case of the Chicago blues, considering that Chicago had such an influx of Mississippians fleeing Jim Crow. We could say they brought Mississippi with them, no? You pretty much expressed my own thoughts on this. The only thing I would add is that be-bop was a healthy progression from the original more 'traditional' (or authentic?) jazz forms. It illustrated that the music did not have to remain static. Also, you could probably say that jazz itself is a hybrid of other forms from other parts of the world. So how far back and which root do you have to dig down to to find the 'authentic' music? The desire for authenticity, paradoxically, can produce the opposite. At some live performances, Billie Holiday claimed that "Strange Fruit" was written especially for her. It was not. But many believed it because they wanted to believe that a performance that had such a powerful effect on them must be based in something historically true. The biopic *Lady Sings the Blues* took the story even further, having Holiday actually witness a lynching. This did not happen. Many people came to believe she *wrote *the song, but it's simply not true. What are we afraid of when we invest so much in the historical truth (versus the artistic or emotional truth) of a creative work? Are we afraid of being faked out? Here's the hook that I couldn't resist taking the bait from. There was also an 'autobiography' written in conjunction with a writer named William Dufty called 'Lady Sings the Blues'. It's pretty much an accepted fact that there was quite a bit of fabrication and exaggeration in that book. Whether it came from Dufty or from Billie herself is debatable. What is certain is that Billie Holiday bore the brunt of racism in her life and career. And although she may never have witnessed a lynching, her recordings and performances of 'Strange Fruit' come from an undeniably authentic place. Two final questions, for those of a lit-crit orientation. 1) Do you think it is possible for their to be a stable "I" to write from? I think it's a bit of a stretch to think the self is that solid, that unified. Even an autobiographical song may capture how you're feeling one year (one day, one hour) but not the next, right? I really had trouble with assigned reading during my academic career. Otherwise I would probably be better educated in 'lit crit'. But, again I couldn't resist asking, have you read Virginia Woolf's 'The Waves'? There you will find six separate I's (I don't know how else to write that without it looking like is with a capital 'I'). Six individual points of view that alternate during the entire novel. No single narrator, either first person or third person omniscient. Just the thoughts of these six characters. Some of it seems confusing and incomprehensible. But Woolf probably worked harder to get the structure and shape of this novel than any of her others, according to her diaries and letters. Much of its prose is truly beautiful. Those that know me are rolling their eyes right now (there he goes with that Virginia Woolf stuff again) but I do have a point that sort of ties in more with this thread. Woolf wrote a lot of literary criticism and essays for various publications in her life. She was also founder with her husband Leonard Woolf of the Hogarth Press. She read a lot of manuscripts submitted for publication, many of them mediocre at best. She made the comment to friends many times in correspondence that she hated reading fiction as a result. She did have a fascination with letters, diaries, journals - any kind of record of real people's lives regardless of whether the authors were well-known or completely obscure. The written records of the seemingly insignificant details of the everyday events of past lives were of great interest to her. Perhaps she liked the authentic quality of these writings? But then again, the subjectivity of any record of so-called truth or reality whether it be autobiographical or otherwise will always cast some shadow of doubt on the particular work. 2) Why is it that we are accustomed to literary writers using first-person voices but we tend to expect singers to be singing about themselves? Is it because of the difference between the voice (which comes from a body) and the written word -- which can travel away from the body who wrote it? This is a great question and I think Joni Mitchell is a prime subject for speculation along these lines. She was labeled as a 'confessional' singer/songwriter at one time which to me implies that the 'I' in her writing from that period was Joni herself. Maybe, but does that necessarily mean that every word is the unvarnished truth? Is the purpose of art to reflect or record life exactly as it is or was? Personally, I don't think so. The best work, especially in songwriting, comes from a basic event or truth at its core but it reshapes, re-arranges and invents to produce the the most 'pleasing' or well-crafted result. I too hope everyone attending Joni's Jazz is having the time of their lives! I so wish I could be there! Mark in Seattle ------------------------------ End of JMDL Digest V2011 #238 ***************************** ------- To post messages to the list, send to joni@smoe.org. Unsubscribe by clicking here: mailto:joni-digest-request@smoe.org?body=unsubscribe -------