Tuesday, September 2, 2008
Wednesday, May 7, 2008
Weber party crashes the Web
LOUISVILLE – Huh? What? Can a person honestly be this deluded? Is this guy for real?
I regret to report he is.
http://www.myspace.com/rogerweber
To be sure, many of you are thinking that I tossed my sense of humor out with the first Bush administration (i.e., George H. W.). In the interest of full disclosure, I find the line regarding Al Gore truly funny: "Carbon foot print up his butt/Will surely keep his big mouth shut." (Note: In the video, take notice of George Dick's laughter of approval as this line is delivered.)
Those of us who know Roger Weber will certainly appreciate this piece of self-indulgent crap. (See video trailer of "Global Warming" below. Courtesy of YouTube and George Dick.) This video should leave the more intelligent and thoughtful among us scratching our heads in befuddled consternation. Others, namely the initiated members of the cult of Limbaugh, may don tinfoil hats, navy-blue jumpsuits and tennies and wait for the Mother Ship to arrive on the next starry night. Don't forget to drink the Kool Aid before retiring for the evening.
Weber and his new CD were recently the subject of a brief article in The Courier-Journal, St. Matthews/Neighborhoods section (23 April 2008). Apparently, Roger had badgered this hapless reporter into checking out his act at a Jeffersonville, IN bowling alley, a venue of which just may be a fair indication of both his talent and currency. Desperate to fill news hole, the article made it into print, which is more of a testament to the objectivity of the reporter than it is to any pop cultural relevance.
One video observer astutely writes:
"Well, that was quite entertaining. Roger seems to inhabit a small world where he doesn't ever have to grow up. I assume he has a real job of some sort? His stuff would be mildly amusing if he wasn't serious about it (which I'm guessing he is). The video of him playing in front of the hot tub about says it all – Roger and George entertaining themselves while about five bored onlookers sit around wondering why they are there."
Well said.
I contacted Ms. Martha Elson, the reporter at The C-J (whose considerable talent is wasted on such fluff), via email, with these comments:
The only things of which he [Roger] is a master are his skills at self-promotion and his ability to delude himself, mostly into megalomaniacal, grandiose superiority. His political heroes are Stalin, George Bushes (both the elder and the younger) and that ubiquitous gas bag Rush Limbaugh.
He bristles at even the slightest whiff of liberalism and like most self-righteous conservatives of his ilk, he becomes instantly combative when confronted with logic or sound reasoning.It’s disappointing, because he is otherwise truly a bright guy...
On the plus side, I did get a quiet laugh at the thought of him playing and crooning in some cheesy bowling alley lounge, as famously parodied by Bill Murray on those early SNL skits. Oh, how I can hear Roger now. In addition to his own compositions, I’m sure you had to endure such nuggets as Secret Agent Man, Sixteen Tons and Do You Know the Way to San Jose?.
(As an aside, I believe you’ve been mislead as to his age. My calculations place him securely in his early fifties. But then again, I suppose his vanity is the least of his sins.) – CM
Ms. Elson kindly replied:
I try to be open-minded about story topics, and, as you say, he was very persistent. I asked him his age, and that's what he said. Again, thanks for reading the story and commenting.
You can view the cover of Weber's new album Happy Hour (which features a nattily attired Weber dousing an overheated planet Earth with a martini), check out audio and video clips and read the full text of Ms. Martha Elson's nicely written article by pulling up this code:
To be sure, many of you are thinking that I tossed my sense of humor out with the first Bush administration (i.e., George H. W.). In the interest of full disclosure, I find the line regarding Al Gore truly funny: "Carbon foot print up his butt/Will surely keep his big mouth shut." (Note: In the video, take notice of George Dick's laughter of approval as this line is delivered.)
That, my friends, is indeed classic Weber. If only he didn't take himself so seriously.
Thursday, May 1, 2008
Pat Metheny on Kenny G.
(Note: A little background is in order here. This scathing essay was written by Pat Metheny in response to a question posted by a reader on Metheny's Web site. It is dated as being posted on 5 June 2000. At the time, Pat believed his response would be read only by a few fans visiting his site, but it was soon circulating worldwide. It was picked up by readers and editors of The New York Times and Harper's Magazine to name but a few. The gist of Mr. Metheny's essay is that if we are to refer to Kenny Gorelick as a serious jazz musician and all that that encompasses, then he should be held to the same lofty standards that all jazz musicians, critics and aficionados use to gauge all world-class musicians and artists. When Pat hears Kenny's lame sax noodling over Louis Armstrong's "What a Wonderful World", he becomes apoplectic.)– CM
Kenny G is not a musician I really had much of an opinion about at all until recently. There was not much about the way he played that interested me one way or the other either live or on records.
