I didn't notice anything, save the time it takes to upload an article to the site has been slow (both on Safari and Firefox). But that's been the case for a while.

Kudos to RP, indeed.

Richard is the man.

Did Derek just call me petty? ;)

A lot of people have wondered (often wistfully) what it would take to drive me away from this site. Well, the excision of comments from the Bobby Few CD review (I suspect at Derek's hand, since he's the one who weeps the biggest, bitterest, most gelatinous tears anytime anybody disagrees about anything) has done it. It's long been clear that all the majority of posters here really want is to have their prejudices reinforced and to be congratulated on their studious good taste and cultural discernment, but to have the exclusionary nature of Bagatellen made utterly explicit in this way is quite pitiful. Is everyone quite sure the site was worth rescuing?

Enjoy life in the Village, fellas. I've got work to do. (Hey, just wondering: When was the last time a woman commented here, or wrote anything for the site? Might be a clue there as to why the improv scene as a whole is what it is.)

Phil, the last time a woman contributed anything entertaining to the site was a certain individual who kept hounding her ex-lover for support...anyone else remember that thread?

Did I miss something, Phil? I zapped one of my own comments in that Few thread because it was syntactically garbled and for some reason I couldn’t get into the works to fix it. Did something else get zapped that I’m not aware of?

And what happened to your thick metal head-hardened skin? Calling me or anyone else here “prejudical” smacks pretty soundly of the whole “Pot Calling the Kettle” scenario. You’re a dude who revels in that kind of shit. That record is ass-blastingly lame. This one is dick-fellatingly awesome. Etc. And as far as a lot of people wondering anything about you… c’mon and tell me that ain’t self-flatteration at its finest. Suck it up & live up to your well-cultivated rep, my man.

Just out of curiosity, how many women write for your metal mag?

Did some digging and it looks like Cliff may have pulled the plug on the Few comments. I’m not sure what prompted it & I didn’t have an opportunity to read the last few posts. But I’m guessing it had something to do with how “discussion” strayed from the topic; I’m partly to blame for that with my quips. I’ve got a note into Cliff to find out more as that kind of unilateral move doesn’t sit well with me regardless of the reasoning behind it.

I seem to have missed the offending comments (I understand your email of yesterday now, Clifford).. would anyone care to reinstate them? Maybe not. Never mind. Storm in a teacup, as ever.
A little sorry to see you check out, Phil (you were always good for a few fireworks), but I have to admit your parting shot with its apparent conversion to feminism bemuses me.. I imagine many members of the fair sex might have been put off upon reading your descriptions of airhead bimbo porn actresses (apologies, that's not an exact quote and I can't be bothered hunting down what you originally wrote) and your beloved adverb "ass-rapingly".. Rape is not laughing matter, and associating it with "great" as you did isn't either.

Wait, I'm confused ... so is Phil leaving because Clifford deleted the comments, or because he was attacked by Damon Smith and two dysfunctional 70s sitcom actors? The show was called "Diffrent Strokes," thus semiotically implying that disagreement is acceptable and it isn't just a matter of people "want(ing) ... their prejudices reinforced."

Doesn't the software used for this site allow one to close comments, as opposed to deleting them? I can understand someone not wanting the discussion to get nastier or more absurd and prompt "fighting words" from Emmanuel "webster" Lewis or Soleil Moon "Punky Brewster" Frye.

But deleting all the comments, some of which were discussing Mr. Few, seems rash.

Good riddance dumbass! Off to your little ivory tower!

I find it incredibly irksome how quickly things devolve into mud-slinging around here. It went from Phil's not having heard the record in question and not being a fan of solo piano, to people jumping down his throat and name-calling. I mean, I'm not always the biggest pdf supporter, but it really pissed me off. I mean, who wants to read a review sullied by a trail of shit-talk on one another? Not me.

Maybe I'm the one who should be saying "sayonara" to y'all. Fuck it.

Sorry Clifford, I know you don't like flame wars on your reviews. I think it is well within your right to take them off, you have stated it before, as much as I'd like to see PDF either research stop writing about improvised music it isn't anything to run off about.

