I'm confused after reading this review. Does Tilbury in fact play much of anything on the piano on this recording? Anything other than "pianistic interludes" or "musical contributions"?

On Cascando, there are piano sections between spoken parts. I didn't time them, but I'd guess they make up about 1/4 or less of the total minutes, though they remain crucial to the conception of the piece, imho. The non-verbal portion of "Rough for Radio 1" might be a similar ratio but without piano (or without obvious keyboard notes--likely some of the sounds derive from the strings, body, etc.) But the disc is much more about the recitation of text, which Tilbury accomplishes beautifully and profoundly.

I didn't know that, in addition to reviews of movies, comic books and chocolate bars, I could also find reviews of radio plays and suchlike here at bags. Sweet. There's like nothing at all we bags guys don't know, is there?

Consider that this is a Matchless recording featuring John Tilbury. Now that you mention it, if any of those guys came up with their own chocolate bars or comic books, that would be hilarious.

I'm guessing he's better than Lahr.

But I always liked McGowran and Cusack.

I dunno -- hard to beat Bert Lahr's interpretations of Lay's potato chip commercials. Dressed up as Satan.

Now, that's profound.

I'd like to see that. I believe Bert had a bit of trouble with "Godot", though.

There is substantial criticism of my initial comment here at Brian's blog. I have tried to respond there but been unsucessful. So I'll do so here.

I have been consistantly "snippy" (I love that Jon Abbey of all people has a problem with this--I wonder how he'd respond if I reviewed a hip hop recording) when bagatellen "reviews" are written on subjects other than music or by people with insufficient background to be writing "reviews" on the subjects at hand. I'm terribly sorry that it has bummed you out and/or disturbed your fan base. I remain convinced, however, that one should not write (simply because one just loves loves loves Jon Tilbury) that his performances of Feldman are the best in the history of the world when one hasn't actually heard all the recordings of Feldman (or even those by the musicians for whom the pieces were written) or that a reading of a play is exemplary when there isn't really any other reading with which you can make a comparison. It's not a criticism of you personally for somebody to say "You know what? You don't really know whether this is any good."

I consider you an expert in a certain type of music. Also crosswords and peanut butter. Maybe painting too. But that's it--at least as far as I know. If there's more I don't know about it and it certainly hasn't come across from the reviews I've snipped at. If you don't like to hear that, you should get the comments function turned off because I'm not likely to change my mind (or my nasty personality). I want the reviews I read to be by people who have some idea what the hell they're talking about, and I think bagatellen suffers when other stuff (really comment-worthy only material) gets passed off as a "review". It just makes the whole mag seem dilettantish to me. Why is it so important to review everything anyway? Tilbury's OK without this constant puffery. So are you.

Walto

Sorry, Walt, but that’s bullshit. By my lights, the whole notion of “expertism” is a fallacy through and through, particularly as a necessity to commenting meaningfully from a personal perspective on something, whatever that something might be. A predictable response, maybe, given the frequent “non-expert” nature of my work here & elsewhere, but that’s how I see it. The whole complaint of “dilettantism” is nothing new from you either. If that’s you’re impression of what we’re doing here, so be it. But that said, I’d strongly advise you take your “nasty personality” and go take a powder in a pile of petunias.

Seriously, man, there’s no reason to be such a dick. I know you to be a thoughtful and considerate fellow under different circumstances… bring back the Walto I know & love.

Good arguments, Derek! Let me summarize them:

1. What I've posted is bullshit.
2. It's a fallacy (through and through).
3. This is how you see it.
4. My remarks are nothing new from me.
5. I should "go take a powder in a pile of petunias."
6. There's no reason for me to be such a dick.
7. I should bring back the other, more thoughtful and considerate Walto you know and love (who apparently agrees with you about these matters).

Very persuasive. Nice job. I'm convinced and will go try to find the good Walto.

I fear that he may be lost for good, replaced by an evil Walto replicant bent on burning bridges & souring the old Walto’s carefully cultivated rapports. Well, at least we’re engaging in a healthy & civilized dialogue. I’m not looking for agreement, just a relative absence of piss & vinegar, neither of which are all that pleasing to my palate.

Well, if you're really interested in civilized discourse, it would seem to me that maybe you shouldn't say that what I've written is "bullshit" and call me a dick. BWTHDIK?

