Walt, I’m with you on Trillium, one of Braxton’s biggest follies (at least on record).

A couple more from the jazz world come to mind. The seemingly promising meeting of Mary Lou Williams and Cecil Taylor in 1977 that led to the double album EMBRACED. Some interesting stuff throughout, but overall a failure given the two pianists widely divergent styles and unwillingness to bend to each others will. Insult to injury, Bob Cranshaw and Mickey Roker as the ‘rhythm section’ are completely superfluous from the start. Also Sonny Rollins lone SOLO ALBUM, from 1985. Again some engaging moments, but most of the live program consists of Newk noodling through a string of pet melodic phrases ad infinitum without going much of anywhere. For an improvisor of his caliber & creativity it’s a major disappointment.

Ellington perhaps. He was deeply stung by the reception BLACK, BROWN AND BEIGE received upon its premiere in the early 1940's. (Part of this, of course, had to do with the racial agendas of some of the work's harshest critics.) But, in listening again to the 1943 Carnegie Hall version of BBB, its clear to me how much filler is in there. But the memorable portions -- "Work Song", "Come Sunday", "The Blues", the "Dances" -- are so superb we tend to forget the logy-ness of the work as a whole. Duke understood this too, I believe, as he kept coming back to this work later in his career, re-shaping and reviving it (the SACRED CONCERTS being a case in point). But I also believe he never tried real symphonic writing of this ambitiousness ever again.

Mingus, interestingly enough, had similar difficulties. Though maybe we can blame his personality more than anything else. There's the famous 1962 Town Hall debacle, and, if Jimmy Knepper is to be trusted -- and he was Mingus' straw boss for several years -- the posthumous EPITAPH is almost apocryphal; Knepper indicated in an interview with Gene Santoro that Gunther Schuller did much more than compile that score.

But what about those artists who are able to succeed at just about anything they attempt? Philip Guston comes to mind, as does John Sayles. What accounts for this?

Speaking of Taylor, anyone here heard his disc with Coltrane? I understand it's a bit underwhelming considering the personnel; Taylor himself spoke of the session's getting derailed by Kenny Dorham's hostility. -- I haven't heard _Embraced_, & can't say the prospect appeals. The encounter with Dewey Redman & Elvin Jones is perhaps not an "interesting failure" as much as OK but underachieved: the opening track is quite good & promises much, but then the rest of the album is mostly solos & duos, & the long final trio track is the worst thing on the disc (Jones does just fine playing straightforward time on the first track, but he's never been an effective free drummer, & on the last track the momentum never gets established). -- I won't rehash my take on the disc with Dixon & Oxley--it's definitely disappointing, whether you consider it an "interesting failure" or just downright dull.

Joe, I’m not sure I’d agree about Sayles universal success. His earlier films outdistance his most recent ones IMHO. LIMBO was perhaps the biggest misstep. The enigmatic ending is a brilliant & brave encapsulation of the entire film, but the laborious lead-up is at times flagrantly monotonous. SUNSHINE STATE & MEN WITH GUNS were uneven as well. MATEWAN & LONE STAR on the other hand…

The 1956 Bethlehem production of PORGY AND BESS fronted by Mel Torme (as Porgy!) is another one for the ‘ambitious, but ultimately lackluster’ scrap-heap. Exorbitant production values & a cast of nearly a hundred couldn’t save this set from seeming half-baked and overwrought. I wrote a pan of the reissue several years ago and raised the ire of my editor to the point that I was relegated to reviewing Wynton’s Louis Armstrong tribute as penance.

I actually like the Cecil/Coltrane conclave quite a bit. It’s a fascinating example of real-time conflict in the studio and the butting of so-called mainstream/avant heads. Dorham is the odd duck, but Chuck Israels sounds fantastic and his tune “Double Clutching” is an intriguing addition to the program. The whole marketing history of the session is pretty telling to with Trane receiving top billing in subsequent pressings of the original HARD DRIVING JAZZ.