I am never going to be OK with PDF trumpeting his ignorance of improvised music while in the next post bragging about getting paid for writing about it.
As musicians we all start out with ideas and have to put in work, often VERY mundane to get our technique to the point of serving our ideas.
It is Phil's job to know the history of music he is writing about just like I need to be able to play a C major scale.
Just like it doesn't matter what he is a fan of, it doesn't matter if I am fan of C major, which takes a lot of un-glamorus, mundane practice to manage on the double bass, if I don't want to do that work I should pick an instrument with frets, keys or buttons.
The fact is no one is forcing me to play bass just like no one is forcing PDF to write about improvised music.

If we can't even do the work to back our own choices in life, what can we do?

Not to get all weepy or hand-wringy as per Phil’s ascription, but it would be nice if the expressions of disagreement didn’t involve broken bottles and fisticuffs so often. I know blood & guts sell papers, but c’mon…

And for the record: Phil was complimentary toward the record above, just not solo-improv in general. Also, I’m not really down with Cliff’s characterization of him as the pacificistic innocent. Imagine Phil’s reaction if someone dismissed death metal after admitting to only hearing the work of a single band and then claimed to be a qualified judge of the entire genre in the next breath. His post seemed custom-fitted to bait the usual suspects, a certain BMX-riding bassist among them.

To answer Sarah’s question, it is possible to “close” comments rather than zapping them in toto. It’s something I trust will happen in the future.

I frequently contribute to another board, Organissimo, which has a pretty large field of members. Of course, threads get shut down, deleted and/or closed when things get obnoxious, but it's by and large pretty rare.

What's different about Bagatellen is that it occurs in response to - or one assumes - writing about a subject that is of interest to the community. If there were a way to separate the writing and the forums, allowing the review or article to stand on its own and the insanity to be separated into another dialog box (with the option to view/contribute), maybe some frustration could be alleviated.

Rash or no, I closed the comments not because of personal prejudices against the contributors, but because there were maybe two or three points made about the music and then a lot of vitriol. Not that some of it wasn't warranted among the participants, but it should find a home of its own on the site.

Good point, Cliff. Bags is pretty static in its construction, at least for the time being, and that’s a definite fault. One small consolation is that the reviews do stand apart from the comments (positioning and font size among other minor structural differences). I have to believe that readers can readily differentiate the relative value contained in both. In other words, bullshit hung on a review doesn’t automatically sully its worth, at least IMO.

Personal beefs between posters/contributors do have a viable home, though it’s not on this site. It’s called e-mail.

I don't know for certain, but I assumed the poster using the 'Sarah Lockhart' handle is a woman. I think her contributions are thoughtful and very informative (but maybe they're not entertaining?) And, fwiw, there was another (at least apparent) woman who made a couple of excellent posts recently (I can't remember the thread) before disappearing (&, as I recall, not answering my last question).

Anyhow, I don't agree with either pdf or SaltySwift on this issue--though I admit to wishing that these two (putative) women (and any other smart or amusing females--or males actually) would contribute more than they already do.

Oh yeah. It was something about German romanticism.

Oh yeah. It was something about German romanticism.

Sarah is a in fact a woman, among many things she is a video artist, drummer and runs 21 grand ( http://21grand.org ), a multi disciplinary space that the bulk of improv, free jazz and experimental rock shows happen at in Oakland.

Bags may be bit of a sausage party but thankfully the improv scene in the Bay Area isn't. It isn't 50/50 but it is rare to see a bill without a woman on it.

And considering, Phil's great concern about the participation of my gender on this site, I feel mildly guilty that a significant number of my posts have been criticizing him. I still want to know, going back to that Lou Reed thread, whether Phil thinks that there is no such thing as "simplistic pop music."

As far as the Bay Area improv scene goes, the last two shows I saw (last weekend) - neither featured any women, but they were both great. Well, at least the second set of the second show was great. I was too busy talking with another member of my gender at the bar to pay attention to the first set.

Maybe we should start a new thread - what is it about improvised music or eai that turns a good portion of women off? Why is it mostly men attend these gigs?

Clifford, if you don't want comments attached to your reviews, then make it so in the submitting process. You can opt to "allow comments" or not prior to hitting the submit button.

"Clifford, if you don't want comments attached to your reviews, then make it so in the submitting process. You can opt to "allow comments" or not prior to hitting the submit button."