On Brian's thread not only did Abbey whack me, but Pinnell referred to me as one of "the bastards" and Brian couldn't even tell that "A Chair" was defending him. O ye defenders of civilization, whatever will you do with us evil doers?

I forgot the brackets after both of those statements suggesting the injection of 10cc of Hornian sarcasm into the central artery of each prior to reading.

I haven’t read Brian’s thread (reminds me that I haven’t visited in site in awhile & need to remedy that soon) so I can’t as yet comment on what Jon and Richard wrote. I’m just responding in relation to what you’ve written and/or implied here, which on some tracks feels like a broken record played with a splintered stylus. Shall I deign to summarize:

1.) Most of what passes for reviews & commentary here at Bagatellen is really just dilettantish public masturbation.

2.) Music reviews writ large are usually far too lenient and praise-oriented, making them mostly useless.

3.) Reviews are usually only useful if the reader is familiar with the tastes and biases of the reviewer and, at least in part, shares them.

4.) Writers shouldn’t attempt to write about something unless they have an extensive and verifiable background in what they’re writing about.

5.) Calling something the “best” in its field will invariably result in the busting of said caller’s chops.

6.) Matthew Shipp is an overrated pianist.

7.) Hopscotch is one of the finest labels currently releasing creative improvised music.

On point #7 we most certainly agree and on point #3, I think you have something of a point.

Must be a slow day at the office.

In my blog, I wrote:

I assume he objects to the fact that I reviewed a radio play. Now, had he asked about my background knowledge in such, something I in fact alluded to in the body of the review (that is to say, not so much), fine. Were someone to post, "I've heard a dozen renditions of 'Cascando' and you might want to hear X, Y and Z before you assign such high marks to Tilbury because, in that context, he ain't no hot stuff!" again, fine. But posts like the above come across as snippy and crabby, nothing more.

********

Had your initial response been more in line with what you posted this morning, I'd have had no problem with it. It's the drive-by nature of some comments that annoys me. I specifically said in the review that I'm no expert on Beckett radio plays, thereby alerting the reader to take what follows with as many grains of salt as he or she wishes. On the other hand, it doesn't seem unreasonable to assume that readers otherwise unaware of the Tilbury work and who have generally either an affinity with what I like or an aversion to it could reasonably use my reaction, inexpert though it may be, as one guide toward whether they might enjoy it as well or not.

Walto, "Don't let the bastards grind you down" is just a turn of phrase commonly used in England that isn't designed to specifically call anyone a bastard, more just a "keep your chin up" figure of speech.

No offence to you personally was intended, apologies if you took any.

As Brian said, if you had posted something similar to what you have written above rather than the short snippy jibes then I wouldn't have jumped to Brian's defence so fast. I still wouldn't agree with you, but you wouldn't have come across as just taking potshots, which is how I perceived things. As I saw it, Brian took a lot of time considering the Tilbury recording and then went to the effort of sharing his thoughts, only to earn a series of one liners in return, something unfortunately common to Bagatellen for no immediately discernable reason.

I am admittedly snippy and crabby (and, mostly, snarky)--it's a character flaw (ask my wife). No apology necessary, Richard. I should try to be more direct and less sarcastic. That's never come naturally to me.

On the other hand, I don't believe I've ever said, anything very much like Derek's (1), and I don't think (5) is true either: I just don't like calling something "the best" unless the caller has heard the all other stuff. I recommend just saying you like it a lot. That seems obvious to me, and one needn't go as far as endorsing the estimable Vince K's rather extreme linguistic measures to say so, I don't think. I can live with all the other items Derek has listed although, in a similar vein, I'd prefer to rewrite #7 as something like:

7') I like a lot of the Hopscotch releases I've heard quite a bit.

I don't think I'm in a position to say what "the finest" labels are (and my guess is that Olewnick, Abbey, and Pinnell will all agree with that assessment).

I must say, Jon A's response to my snark is the most surprising to me. He's a connosseur of many things--chocolates, a number of sports, certain types of music, certain areas of film and TV, etc.--and is very quick to call people on what he takes to be insufficiently grounded assertions. (I've been nailed by him for these very shortcomings on several occasions.) When I happily admitted once that I was no more than a "casual fan" of some sport and never claimed more, he responded with disdain. So, my take is that the basis for his objection to Brian's assertions being questioned (or snarked at) here is simply a function of his fierce loyalty to his buddy. I've seen that response when I've criticized other writers he's friends with. I suppose that can be seen as an attractive trait, but it's not entirely intellectually consistent.