Couldn't disagree more about the Taylor/Dixon/Oxley disc. I think it's great. Sure, it's not 3 Phasis, but why should it be?

I took it to a critics' roundtable thing at the New School, where each of us was supposed to play a disc, get opinions, then talk about who it was and what-not. I played that one, and it was universally reviled. But when I told the assembled that it was Cecil, the immediate reaction was "Well, I guess knowing that it's him, I'd give it another chance."

Derek -- I was really referring to Sayles as both successful novelist (UNION DUES, LOS GUSANOS) and successful filmmaker. Not a mean feat, IMHO.

I agree with your assessment of HARD DRIVING JAZZ / COLTRANE TIME, though I think too KD acquits himself quite well. Factor in the presence of Tom Wilson as producer and it becomes all the more interesting...

Joe, didn’t know Sayles was also a novelist, though the complex narrative flow of most of his films suggests he’d also be successful in that sort of forum. Cases could be made on similar grounds for Sam Shepard and David Mamet (though Shepard’s style of film acting is an acquired taste). Which of Sayles written works would you recommend starting with & why?

Joe, what else did Philip Guston succeed at besides painting? By the way, you should read his daughter's book on the man--Night Studio. And, if you are going to get into artists that are successful at whatever they attempt, talk about people like Cocteau or Oskar Schlemmer way before you mention Sayles. Especially if you are going to say 'artists.'

Ted -- I was referring specifically to the major (well, apparently major) stylistic risks Guston took over the course of his career, not so much to his success in differing media. Though you could claim that he was both a great painter and a gret caricaturist / cartoonist... I agree; NIGHT STUDIO is an excellent read. Musa Mayer actually spoke in Fort Worth this spring when the new modern musuem there mounted their Guston retrospective. Wish I had been able to attend.

As for Sayles -- Derek, I'd try UNION DUES first -- and his offensiveness, the name just popped into my head as I was composing the response. By all means, feel free to elaborate on Cocteau and Schlemmer or whoever else you can think fits this bill. I'm eager to hear about more examples, and to get to the heart of what makes an, ahem, "Renaissance man".

Joe, thanks for the rec. Ted is a connoisseur of snooty French cinema, specifically Cocteau & Truffault, so I’m sure he’ll have some tales to tell us. If we’re talking about Renaissance Men, how about Keanu Reeves? He covers quite a few bases as virulently popular actor, hockey player & bassist in the underdog garage/art rock band Dogstar. Or Ethan Hawke, actor, theatre company founder, and widely reviled novelist. Then there’s Vincent Gallo who trumps them both as director, writer, actor, producer, visual artist, photographer, fashion designer, model, musician, race car enthusiast & world reknowned egotist.

Guston definitely took a big leap but it really added to his legacy. Rarely do you see anyone do anything like that late in their careers and succeed so well. Any others come to mind? I'm drawing blanks. Seems more productive than discussing failures.

By the way, Schlemmer was amazing and everything he touched was remarkable. Painting, sculpture, costumes (his bizarre futuristic ones for dance performances is probably his most recognizable work), graphic design, set designer, etc. He just came from another world. Cocteau wasn't a too distant second but in different discplines--novels, films, essays, poetry, plays--a true poet with word and image no matter what Andre Breton thought--he couldn't touch the vision of Cocteau. I can't think of any finer examples in the 20th Century.

Don't start, D. I'm no big fan of Truffaut, by the way but we can discuss french film elsewhere. But, I did pick up the Vincent Gallo record from 1981 by his band 'Bohack.' Actually, it's pretty interesting. Sort of weird industrial. At least he and Ethan try. Maybe they don't have much talent but they are doing something instead of just basking in the sun. Though, we wouldn't be any less off if they did. Keanu, on the other hand, let's not put him in the same arena. That man needs to just go away.

Ted -- what are your feelings about Eric Rohmer? I've recently been watching examples from the SIX MORAL TALES and the COMEDIES AND PROVERBS. I've been very impressed so far. And, of course, Rohmer was an important critic and a talented writer of fiction years before he ever got behind the camera.