- I don't think it is comments Clifford does not want, it seems to be flame wars/pissing matches that have little to do with the release being reviewed.

"Maybe we should start a new thread - what is it about improvised music or eai that turns a good portion of women off? Why is it mostly men attend these gigs?"

- I am not sure it is a turn off, but what I notice is the more women are involved in the music, the more women are part of the audience.
I think it can be less complex than it looks. When I was first getting into Free Jazz I had the impression that it was black music - Exclusively. It is black music for sure, but not only. Getting a Peter Kowald LP and really loving the sound and seeing someone who looked like me playing it made me think I could contribute to improvised music.
It was still fairly simple, not requiring an advanced course in gender studies: when people who look like you are involved you are going to feel more comfortable on a basic level.

If I examine my situation further, the idea to work with women for improvisors of my generation forward is kind of a given.
Marilyn Crispell and Joëlle Léandre cds were among the first things I heard and really loved. Kowald was very pro-active about working with women.
When I came to improvised music, it was a different situation these precedents plus the fact that Mills college is a big part of the new music community here so the situation was simple -women are involved.

My experience is hard contrast to earlier generations when musicians Irene Schweizer and Jeanne Lee were anomalies.
Things change but it is a slow process.

Same goes for me Damon. I fell madly head over heals for Crispell's music. Anything that she did, I snatched up. Schweizer was a similar example as was Lee Pui Ming for instance.
Rarely have I been at a concert where more than half a dozen women are present and I've often dispared over that fact.....

Clifford, you have the option in moveable tpye if you don't want comments attached to your contributions.

wow, a lot has happened since i've been here last! ha ha ha.

it's impossible to take phil's parting "you guys are losers because no women like this music" or whatever thing seriously. period.

the bay area is definitely one of the more thriving places where women are integrally involved in the improvised music scene. this situation is very valuable! even at the all-sausage gigs i just booked with peter evans, there were plenty of women in the audience, just not on stage those particular nights.

to further damon's observations on why people get involved or don't, i have to say this - it is actually possible for an improvised music event to be "fun". i've seen it happen many times. if something seems like "fun", more people are apt to take part in it. this doesn't involve artistic pandering in any way, but perhaps reflects the attitude of the performers. i've been in many situations (even chicago) where the audience was full of all sorts of different people and genders because the event where the improvised music was being played was warm, inviting and entertaining. an improvised music concert doesn't have to be a sterile, antiseptic experience. sometimes it is, and that perhaps explains the demographics of the turnouts (maybe that's the white male idea of fun???)

from the perspective of the performer, i'm still interested in - cough, cough - "entertainment" on some levels (believe it or not). i often find a lot of humor and/or theatricality inherent in making this music. letting the audience in on that can really warm up a room. that's a delicate matter and has a lot to do with timing and taste though, so it doesn't always happen.

not enough women at your gigs? try to make them more fun!

dr. wwwwwwwww

Al, Cliff’s down with the comments options/process in MT. His past reviews have made use of the “no comments” feature, the Few was an exception. One I hope he considers making again in the future.

As to a female presence here & and in improvised music, I’m wholeheartedly for both. Hell, who isn’t? Open invitation to Sarah and any other women who might consider authoring content for Bags.

I dig Damon’s point about artist demographics determining (at least in part) audience demographics. I got into music reviewing primarily through Jon Morgan (ex-music critic & Meniscus honcho). I was familiar with his work in Cadence and had this mental impression of him based solely on his writing: fifty-something, post-grad educated, erudite, balding, glasses… basically Walter Horn ;-) Anyway Jon ends up crashing at my place one weekend while covering a Scott Fields recording session in Madison & I’m greeted by this twenty-something guy who basically looks, talks & acts like a lot of my friends in college. In other words, he wasn’t that far removed from me. The disparity between my preconceptions & reality got me thinking: man, if he can do this writing thing, why can’t I? A call to Cadence later & I was on their masthead.

Weasel’s got a point about the fun factor too. The stereotype of the stick-up-ass improv fan shush-shushing and poo-pooing any sort of noise emanating from his fellow audience members ain’t fiction. There was this one dude (not naming names) here in the Twin Cities who was (in)famous for setting up a sentry post in the front row at gigs, arms folded like a centurion and shooting back basilisk glares at anyone who so much as let out a chair squeak or a muffled cough during a set. Pretty comical, but also curiously intimidating to some.