W

fwiw, I don't believe I referred to Tilbury's Beckett reading as "the best". I like it far more than the other readily available example I cited and more than my memory of the several other readings of Beckett I've heard over the years. I called it "excellent", etc. (unhappily, for certain folk, I didn't trot out "superb") and said that I'd tentatively--tentatively, mind you! ;-)--add Beckett to Cage and Feldman as an artist who I'd rather hear interpreted by Tilbury than anyone else. Obviously, that could change given exposure to other performers. Not sure where the problem is as far as "bestness".

The 'bestest' problem came from another review, not this one. I asked if you'd heard Tudor's Feldman before claiming Tilbury was the best pianistic interpreter of Feldman that ever lived, and, IIRC, at the time, you said you hadn't.

Again Walto, that makes sense now you explain it, but it needed you to enlighten us.

Out of interest, which Tudor Feldman do you recommend? I only have a couple of discs upon which he plays, the Editions RZ release and the recent New world reissue of the Viola in my life... is there anything else currnetly in print?

This is (obviously) a sensitive area for me. I used to insist I was unqualified to review certain discs sent to me by Cadence and ended up getting fired for it. I was snarky when Crawjo began making what I took to be overarching statements about this or that area of jazz or improv after having been exposed to it for no more than a few months. I made fun of Michael Anton Parker's list of the best movies ever made after he indicated he'd seen only a couple dozen flicks his whole life.

I don't know exactly which peformances one should be expected to have seen/heard to be reviewing peformances of Beckett, I just insist that there ought to be SOME list, or my daughters could be doing the reviews. I understand that Derek doesn't agree with this, but to me there is or ought to be a difference between fan letters and "reviews." I suppose this makes me an elitist of some kind, but isn't bagatellen supposed to be more than an e-list? There's plenty of blog or BBS space available for saying who we think is the cutest girl or best tv show or whatever.

It should also be noted though that there is plenty of music on this Beckett disc, both Tilbury's piano but also Prévost, Lexer etc...

Assuming there isn't a radio plays expert out there who is also well versed in improvised music I'm really not sure who could ever write a review of this CD if they really need to be that knowledgable of the subject matter in advance.

Personally I welcomed Brian's response to the disc, he seemed as qualified as anyone to give an opinion, (and thats all he gave) but I was not under any illusion that he was any kind of radio plays expert.

Anyway I'm off out to dinner.

Richard, I have a nostalgic attachment to the first Feldman LP I ever had, an Odyssey compilation of some of his early works. I don't know if any of the performances are as good as Tilbury's. I'm particularly fond of the string quartet performances on there too, but maybe, as Glen Freeman has suggested to me, the OgreOgress readings are more faithful to the instructions on the scores.

My only point was that Feldman wrote a number of those piano pieces for Tudor and supervised some of his recordings of them. Maybe Tilbury's peformances are indeed better, but you'd probably have to listen to both to know that. There are a ton of Feldman recordings. I think it's possible to say that some new release is great or wonderful without saying it's the best. Why is that necessary anyhow?

I really like that Editions RZ release, by the way.

Leaving this aside for a moment, if I may, I want to take up Richard's query again. I have both Tudor/Feldman discs he mentions; on the RZ one, Tudor is one of four pianists (wonderful performance, gorgeous music) and I think it dates from the early sixties. The Viola in My Life is from around 1970, right? I know he recorded earlier Feldman pieces from the 50s, but (my main question) did he ever record the larger scale pieces (solo or otherwise) from the 70s and 80s? I'm not aware of it though I'd dearly hope it's the case. Is there a Tudor "For Bunita Marcus" against which to compare Tilbury or anyone else?

I assume my "best" comment derived from the All Piano set. But I'm not sure there exists any Tudor with which to compare at least the pieces on the last two discs. Not having heard (of course) *every* Feldman interpretation, I've nonetheless listened to quite a few over the years and, as of today, I still haven't heard one that comes close to touching Tilbury's "For Bunita Marcus", so I'm afraid it remains the "best" in Olewnick's book.