I first heard him a number of years ago playing as a sideman with Jeff Lorber when they opened a concert for my band. My impression was that he was someone who had spent a fair amount of time listening to the more pop oriented sax players of that time, like Grover Washington or David Sanborn, but was not really an advanced player, even in that style. He had major rhythmic problems and his harmonic and melodic vocabulary was extremely limited, mostly to pentatonic based and blues-lick derived patterns, and he basically exhibited only a rudimentary understanding of how to function as a professional soloist in an ensemble - Lorber was basically playing him off the bandstand in terms of actual music.
But he did show a knack for connecting to the basest impulses of the large crowd by deploying his two or three most effective licks (holding long notes and playing fast runs - never mind that there were lots of harmonic clams in them) at the key moments to elicit a powerful crowd reaction (over and over again). The other main thing I noticed was that he also, as he does to this day, played horribly out of tune - consistently sharp.
Of course, I am aware of what he has played since, the success it has had, and the controversy that has surrounded him among musicians and serious listeners. This controversy seems to be largely fueled by the fact that he sells an enormous amount of records while not being anywhere near a really great player in relation to the standards that have been set on his instrument over the past sixty or seventy years. And honestly, there is no small amount of envy involved from musicians who see one of their fellow players doing so well financially, especially when so many of them who are far superior as improvisors and musicians in general have trouble just making a living. There must be hundreds, if not thousands of sax players around the world who are simply better improvising musicians than Kenny G on his chosen instruments. It would really surprise me if even he disagreed with that statement.
Having said that, it has gotten me to thinking lately why so many jazz musicians (myself included, given the right "bait" of a question, as I will explain later) and audiences have gone so far as to say that what he is playing is not even jazz at all. Stepping back for a minute, if we examine the way he plays, especially if one can remove the actual improvising from the often mundane background environment that it is delivered in, we see that his saxophone style is in fact clearly in the tradition of the kind of playing that most reasonably objective listeners WOULD normally quantify as being jazz. It's just that as jazz or even as music in a general sense, with these standards in mind, it is simply not up to the level of playing that we historically associate with professional improvising musicians. So, lately I have been advocating that we go ahead and just include it under the word jazz - since pretty much of the rest of the world OUTSIDE of the jazz community does anyway - and let the chips fall where they may.
And after all, why he should be judged by any other standard, why he should be exempt from that that all other serious musicians on his instrument are judged by if they attempt to use their abilities in an improvisational context playing with a rhythm section as he does? He SHOULD be compared to John Coltrane or Wayne Shorter, for instance, on his abilities (or lack thereof) to play the soprano saxophone and his success (or lack thereof) at finding a way to deploy that instrument in an ensemble in order to accurately gauge his abilities and put them in the context of his instrument's legacy and potential.
As a composer of even eighth note based music, he SHOULD be compared to Herbie Hancock, Horace Silver or even Grover Washington. Suffice it to say, on all above counts, at this point in his development, he wouldn't fare well.
But, like I said at the top, this relatively benign view was all "until recently".
Not long ago, Kenny G put out a recording where he overdubbed himself on top of a 30+ year old Louis Armstrong record, the track "What a Wonderful World". With this single move, Kenny G became one of the few people on earth I can say that I really can't use at all - as a man, for his incredible arrogance to even consider such a thing, and as a musician, for presuming to share the stage with the single most important figure in our music.
This type of musical necrophilia - the technique of overdubbing on the preexisting tracks of already dead performers - was weird when Natalie Cole did it with her dad on "Unforgettable" a few years ago, but it was her dad. When Tony Bennett did it with Billie Holiday it was bizarre, but we are talking about two of the greatest singers of the 20th century who were on roughly the same level of artistic accomplishment. When Larry Coryell presumed to overdub himself on top of a Wes Montgomery track, I lost a lot of the respect that I ever had for him - and I have to seriously question the fact that I did have respect for someone who could turn out to have such unbelievably bad taste and be that disrespectful to one of my personal heroes.
But when Kenny G decided that it was appropriate for him to defile the music of the man who is probably the greatest jazz musician that has ever lived by spewing his lame-ass, jive, pseudo bluesy, out-of-tune, noodling, wimped out, fucked up playing all over one of the great Louis's tracks (even one of his lesser ones), he did something that I would not have imagined possible. He, in one move, through his unbelievably pretentious and calloused musical decision to embark on this most cynical of musical paths, shit all over the graves of all the musicians past and present who have risked their lives by going out there on the road for years and years developing their own music inspired by the standards of grace that Louis Armstrong brought to every single note he played over an amazing lifetime as a musician. By disrespecting Louis, his legacy and by default, everyone who has ever tried to do something positive with improvised music and what it can be, Kenny G has created a new low point in modern culture - something that we all should be totally embarrassed about - and afraid of. We ignore this, "let it slide", at our own peril.
His callous disregard for the larger issues of what this crass gesture implies is exacerbated by the fact that the only reason he possibly have for doing something this inherently wrong (on both human and musical terms) was for the record sales and the money it would bring.
Since that record came out - in protest, as insignificant as it may be, I encourage everyone to boycott Kenny G recordings, concerts and anything he is associated with. If asked about Kenny G, I will dissmis him and his music with the same passion that is in evidence in this little essay.