FWIW, I've never noticed a scarcity of women at conventional jazz concerts and/or clubs. The more determinedly esoteric the music, however, the more phallo-centric the audience (and the performers, for that matter).

I don't mean to question women's ability to grasp challenging music. On the contrary, I would assert that available evidence suggests they are more discerning, if anything.

So, reading between the lines, determinedly esotertic music is for wankers whereas conventional jazz concerts/clubs are gender neutral? Help me out here.

this "phallo-centricity-directly-proportionate-to-how esoteric-music-is" theory is totally, utterly ridiculous. it can't be proven on any level.

ww

Not a theory, just an observation based on experience, and applied narrowly to the subject at hand (relative lack of interest in improv by women). But we all agree there is a disparity. There must be a reason. Could part of it be that improv (including free jazz, which is essentially what I play) is a very hubristic endeavor, and hubris seems a largely male trait?

go ahead, press those buttons all you want, but i'm done commenting on this thread. "hubris seems like a largely male trait"? gimme a break.

ww

Buttons? What are you talking about? I thought this was an exchange of ideas. Forget I said anything.

The ol' place hasn't changed a bit, Derek.

Well, Mr. Walter, I'm glad you're done commenting, thus we don't have to debate Mr. Kelsey's (it is Mr. Kelsey, is it ... or are you a female Chris?) "phallocentricity-directly-proportionate-to-how esoteric-music-is" theory.

Because I have observed some truth in it, as much as I would like to agree with you. In most esoteric music subcultures, that I've observed, men visibly outnumber women, save for queer hip-hop, which seems to attract at least as many women as men. Is it "directly proportionate"? Probably not - there are too many variables. But there is a correlation. Maybe out of the 500 or so improvised music concerts I've attended in the past 8 years, 5 maybe 10, had more women than men present. Is it nature (genetic differences) or nurture (cultural conditioning) or a bit of both? I don't think one can categorically conclude anything.

That doesn't necessarily mean that women aren't interested in or enjoy improvised music or "esoteric music" in general - they may largely be enjoying it in the privacy of their own homes or workplaces or cars and not post on message boards or blogs discussing said music.

As far as "proving" this theory, from a scientific standpoint, you could probably sample a certain procedural quantity of people, and come up with some reasonable way to measure the comparative "esotericity" of different forms of music, that you would need to come up with a reasonable way of categorizing to begin with, and then survey your samples about participation in activities related to said forms. And if the gender difference is significant in scientific terms, then you could conceivably say you have "proven" something.

But you could also scientifically "prove" that people named Chris like chocolate ice cream more than people named Sarah.

As far as hubris being largely a male trait ... well, too bad Mr. Freeman has left us.

Nah, I'm a guy. And I love chocolate ice cream...

Thanks for addressing my musing, Sarah.

Of course, throughout your hypothetical scientific survey, you'd have people questioning and finding fault with your methodology as far as categorizing and quantifying esotericism and the demographics and size of your sample, the entire time.

I think the chocolate ice cream survey would be easier.

This discussion reminds me of a review of Katha Pollitt's book _Learning to Drive_, in the New York Review of Books. Maybe improv is an "obsessive lonely-guy hobby"

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/20812

That Marxism is incompatible with feminism, as she suspects? Or—and here Pollitt throws all the theory, like bottles, gaily out the window and listens to them land like coins in that deep, deep well—

"perhaps the problem was not Marxism, but Marxists: in its heyday men had kept a lock on it as they did on everything they considered important; now, in its decline, Marxism has become one of those obsessive lonely-guy hobbies, like collecting stamps or 78s."

"The ol' place hasn't changed a bit, Derek."
No it hasn't. Welcome back. There's always a mud pie waiting for you with your name on it whenever you want to stop on by, Chris :-)
What's amusing is that it's Freeman's parting shot that's got this whole ball rolling.
Ô to be in California, where the sun shines and improv concerts are (nearly)50/50..
Now that the LMC has had the plug pulled on its Arse Council Funding, maybe the London improvisers will all emigrate en masse to the Bay Area (Gail Brand had the right idea).
I'm with Weasel - make it fun.