"I must say, Jon A's response to my snark is the most surprising to me."

trying to stay out of this, but since you won't let me: I didn't defend Brian one bit in my comment on his blog, I merely wrote that "Walt's the king of pointless snippy and crabby remarks, you should know that by now.", I didn't say a thing about this specific one.

since you say right here that "I am admittedly snippy and crabby (and, mostly, snarky)--it's a character flaw (ask my wife).", I don't see what the problem is, except your reading comprehension.

Yeah, but don't forget little man, I'M the KING.

And (though I understand that your snipe was your unique way of "staying out of this") my remarks, snippy or otherwise are generally not and were certainly not in this case "pointless"--whether you managed to understand them or not.

Ah, this is much better, a salubrious meeting of the minds rather than a snark hunt. My own attempts at snarkiness above were both ill advised & ill executed, so I’ll apologize for them off the bat.

Walt, I’ll take your word that you’ve never said/written anything resembling 1), but nonetheless it just seems to be the implication of some of your snarkier posts. To clarify my position on “appropriate backgrounds” for reviewing: What matters most to me is not whether a writer is extensively versed in particular musician, genre, etc., but rather whether they have seriously listened to and thought about the particular piece of work that they’re writing about. To use a handy (& it seems contentious) example, I think a writer could be perfectly capable of commenting meaningfully on a Beckett performance, assuming they had actually listened to & cogitated on the performance of the Beckett work they were commenting on. Brian did just that, IMO.

Also, I think you should apologize for baiting Jon and not letting him stay out of this.

nah, I started it there, not sure why it couldn't stay on Brian's blog, though, unless Brian is somehow screening comments there...

Walt wrote:
"This is (obviously) a sensitive area for me. I used to insist I was unqualified to review certain discs sent to me by Cadence and ended up getting fired for it."

I once wrote on this site that I heard you were fired from Cadence and you denied it. I actually apologized to you on this site for making that statement. Now you say you were fired from Cadence. You can use my apology as if it came from Derek for calling you a dick and saying your opinion was bullshit.

For the record: no screening of comments or password protection on my blog. The only things I delete are the occasional spams that appear there.

I tried to post my comments there, both as a blogger and as "anonymous," but they didn't show up. I've been unsuccessful posting comments on those google blogs in the past too. Either I'm doing something wrong or they're on to me and I need another disguise.

As to Cadence, Joe, as I explained the last time this came up, I was told either to review everything they sent me or take a walk. I did the latter--not sure if you want to call that being fired or not.

One, two, three, four...
Hrmm!
One, two, (one, two, three, four!)

Let me tell you how it will be;
There's one for you, nineteen for me.
'Cause I’m the taxman,
Yeah, I’m the taxman.

Should five per cent appear too small,
Be thankful I don't take it all.
'Cause I’m the taxman,
Yeah, I’m the taxman.

(if you drive a car, car;) - I’ll tax the street;
(if you try to sit, sit;) - I’ll tax your seat;
(if you get too cold, cold;) - I’ll tax the heat;
(if you take a walk, walk;) - I'll tax your feet.

Taxman!

'Cause I’m the taxman,
Yeah, I’m the taxman.

Don't ask me what I want it for, (ah-ah, mister Wilson)
If you don't want to pay some more. (ah-ah, mister heath)
'Cause I’m the taxman,
Yeah, I’m the taxman.

Now my advice for those who die, (taxman)
Declare the pennies on your eyes. (taxman)
'Cause I’m the taxman,
Yeah, I’m the taxman.

And you're working for no one but me.

Taxman!

Ouch. I'm still dealing with those guys. I can't even figure out what they think was wrong with my 2005 return.

It's amazing. They just send a bill, with no explanation whatever (except for the interest calculation, which is spelled out in excruciating detail) and tell you that if you don't pay it immediately, interest and penalties will continue to accrue.

Crap. My last post, in reference to Walt's disguise one, got bumped down by his response to Joe.

And the last one gets bumped down too, I seriously need to work on my quick key reflexes, Quick Draw McGraw I ain't.