Do you all remember when David Byrne appeared on the ocver of TIME magazine in the mid-80's as an example of the "new" Renaissance man? The idea being that simply trying out new endeavors is enough to earn that designation...

I thought Byrne’s claim to the title was based more on his ability to look cool in over-sized suits.

T, you’re right, it probably isn’t fair lumping Hawke and Gallo with the redolent reek of Reeves. But they both exude an odor of pretentiousness that makes them hard to take seriously.

Well, almost all of the French new wave directors were critics and, I think, worked at Cahiers du Cinema. I like Rohmer and I enjoy his films but I never place him up there with the real innovators of film. I don't know of his novels. Are any translated?

I like David Byrne. He was one of the first to try and promote Brazilian music in this country as we had been missing the boat all through the 60s and 70s. Plus, he has a great aesthetic eye and always surrounded himself with talent. How can you knock Talking Heads? We could use more intelligent pop music. Beck can't even iron those suits of Byrne's. Plus, I'd take Luaka Bop over Gabriel's Real World any day.

To each their own, but you gotta admit Gabriel’s PASSION is awfully good for romancing the ladies. And both he & Byrne are light years ahead of Paul Simon when it comes culturally sensitive appropriation.

While we're on french film, I have to mention Leos Carax if we are going to talk about ambitious failures. This guy bombed with his extremely expensive 'Lovers on the Bridge.' It wouldn't have gotten US distribution hadn't Scorsese taken it under his wing. This film was totally pompous but also amazing. There are moments that are some of the most fantastic I ever saw in film. Then he makes 'Pola X' which also fails and, I believe, also very expensive. Equally pompous but also equally brilliant. Fantastic imagery and totally overblown. It's hard to deny it even when you're laughing at it. The end result is Carax' career is considered over when he made some of the greatest contributions to cinema in the 90s. What seems apt is 'Pola' is based on Melville's Pierre, which also continued his decline in popularity following his ambitious failure, some novel called 'Moby Dick.' I mean, how long did it take to acknowledge that as a masterpiece? I think it wasn't until the 1920s. And, how about another 'failure' "Exorcist II." Totally bombed at the box office. People say it sucked when they never saw it and major directors praise it as the amazing visionary work it is. So, who are the critics when something is deemed a failure. I mean, won't we all agree that Ken Burns' Jazz was a failure while it's praised elsewhere. Neil Young has said that 'Trans' is his favorite work when everyone else was like, 'what's this synth shit?' I'm not sure where I'm going but I don't think failure is an easy criticism to make.

Ted -- SIX MORAL TALES was translated into English in 1980 or so and published in the US by Viking. OOP, but I found a used copy here in Dallas just last week.

Now that’s the cineaste Ted I know & dig.

Failures in art, like pretty much everywhere else, are necessarily the sphere of subjective opinion. Complete consensus really ain’t an option. Burns’ JAZZ blew on a myriad of levels, but there’s a lot to like (or at least be entertained by) in his tunnel vision take on the music too. For me it’s the font of archival footage on hand, for someone else it might be hearing Wynton mug & pontificate for the masses. Diff’rent Strokes…

But even so it’s still worthwhile learning what works folks consider failures.

It's a subject that interests me a lot, but I wasn't really thinking out "renaissance men" when I started this thread or I would have mentioned some of my whacked faves, like:

Samuel Butler, who wrote novels, and oratorios (in the style of Handel), as well as a bunch of books on Darwin and evolution, biography, art criticism, travel, Shakespeare's love life, the origin of X-tianity, and the gender of the author of "The Odyssey."

Aldous Huxley---novels, poetry, plays, and screenplays (original and adaptations), as well as books on sociology, art criticism (in spite of his near-blindness), travel, mysticism, eyesight, psychedelic drugs, ecology, politics, foreign policy, history, and biography.

What I WAS trying to get at were examples of talented artists who failed at some big, quixotic project--like Braxton's symphonic works to be performed on different galaxies (or, IMHO, Feldman's late, endless, stuff for string quartet).