Easy, Chris. I’d be happy to exchange ideas with you as Sarah & others already adeptly have. Curious why you’re attaching all those negative descriptors (“hubris”, “esoteric”, “phallo-centric”, etc.) to the music as possible reasons behind the disparity? I still like Damon’s & Weasel’s rationales. I organized a Assif Tsahar/Susie Ibarra show many moons ago and the audience (50-some strong) had a sizeable female component. They were there to see Susie, either already familiar with her music or curious about it, but a few also fell prey to Assif’s storied charms. :)

Phil's parting shot (if it was indeed parting, hope not) was more like a melon ball fired from a slingshot.

I was familiar with his work in Cadence and had this mental impression of him based solely on his writing: fifty-something, post-grad educated, erudite, balding, glasses… basically Walter Horn ;-) Anyway Jon ends up crashing at my place one weekend while covering a Scott Fields recording session in Madison & I’m greeted by this twenty-something guy who basically looks, talks & acts like a lot of my friends in college. In other words, he wasn’t that far removed from me.

That's not fair. I don't think Jon is a geek! ;>}

Besides, while I certainly am both now, back when I wrote for Cadence, I wasn't either balding or fifty-something. I just wrote as if I were.

What's negative about calling a music "esoteric?" What's wrong with a music BEING esoteric? Nothing. Improvised music tends along those lines, doesn't it? The "phallo-centric" comment was just half-assed wordplay (esoteric/phallo-centric) referring to the predominantly male audience. Again, it was an observation, not a theory. Nor was it a value judgment.

It's great that there were a lot of women at the Ibarra/Tsahar thing, but isn't that the exception rather than the rule?

I think talking about making the music "fun" is condescending to women, frankly. What, "Girls just wanna have fun?" No, it's more than that.

As for "hubris:" To be a musician on the fringe, one has to be convinced--despite prevailing opinion--that what he or she does has value. Taken a step further, one has to be arrogant enough to believe that he or she is right, and the vast majority of the human population is wrong. I'm not saying that's good or bad, but it it weren't true, none of us who play "esoteric" musics could continue. It requires a leap of faith that I would characterize as hubris. And isn't hubris found mostly in males? I would say so.

Again, this is not a value judgment, nor is it intended to be a fully-formed explanation of why improvised music is a predominantly male enterprise. Far from it. I'm just presenting it as a possibility, amidst a world of possibilities.

Taken a step further, one has to be arrogant enough to believe that he or she is right, and the vast majority of the human population is wrong.

Well, not necessarily. You could believe you're "right" but also not that everyone else is "wrong". It's not like there's one right answer in music or art.

fwiw, when I attended a Christian Wolff concert on Monday evening, I daresay about half the crowd (sizable for something like this, about 150) was female, though I guess I was remiss in not taking an exact count. The music was reasonably esoteric. otoh, the audience was 99% white and, as near as one could tell, moneyed. Might this be just as troubling?

I was referring to the Walt of today, not the Walt of yesteryear, in the above post. The latter is possibly very similar to the Taylor of today. ;) And I’m pretty confident Jon would readily cop to the geek charge. As would most of us here, if we were being honest. My girlfriend prefers the term "rube".

I don’t think there’s anything necessarily negative/wrong about “esoteric” music. I was responding to a perceived context in your usage. Sorry if I read you wrong.

The Ibarra gig illustrates Damon’s point about demographics. Another example: a Marilyn Crispell solo gig at an old church on the UW-Madison campus. Only about twenty in the audience, but again, a good half (iirc) were women (still are, far as I know :). I didn’t poll them, but it stands to reason that they were there (in part) because a female musician was playing. I mean look at Lilith Fair, an entire festival catering to a specific highly female demographic. Plenty of men attend, but often in the company of their spouses, girlfriends, female friends, etc. Also, does it even exist anymore?

“Fun” should be applied across genders, no doubt. It’s a way to attract more people, period.

I’m not really buying your “hubris” argument. Why is it a matter of the artist being “right” and the general populace being “wrong”. Why so black & white? Most artists I know don’t do what they do because they’re looking for approval. They do it because they love it and can’t really imagine not having a creative outlet. Believing what you do has value isn’t evidence of hubris, IMO.