Sometimes I find myself pondering whether the IRS cribbed their customer service handbook from Stalinist sources. Good luck with that, man, here's hoping it's a David and Goliath situation rather than a Bambi and Godzilla one.

re: unhappy 2005 returns
call the phone number listed on the letter and ask them. Generally, if the IRS disagrees w/what you reported & calculated on your tax return, they will send a "helpful" letter notifying you of such. Usually it is a matter of income reported to them by a 3rd party not being reported on your return (non-employee compensation, investment income, retirement savings account distributions, etc.) Sometimes it involves math errors. But in general, it's something that is obvious, based on the information available to them.

I can't read through all the personal dribble to figure out what the actual issue is here.
Is it Brian not being well versed in radio plays? Or interpretations of contemporary piano music?

Personally, I found this interesting because Tilbury is so well-versed in Feldman who was really inspired by Beckett.
It also tells us a bit more about where Tilbury is coming from.
He may also have more background in this kind of thing than we are aware of. He certainly sounds comfortable doing it.

I have had the idea for years to do one of Thomas Berhard's plays using only musicians since Bernhard started as a musician and famously hated actors.

Here is the other verison of “Cascando”:
http://ubu.wfmu.org/sound/beckett_samuel/theatre_pieces/Beckett-Samuel_Theatre-For-Your-Mother_Cascando.mp3

Tilbury's version is a much dryer as Brian Points out, I prefer that, personally. I have also been put off by over-acted versions of Beckett's work.
I am not a Beckett scholar, but he is a writer I have an interest in.

this may help a bit at least around ''Cascando'':

http://samuel-beckett.net/ch4.html

Thank you, Sarah.

I have called and they've promised to send me a return reflecting their 'corrections.' It's just that I still haven't gotten it--a couple of weeks later....and the clock is still ticking.

Beckett scholars and non-Beckett scholars should all check out Scott Fields' Beckett on Clean Feed. Terrific.

His new one on RogueArt is pretty nifty too w/ what is quite possibly the first ever quartet feat. electric guitar, tenor sax, analog synth & guzheng.

i am expert on radio plays, improvised music and critical thinking. I write and produce radio plays, present papers on them, and listen to lots of improvised music.

i don't understand derek's stance of "I think a writer could be perfectly capable of commenting meaningfully on a Beckett performance, assuming they had actually listened to & cogitated on the performance of the Beckett work they were commenting on."

it's not a question of capability, but of what the reader is going to get out of it. Being merely capable is not enough. It'd be nice to have informed critics, which is all that walto is saying.
i'll never understand the school of thought that things that anyone paying attention to some artifact is just as capable as anyone else of saying something meaningful about it.
Sorry, I'd rather hear from an expert and balance that with my own impressions.

and walto you should know better: owlenick, pinnell and abbey are in a state of permanent hug.

derek blindly defends whoever he can get to contribute to this site.

"i am expert on radio plays, improvised music and critical thinking."

Give the man a medal, someone.

Where would we send it? He's such an expert he can't even reveal his real name. I'm getting pretty sick of these dumb pseudos. Don't people have birth certificates anymore? Bring back Joe (Morris AND Milazzo).

He must be a Los Glissandino, Dan.

Sorry, I’d rather hear from an expert and balance that with my own impressions.

Guess this site isn’t for you then; but I am curious: What are the specific credentials necessary for "expert" status in your mind?

derek blindly defends whoever he can get to contribute to this site.

That’s funny... my optometrist, an expert in her field, tells me I’m 20/20.

I’m with Dan; pedantry is usually more effective when one knows the identity of the self-appointed pedant.

if identity will make my post carry the weight of your burdened gasps, so be it. my name is William Avery D'Hautcourt. My father is belgium and my mother is american. I live in Cincinnati.

What does this add to the discussion?

I can tell I've hit a sore spot with you guys. With a little tender rubbing, you'll all be just fine.

At least we can all agree on Bert Lahr.

William, the operative word in my post above is “usually”. Unfortunately, in this case, revealing your secret identity doesn’t lend any further credence to what you wrote. Your father is Belgium? How do the millions of other Belgians feel about him appropriating the entire country as his identity?

It’s not a sore spot that you’ve struck, but instead an acupuncture point that induces instant indifference. Just for clarity’s sake, what’s a “burdened gasp” & from what orifice does it emanate?

Sorry, today it looks like I'm the one experiencing a slow day at the office.

"owlenick, pinnell and abbey are in a state of permanent hug."