Hey, come to think of it, both Butler and Huxley fit that bill too!

Ralph Ellison, Juneteenth.

Walt -- well, there's Dylan's films RENALDO AND CLARA and MASKED AND ANONYMOUS...

Is MASKED AND ANONYMOUS as bad as it looks?

Derek -- it lacks focus. And it features way too many "celebrities".

Come to think of it, there's also Dylan's TARANTULA...

How about "200 Motels"?

Derek:

re: Burns' Jazz - what archival footage? There were tons of clips, but I don't believe that even a single tune was shown from start to finish. That's what I was interested in, too, and I felt that he perversely went out of his way to avoid showing us the footage...just tantalizing clips with voiceovers...

did I miss something?

June

Jesse,

You’re right, none of the film footage was complete & most of the visuals consisted of Burns’ patented photo slide shows (often of completely different scenes/subjects than what the narrative was talking about) with Keith David’s husky measured voice supposedly setting an erudite mood. But beggars like me can’t be choosers. Even watching the Ellington & Armstrong talk show clips was interesting to me. Plus showing a complete Coltrane performance would’ve detracted from his “Almighty Two” theory of jazz history.

"How about 200 MOTELS?"

I think that counts. As does LIFEHOUSE.

As does SMILE.

Shaw's "Back to Methuselah"?
Lord's "Jazz Discography"?
"Star Wars"?

THRE ADVENTURES OF BUCKAROO BANZAI ACROSS THE 8TH DIMENSION.

William Parker's Little Huey group might qualify for some of you, although I rather like the music. The second release in particular has some magical moments.

I wouldn’t say Little Huey is an ‘ambitious failure.” Ambitious? Yes. Failure? No. Parker’s done some inventive things with the large ensemble format- not all of it clicks, but a lot of it delivers the right combination. What’s wrong with Buckaroo Banzai and Star Wars specifically?

I just meant the whole "Star Wars" series: I haven't seen most of it, but I understand it's flamed out pretty badly. I can't remember "Buckaroo Bonzai."

BTW, I don't know whether the Huey thing was ambitious, but I didn't care for it AT ALL. Come to think of it, I'd throw in those Spring Heel Jack things...if they were more ambitious.

I actually really like BUCKAROO BANZAI, with the fake Zen, Rastafari riffs, and Pynchon references and all. But it never evolved into the movie franchise it should have... hence an ambitious failure for me.

Thanks for the clarifications mates. I dig BANZAI too, if mostly for its all-over-the-map wackiness, but think it hasn’t aged well at all & the ‘acting’ is atrocious. Even Lithgow is laughable (though intentionally so). The idea of it as a possible franchise makes me wonder.

Didn’t realize you were talking about the Star Wars series as a whole Walt. The first two still give me smiles & warm twinges of nostalgia, but I’m with you on the rest. Didn’t even bother with that latest CLONES installment.

As for Little Huey, I think the logistics of that project alone merit the tag ‘ambitious’ (that’s a lot of musicians repeatedly going without much bread after all), not to mention some of the charts Parker’s come up with over the years. Does it stack up against the London Jazz Composers Orchestra? Not really. But it’s still a nice source for reasonably creative music. As Ted mentioned above, there’s a distinction to be drawn between a track record of inconsistency & downright failure.

There are ridiculous and Quixotic examples in avant-garde filmland as well, possibly because the incidence of somewhat unstable personalities is a little higher there.

Gregory Markopolous' "Temenos Project", continued posthumously by his companion Robert Beavers would be a pretty prime example. He withdrew his films from distribution because he wanted to have supreme control of the settings of his films, thankfully though, there have been occasional screenings of the works; http://www.the-temenos.org/events.htm

Also, Hollis Frampton's "Magellan" cycle. (taken from the Anthology Film Archives site):

"MAGELLAN films released by Frampton comprise only about 8 out of the 36 hours planned. Moreover, Frampton intended MAGELLAN to be a calendrical cycle, with specific films to be shown on each day of the year. Metaphorically modeled on Ferdinand Magellan?s exploratory circumnavigation of the world, the film aspired to remarkable global aesthetic, historiographic, and conceptual challenges to cinema and perception....Stan Brakhage. Certainly, Frampton conceived of MAGELLAN as a utopian artwork in the monumental tradition of James Joyce and Sergei Eisenstein. In a grant application, he hoped to realize the project as 'the notion of an hypothetically totally inclusive work of film art as epistemological model for the conscious human universe.'"