Maybe it is so simple as involving more female performers. But to do that we'd need more female performers, and the fact remains that improv attracts a great many more male musicians than females. I'd love to see that situation corrected.

Derek hit the mail on the head: "Fun" crosses genders in terms of attracting an audience, and is something to which more improvisers should aspire, imo.

Brian, wouldn't you say that Wolff has an explicit connection to the classical tradition, in contrast than the more bohemian avant-garde we're generally talking about when we refer to "improv"? Classical concerts--even avant-garde classical concerts--seem to usually have a pretty even man/woman mix.

Brian's (and Derek's) points about shades of gray are right on, and mostly kick my hubris suggestion's ass. Still, I have to think there's an amount of arrogance required to do what we do-- and men tend to corner the arrogance market.

"Fun" in my book doesn't necessarily mean slapstick antics à la Bennink / Mengelberg, or sticking quotes from pop songs in - it means musicians actively engaging with the audience by communicating their own energy, commitment and enjoyment of what they and their fellow players are doing. A simple sly smile can be fun. As opposed to sitting po-faced behind a Powerbook while all hell rains out of the speakers. And I don't think that concept of fun is in any way a dumbing down or demeaning to anyone (boys or girls alike). I can have - and have recently had - a lot of fun at a Keith Rowe concert (last week, with Will Guthrie). Sorry I didn't note how many males or females were present in the audience.. I went there for the music, not to conduct a sociological survey.
I don't mind "esoteric" as adjectives go - it describes a lot of the music and art I like perfectly well. Nor do I think there's anything wrong with "phallo-centric" as an adjective either; it certainly summed up my impressions of the Brötzmann tentet when I saw them here a few years ago. Like it or not, there is an element of laddishness, machismo (maybe, though I'm suspicious of that word) about a lot of skronkin' free jazz and noise (check out Olson's liners to the Flaherty / Corsano / Spencer Yeh disc on Important (I think it was) last year). A lot of noise is brutish, violent, excessive and ruttish: qualities I tend to associate with the male of the species, but beware of generalisations. Ever seen Junko? (Ever HEARD Junko?
As for "hubris", I'll leave that to others :)

Brian, wouldn't you say that Wolff has an explicit connection to the classical tradition, in contrast than the more bohemian avant-garde we're generally talking about when we refer to "improv"? Classical concerts--even avant-garde classical concerts--seem to usually have a pretty even man/woman mix.

Chris, yes, there's certainly that. If he were performing in duo with Rowe, for example, I'd guess the split would be closer to what we're used to (unfortunately). If that's the case, it'd be interesting to figure out why. The phallocentric aspect of improv (I think I should call it Brotzturbating maybe) isn't generally present in post-AMM improv. And there are for sure plenty of female geeks. Dunno!

I don't buy that there are not many Female improvisors, I play with women from all over the place.
I am not an activist, I pick my collaborators based on music, and I think if you are really listening, you will hear there are women doing great things.
There are some great female musicians coming out of Mills in the last few years.
Kelsey, if you ever want to do an article about it I can put you in touch with some incredible players who are female.

Brotzurbating! You register that as a trademark!

Damon, it's good to hear of an influx of women. Over the years I've worked with many women, too (indeed, I seek them out, since I frankly tend to get along with women better than men). It doesn't surprise me to hear the Bay Area is in the vanguard in that regard.

As for an article, I'm taking a long (hopefully endless) sabbatical from writing about music, excepting the occasional gear review.

Of course I meant you SHOULD register that as a trademark...

Dunno about men cornering the arrogance market. I’ve met plenty of narcissistic females over the years to counter that assertion. Arrogance is often a function of (assumptive) power/influence and I can’t think of too many improv players who exercise those attributes in the larger scheme or on a regular basis.

Sorry I didn't note how many males or females were present in the audience. I went there for the music, not to conduct a sociological survey.

That’s funny, I never leave for a gig w/o my clipboard, clicker & a decent supply of ball points.

Brötzturbating

Man, once again poor ol’ Peter takes it on the chin for resolutely following his muse. Paging Adam Hill for the pile-on, stat.

No more Jazz Times column, Chris? That was easily my favorite part of the mag during my $5 12-issue subscription last year. Disagreed with you a lot, but the reviews were a reliably fun read.