- True or not it does not diminish their understanding of their fields of interest.
I'd say Brian is certainly an expert on EAI or whatever it is called this week, and unless something is revealed about Tilbuy's hidden background in theater or radio works, it is safe to assume he is
making connections between his work as a pianist and Beckett's work.

I just don't see any problems with what Brian wrote.
As long as he is not dogmatically asserting EAI's superiority over everything else he is a fine, insightful writer who certainly does his research.

So, Mr Expert, you have not hit any sore spots with me, but I think we would all rather hear your "expert" and detailed opinon of this work and how it differs from Brian's rather than have you just attack his.

Note to self: dogmatically assert eai's superiority to everything else in near-future review.

;-)

And so Mr. Cincinnati-Belgium jr., I have just asked Messrs. Aeschylos and Evripidis to comment upon your soi-disant expertise in plays, improvised music and critical thinking. Mr. Socrates has been called in for the latter. I await their response. Don't you?

it's just nice to remind lurkers and commentators to this site that the people that post here don't know anything more than anyone else. sometimes a reminder is necessary since there's so few resources about this music on the web (lest a neophyte think the musings here were expert or represented a relative consensus among listeners/ devotees of this music)

and sorry damon i can't comment on this recording of the plays - haven't heard it. i've studied the others. i won't hold my radio play experience over your heads though; i can tell you guys are jealous of the EVEN MORE EXTREME ELITISM our small community relishes within.

note to derek: a burdened gasp weighs more heavily than the stack of meager excuses you tell yourself when justifying the life choices that have landed you so pitifully...here.

toodles for now!

Thanks for another convivial drive-by, William. Fortunately, rubber bullets aren't usually fatal.

"and sorry damon i can't comment on this recording of the plays - haven't heard it."

Well, it is available and easy to get. You can probably download it for free if you look hard enough.
Not hearing it will likely threaten your expert satus in both radio plays and improvised music if not critical thinking.

So track it down and give us your opinon instead of taking petty shots at the various writers and posters here.

What I find most amusing about this recent exchange is the hypocrisy that’s soaking through like urine stains in churned rice/locust musk/sure thing/billy boy’s posts. He purports to be this “expert” as well as an arbiter of exemplary music criticism (or were radio plays his only area of self-professed connoisseurship?), yet the only evidence we have of his expertise are three ill-mannered & argumentative posts at a place he condescends to call pitiful. Conversely, the contributors here have hundreds (perhaps even thousands) of pages of content proving both their commitment to and considered understanding of the music they comment on. Derek has a decent command of jazz, even if he hits with kid gloves sometimes. Brian has his finger on the pulse (or lack thereof :-)) of eai. Other occasional contributors like Marc Medwin & Clifford Allen are similarly versed. I enjoy stopping by here, but it’s the trolls-in-tastemakers clothing like our boy Billy that make it a drag. Thanks, Billy, but I can make my own decisions as to what & who to read without your hollow rhetoric.

i'm an expert of doritos and replacing toilet paper rolls. fuck you all.

ww

ps. my father is from rockford, il.

Spoken like a small, sharp-fanged mammal.

Anyone heard the new Bjork and care to comment?

With apologies to Messrs. Beckett and Tilbury for the deviation ...

Does anyone know what happened to Don Cherry's pocket trumpet after his death? Such a unique man, a unique sound and a unique instrument, in his hands. It should be enshrined somewhere.

Cherry played a number of instruments during his lifetime, including a pocket trumpet, pocket cornet, and standard cornet. They're all Bb-pitched instruments. That really odd-looking one he's holding on the cover of Brown Rice is most certainly an Indian or Pakistani-made pocket cornet. I have a similar one. It has a really nice sound but is terribly unreliable in the range above D2.

Graham, Peter Apfelbaum may have some idea of what became of Don's instrument.

Now, are we talking about all toilet paper rolls, including the industrial size contraptions as found in public restrooms in airports, gas stations, and other public places or solely the residential variety.

If the latter is the case and you don't know diddley about the industrial variety with the dual roll/drop down action, then you really should limit your discourse to residential toilet paper roll replacement, as even though there may be some shared ideas, techniques, and historical touchstones between the two, you owe it to the theoretical reader to only hear about such things from "true" experts.

Sarah L (daughter of Lynn Lockhart of Parkersburg, West Virginia)

>i'm an expert of doritos and replacing toilet paper rolls. fuck you all.