One more I just noticed this morning, Ken Jacobs' "Star Spangled to Death", which it seems he's been working on sporadically for the last 35+ years. I think he showed a 3 hour version at Donnell Library last year, the one they're showing at NYFF's Views From the Avant-Garde is 6 1/4 hours long. He's a nut, I just hope he doesn't talk through the entire hour long intermission.

Do you think "Berlin Alexanderplatz" is a fair example?

How about Diderot's Encyclopedia or Bayle's Dictionary?

Bergmann's "Scenes from a Marriage"?

Von Stroheim's GREED...

Hegel's "Phenomenology of the Spirit"?
Marx's "Capital"?

Walter: those are all interesting examples you give... I?m not really qualified to speak here, as I my relationship to those works is mostly passing (I've read the Preface to the Phenomenology, have read some Diderot, and have seen lots of Fassbinder, but not that one.) But as far as Hegel or the Diderot, are you sure they really "failed"?
Or are you alluding to something....

But, in all of those examples, I think the most interesting, and saddest one is of Stroheim's "Greed." Most of the examples listed in the original post fail through some sort of flaw either in the realization of the work, or some defect in it's conception (the Quixotic part), but in the case of Stroheim, I think that there's a general consensus that had the film survived the it's butchery in the editing room, than it would have been some kind of masterpiece (it might not have been, though). In it's case, if we do assume that the film in it's long cut was a work of visionary brilliance, then the failure was in the system he was a part of, it was an institutional failure to recognize the magnitude of the work. Which is a particularly sorry case. Are there any musical examples you can think of? Things that, had they been released in the form in which they?d been intended might have been great, but for whatever reason, the form that it was made it to the world is inferior?

But, there's also a separate category of works in which failure is taken as a thematic elements. A quote from Visionary Film about the Ken Jacobs film I mentioned earlier, "Star Spangled to Death":

"I was very interested in combustion. There was even a long destruction sequence in which thing after thing was broken?..just watching things break, and in breaking reveal their structure, had the most vibrant moment of life, all the clarity of their being made, like explicitly for their moment of destruction. I was interested in revealing things in their breaking and I wanted 'Star Spangled to Death' to be a film that was constantly breaking." [italics mine]
But as far as "Berlin Alexanderplatz" isn?t it supposed to be really, really good? I think Hanna Schygulla mentions it as one of her favorite films, and it's a favorite of a friend of mine. Maybe I'll rent it this weekend as a sort of last Hurrah before classes start again to find out.

Oh, I wasn't claiming all these were failures (hence the questions marks). I was trying to elicit opinions. I've heard only good things about the Fassbinder (I've seen only part of it myself), and I love the Bayle.

I don't like anything by Hegel, FWIW. (He thought, e.g., that one could prove, a priori, that there are exactly seven planets in our solar system.)

The United States of America.

"The United States of America"

The psychedlic-era electronic rock band co-led by Joe Byrd or the honest-to-goodness nation-state? Or all of the above?

And how about the ill-fated Moby Grape? Sunk by hype...

Hugh MacDiarmid, the big amorphous long poem he never really finished. Olson's Maximus, WCW's Paterson & Pound's Cantos. Geoffrey Hill's later long poems. Ted Hughes' Crow.

Being & Time & Philosophical Investigations are both massively incomplete (if that counts as "failure"). I'm also rather disappointed that Merleau-Ponty's last book was left incomplete by his early death (& in many ways this is more of a loss: he actually seemed to be getting somewhere as the MS breaks off).

How about "Being and Nothingness"?