Man, once again poor ol’ Peter takes it on the chin for resolutely following his muse. Paging Adam Hill for the pile-on, stat.

Yeah, I apologize for that but you understand how impossible it was to resist.

Nah, my music critiquin' days is ovah. Can't serve two masters, etc., although I tried for a long time.

Saxophone or bust, that's my new motto...

So now there's no reason to even browse Jazz Times at the news stand...small price to pay, if the next record is as excellent as the last 3 CIMP's...

WOW! Thank you, sir.

Sure, Brötz got pegged a long while back as the poster boy for penile improv, with titles like “My Balls, Your Chin” and “Sore Titties” in his catalog, it’s sorta undertandable. But he’s obviously not averse to exploring his inner-Iron John either (cf. 14 Love Poems, Right as Rain, “Master of a Small House”, etc.). You buttoned-down Rowe fans just can’t appreciate a from-the-groin-up barbaric yawp.

What Bill said re: the CIMPs. Not necessarily on the same page re: JT. I sometimes dig what Nate Chinen, Gary Giddins and Nat Hentoff have to say in their respective columns. Once a month, I drop by the UMN music library on my walk to work to flip through it and Down Beat. Usually takes about twenty minutes, but there’s still good stuff to be gleaned in both mags, IMO.

You can peg Brötzmann as a maximalist, but I think he actuall pares down what he does and plays with total artistic clarity.
I think what you can blame him for is influencing a lot of mindless blowing.

Give over Derek! Keith can get pretty gnarly too when he gets going (and there's quite a bit of that stuff on disc too).
Mindless blowing, eh, Damon? C'mon, name names, let's have a bunfight :) (I suppose this is Walter "We are a grandfather" Horn will weigh in about Dave Gross's Fetish again, but I'm ready and waiting..

mindless blowing

Being partial to fish in a barrel I'll go for the obvious... Arthur Doyle, anyone?

Duly noted, Dan. I was just trying out-cheap Brian’s cheapshot. ;) His was worth two bits; mine, just one.

“Maximalist” is far more diplomatic that masturbationist, but I’m morbidly curious also to see if Damon daringly picks up the gauntlet thrown. For me, I’d name Mr. Dorgon, but that’s a bit of a cheat as it was often part of his shtick.

Back to Brötz: the new duo w/ Uuskyla on Atavistic looks damn promising, at least based on the sample on-site.

"Mindless blowing, eh, Damon? C'mon, name names, let's have a bunfight :) "

I don't feel like typing that much, as bass player carpal tunnel can be a real concern.

Arthur Doyle was mindlessly blowing long before he would've (even theoretically) come into contact with Brotzmann's music.

I don't even know what "mindless blowing" really is, anyway - lotta players influenced by Brotzmann, Ayler, or Frank Wright, both stateside and in Europe and Japan.

Peter Van Der Locht, Shoji Ukaji, Mototeru Takagi, Rudiger Carl, Michel Pilz, Franz Beckerlee, Paul Flaherty...

i'm back. psych. to defend a few of my points now that i've had a chance to breathe and think a little . . .

the "fun" thing is more about attracting a larger audience period. that had nothing to do specifically with women. period.

chris and some of the others have brought up and or resolved most of what i had a problem in with the semantics of chris' comments, specifically, what i saw as derogatory adjectives flung towards improvised music vis a vis the predominance of male musicians. i won't flog a dead horse much more, but "hubris", "phallo-centric" and in this context "esoteric" were all offensive to me. it probably doesn't merit further discussion, but that's where i was coming from.

i talked to sarah about this whole thing offline and i think that the reason why the whole recurring improvised music/gender issue sets me off so much partially has to do with the really sad-sack attitude that some people maintain about the scene, i.e. all the players are lame white nerds and only lame white nerds want to hear it. sorry, but it's not true. there might be arguments that there's some common demographic or whatever, but i'm not the kind of person to accept this fate. some of the people here (and elsewhere) seem like they're fine with that - and even revel in it - but to me improvised music is a LIVING ART and it can push beyond the "white male" ghetto.

i've played completely free music to a 500+ person mosh pit of men and women of all different races in an abandoned slaughterhouse in italy. nobody can sit here and tell me that this music is the exclusive domain of lame white nerds.

ww

BLOWING MINDS

Yep, I'm all for fish in a barrel. Arthur Doyle's fine by me, Dave Gross too. Never been all that partial to Mr Dorgon (who's dropped off the radar a bit - what's he up to) though.
Just as long as we don't get this question confused with that old "but he can't play" putdown..