>ww

Thank you, djll.

>Anyone heard the new Bjork and care to comment?

Heard it, didn't much like it. The guest musicians aren't treated as equal partners; their stuff is sampled and turned into one more piece of bric-a-brac for Bjork to arrange. Since I like some of their work a lot better than the majority of hers, I find that a little demeaning to them. (The only guest of whom this is not true is the execrable vocalist Antony, who moos and coos on a duet track that's pretty much wretched through and through.)

I also saw her at Radio City Music Hall, though, and the songs worked much better live. I wish Chris Corsano had been louder in the mix, and had been given more to do. But it was a pretty good show in support of a disappointing album. I think Bjork is better in theory than practice, overall.

"the execrable vocalist Antony, who moos and coos on a duet track that's pretty much wretched through and through"
Yo, time to start the Antony backlash here..! Nice to see you back Phil. Thought you might comment on Weasel's toilet paper rolls.
Haven't heard the new Bjork (and I'll be buggered if I'm buying it - I shelled out for Vespertine and still regret doing so) but I don't suppose it'll be long before she graces the Wire front cover yet again. At least she's more agreeable to look at than Mark E Smith. Though that's not exactly difficult.

I shelled out for Vespertine and still regret doing so

Me too, mate. Me too. I figured that With Z. Parkins on it, how bad could it be? I need an imagination tune-up, obviously....and to stop listening to fans.

Vespertine and Homogenic are my two favorite Björk records, the latter much more than the former, but that's really not saying much at all. I find her intermittently diverting but generally disappointing, and the rabidity of her fans' response to her every dribble is mostly a testament to the limits of their imaginations. (True of a lot of artists.)

Homogenic I can stand, Vespertine I have to take in veeery small doses. Nice production, but those little panting fairy gasps and intakes of breath drive me up the fucking wall. Gimme some Chaka Khan anyday. "I'm Every Woman".. yeaaaaah!

Yes Chaka Khan! Glad to hear that you dig her too, Dan. Though I guess that shouldn't surprise me since I know that you are (as am I) a Steely Dan fan too.

And it makes me remember this too - Peter Kowald's first visit to New Orleans, and PK soundchecking the mic by first doing a bit of throat singing then doing the "Chaka Khan Chaka Khan" beginning of "Feel for You." Hilarious just thinking about it again.

Rufus = "Tell Me Something Good"...killer track.

PK dug CK too! That's gorgeous! Yeah, I'm a major league CK fan, have to admit. Sure, it's a SEX thing, but I also love voices with flaws and singers who push them into places they shouldn't go - ever heard "Spring Can Really Hang You Up The Most" on Echoes Of An Era (wish CK had done more jazz.. nice band too with Corea, Hubbard & Henderson..)? I'll even put up with the crappy funk of the CK album for those sumptuous Dave Grusin arrangements on "The End Of A Love Affair".. and what about Miles on "I'll be Around"..
Meanwhile all those early Rufus albums still cook - Clare Fischer arrangements awesome ("Little Boy Blue" my all time fave Rufus track). I also like the Life Is A Dance Remix project (Dancin Danny Dee garagin' up "I'm Every Woman"). But it's the Arif Mardin produced stuff that really rocks.

I'll take Chaka Kahn over Björk too, but it's Björks old man I can't stand.
He had a big exhibition here around his newest film. Both were total travisties.
I almost puked when he Björk turned into dolphins and swam away, they should have stopped at flensing each other.
The Exhibition consisted of a couple rooms and vitrines that were direct Beuys rip offs, a bunch of props from the recent film, and a room full of early films that were direct Bruce Nauman rip offs.
She should go back to banging Goldie, at least he was good in "The World Is Not Enough".

M. Barney is another one I wanted to like; the stills from the various Cremaster movies made 'em look pretty cool. But when I actually went to the Guggenheim for his exhibit out here, and saw as much as I could stand of the interminable, static products themselves, the emperor's clothes fell right to the floor.

At least we can all agree on Chaka, Barney, and Bert Lahr. Is this the Summer of Love or what?

God how I hate Chaka Khan ....:)

Richard, thank you for sparing me from writing that myself. Screeching wenches ...

Okay, so it's not the summer of love.

Maybe Springtime for Tilbury?

I don't find M. Barney's work execrable - there are some interesting ideas and compelling imagery in his work. Does it live up to the hype? No. But I think the notion of "overrated" has been discussed here relatively recently - in fact, this thread feels a bit similar to the Lou Reed one - angry pseudonymous commenters and all.

rumbled!

I offer this only for calibration purposes: I think Bjork is the most creative mainstream pop artist I know about, and think that Homogenic and Vespertine are great through and through.

Interesting "calibration".

Bjork was universally agreed as The Only Major Flop of the Athens Olympic Games.

Isn't "creative mainstream pop artist" a kind of contradiction in terms?

>Isn't "creative mainstream pop artist" a kind of contradiction in terms?

Oh for fuck's sake, Dan, stop pretending to be stupid. I swear, sometimes this place seems like a shelter custom-built to protect some of the most obtuse motherfuckers on the internet from accidentally brushing up against the non-theoretical world. But I thought you were smarter than that.

> Bjork was universally agreed as The Only Major Flop of the Athens Olympic Games.

Totally untrue. Event audience attendance was the other one.

How many of the events did you attend, Vincent? Or are you another victim of media fraud?

> How many of the events did you attend, Vincent? Or are you another victim of media fraud?

I'd left Greece by that time, so I'm only going on media reports. You're suggesting they were inaccurate, and that the broadcasted empty venues were cherry-picked? Low attendance sounded perfectly reasonable to me - Greek locals generally wouldn't have been able to afford the typical ticket list price.

pdf,

shouts for keepin it real, blood.

and for reminding us professers that pop music is so very democratic and intelligently designed by folk who are out there, doin' it, movin' and groovin' with The People.

"Oh for fuck's sake, Dan, stop pretending to be stupid."
Haha, OK. Just checking that you were all still alive out there. The only way to get a thread moving on Bags seems to be to say something totally provocative. But I would say that there's a damn sight less creativity in pop music nowadays than there was before.
Meanwhile Tom I can't decide if your last post is sincere or ironic. Maybe you could enlighten us.

Then, Vincent, please take my word for it, as a spectator to the event. Bjork's performance at the opening ceremony to the Athens Olympics promptly sent 85,000 people into stupor, despair and tedium. What you see on the DVD of the event bears no relation to reality, it is entirely manipulated. We call it media fraud. A daily, ongoing, international crime, of which the Americans are evidently the least aware. (It is thus no surprise that the Americans don't have a clue as to how to make friends around the world in cultures different to their own, hence their expertise at making enemies).

P.S. Most ticket prices were about that of a double CD, sometimes a single. That's what I paid.

Graham, I can't tell what you're referring to, that Bjork's performance was a flop (which I didn't comment on at all, and about which have no opinion concerning media misrepresentation) or if reports of low event attendance were "media fraud" (the only thing I was talking about). Are you stipulating the latter? As I said, I'm only going on reports that that was so (that attendance was generally a disappointment), though the Greek government actively encouraged locals to leave the city for their typical August vacations to reduce chances of gridlock, and friends at the embassy said that people took that advice and that Athens was even emptier than usual of residents (and in August, it's comparatively a ghost town in general).

Dan - ironic. Guilty as charged.

PDF
"M. Barney is another one I wanted to like; the stills from the various Cremaster movies made 'em look pretty cool. But when I actually went to the Guggenheim for his exhibit out here, and saw as much as I could stand of the interminable, static products themselves, the emperor's clothes fell right to the floor."

-That show was my first experience with him, I thought it sucked but was convinced to give him another chance.
Supposedly the Cremaster series is great, and admitedly the short DVD of part of Cremaster 3 is better than either exhibition
or the new film.

Vincent:
"I offer this only for calibration purposes: I think Bjork is the most creative mainstream pop artist I know about"

-I agree there are maybe a handful of others if you dig deep enough. Still, it is not much of a distinction.

"I swear, sometimes this place seems like a shelter custom-built to protect some of the most obtuse motherfuckers on the internet from accidentally brushing up against the non-theoretical world."

- A lot of us just don't have any interest in pop music. It would make things easier for me in a lot of cases if I did but I just don't.
I listen to about 5 or 6 albums of improvised music, free jazz or new music a day. That is just what my taste is.

Oh, and Malachi Thompson plays trumpet, not bass.