I've played completely free music to a 500+ person mosh pit of men and women of all different races in an abandoned slaughterhouse in italy. nobody can sit here and tell me that this music is the exclusive domain of lame white nerds.

ww

Nicely stated, WW.

I have experienced the same unified field with humans of disparate gender/ethnicity, knit together by sound. One example was New Music America here in Minneapolis. I heard Julius Eastman, Robert Ashley, AEC, Ornette, David Byrne, Laurie Anderson (you get the drift)on one stage.

Nerd, as bandied about on these boards, is the new, inverse "square." Like, if you're hip your're retarded.

Get off it, open your ears, pay attention.

Dan, I'm not the grandad, that's Jesse. And I didn't bring up Gross, you did (twice now I believe--I'm not sure why).

FWIW, I've also played where there have been lots of women present--but there has had to be a movie going on too.

I haven't visited these boards much in recent years, but if what Jesse says about the use of the nerd word is true (a bizarre development as Jesse points out), then I can't blame weasel or anyone else involved with improv for being sensitive when they sense it being implied. I didn't mean that at all.

nobody can sit here and tell me that this music is the exclusive domain of lame white nerds.

Who told you that?

I’m not really clear on the phenomena Jesse describes. Maybe a better corrolary exists between “hipness” and obsessiveness? Most hipsters are on some level obssessives, at least in my experience. The “nerd” or “geek” tag comes in to play with folks who are obsessive about the music, ie. those of us who are out there trying to hear (collect) as much as possible, sometimes to a fault when quantity trumps quality. No way to verify this, but I’m willing to bet the number of “casual” improv fans is probably fewer than for certain other genres. The genre seems to invite (& in some ways, necessitate) immersion. Besides, meant in a pejorative sense, words like “nerd” and “geek” carry about as much bite as Pace Picante sauce.

Riffing on that species of “stick-up-ass improv fan” mentioned above: I was an local gig last night by drummer Eric Kamau Gravatt and had the misfortune of sitting next to its antipode: the overly-effusive sycophantic fan. These folks can be just as annoying in their ceaseless clapping, shouting and fawning, doing their damnedest to be an intrusive part of the action on stage and completely oblivous that an audience is present other than themselves. The band was decent, but the antics of this woman, who I gather was Kamau’s significant other (& as such gets her a partial pass) were pretty hard to take by the time the set was half in the bag. I like to think (rightly or wrongly) that I have a pretty high tolerance/appreciation for that kind of thing, but damn… give me that happy median.

>>> Who told you that?

well, phil freeman ran away sobbing, intimating that bagatellen is a "boys club" anyhow and that he's somehow above it and more in touch with our female sisters, i.e. "cooler".

chris kelsey proceeded to note the disparity between women and men audience members and proceeded to call the scene (i.e. men) hubristic (not a positive term in my book), "phallo-centric" (as i interpret this to mean "focused on their own penises" and whatever other stuff that signifies)and esoteric (which in his context, i felt meant "nobody likes it"). that's a description of lameness if i ever heard one.

derek himself then identified the archetypes of the "stick-up-ass" improv fan as well as the annoying syncophantic fan (we used to call them "screamers" back in the day) . . . these are both totally unflattering (or "lame" in my estimation) archetypes of lame lame-os. they certainly exist, but that's not the entire audience for this music. not at my gigs.

in total these kind of remarks paint the whole scene as a small, lonely gaggle of self-centered, navel-gazing, sexless dweebs. maybe that's the norm, but as i said, i don't accept this fate for myself!

ww

Nice assemblage of pull quotes :) None of them claim anything ressembling exclusivity or “entireness” though, IMO (well, except maybe Phil’s). Let me clarify and say that I’m on the same page in thinking these observations are exceptions rather than rules. The “self-centered, navel-gazing, sexless dweebs” have a presence & a voice, but they’re far from the ruling party in improv or elsewhere.

hallelujah!

ww