Normally, I feel that musicians all have a hard enough time, regardless of their level, just trying to play good and don't really benefit from public criticism, particularly from their fellow players. but, this is different.
There ARE some things that are sacred - and amongst any musician that has ever attempted to address jazz at even the most basic of levels, Louis Armstrong and his music is hallowed ground. To ignore this trespass is to agree that NOTHING any musician has attempted to do with their life in music has any intrinsic value - and I refuse to do that. (I am also amazed that there HASN'T already been an outcry against this among music critics - where ARE they on this?????!?!?!?!, magazines, etc.). Everything I said here is exactly the same as what I would say to Gorelick if I ever saw him in person. and if I ever DO see him anywhere, at any function - he WILL get a piece of my mind and (maybe a guitar wrapped around his head).
Kenny G is not a musician I really had much of an opinion about at all until recently. There was not much about the way he played that interested me one way or the other either live or on records.
I first heard him a number of years ago playing as a sideman with Jeff Lorber when they opened a concert for my band. My impression was that he was someone who had spent a fair amount of time listening to the more pop oriented sax players of that time, like Grover Washington or David Sanborn, but was not really an advanced player, even in that style. He had major rhythmic problems and his harmonic and melodic vocabulary was extremely limited, mostly to pentatonic based and blues-lick derived patterns, and he basically exhibited only a rudimentary understanding of how to function as a professional soloist in an ensemble - Lorber was basically playing him off the bandstand in terms of actual music.
But he did show a knack for connecting to the basest impulses of the large crowd by deploying his two or three most effective licks (holding long notes and playing fast runs - never mind that there were lots of harmonic clams in them) at the key moments to elicit a powerful crowd reaction (over and over again). The other main thing I noticed was that he also, as he does to this day, played horribly out of tune - consistently sharp.
Of course, I am aware of what he has played since, the success it has had, and the controversy that has surrounded him among musicians and serious listeners. This controversy seems to be largely fueled by the fact that he sells an enormous amount of records while not being anywhere near a really great player in relation to the standards that have been set on his instrument over the past sixty or seventy years. And honestly, there is no small amount of envy involved from musicians who see one of their fellow players doing so well financially, especially when so many of them who are far superior as improvisors and musicians in general have trouble just making a living. There must be hundreds, if not thousands of sax players around the world who are simply better improvising musicians than Kenny G on his chosen instruments. It would really surprise me if even he disagreed with that statement.
Having said that, it has gotten me to thinking lately why so many jazz musicians (myself included, given the right "bait" of a question, as I will explain later) and audiences have gone so far as to say that what he is playing is not even jazz at all. Stepping back for a minute, if we examine the way he plays, especially if one can remove the actual improvising from the often mundane background environment that it is delivered in, we see that his saxophone style is in fact clearly in the tradition of the kind of playing that most reasonably objective listeners WOULD normally quantify as being jazz. It's just that as jazz or even as music in a general sense, with these standards in mind, it is simply not up to the level of playing that we historically associate with professional improvising musicians. So, lately I have been advocating that we go ahead and just include it under the word jazz - since pretty much of the rest of the world OUTSIDE of the jazz community does anyway - and let the chips fall where they may.
And after all, why he should be judged by any other standard, why he should be exempt from that that all other serious musicians on his instrument are judged by if they attempt to use their abilities in an improvisational context playing with a rhythm section as he does? He SHOULD be compared to John Coltrane or Wayne Shorter, for instance, on his abilities (or lack thereof) to play the soprano saxophone and his success (or lack thereof) at finding a way to deploy that instrument in an ensemble in order to accurately gauge his abilities and put them in the context of his instrument's legacy and potential.
As a composer of even eighth note based music, he SHOULD be compared to Herbie Hancock, Horace Silver or even Grover Washington. Suffice it to say, on all above counts, at this point in his development, he wouldn't fare well.
But, like I said at the top, this relatively benign view was all "until recently".
Not long ago, Kenny G put out a recording where he overdubbed himself on top of a 30+ year old Louis Armstrong record, the track "What a Wonderful World". With this single move, Kenny G became one of the few people on earth I can say that I really can't use at all - as a man, for his incredible arrogance to even consider such a thing, and as a musician, for presuming to share the stage with the single most important figure in our music.
This type of musical necrophilia - the technique of overdubbing on the preexisting tracks of already dead performers - was weird when Natalie Cole did it with her dad on "Unforgettable" a few years ago, but it was her dad. When Tony Bennett did it with Billie Holiday it was bizarre, but we are talking about two of the greatest singers of the 20th century who were on roughly the same level of artistic accomplishment. When Larry Coryell presumed to overdub himself on top of a Wes Montgomery track, I lost a lot of the respect that I ever had for him - and I have to seriously question the fact that I did have respect for someone who could turn out to have such unbelievably bad taste and be that disrespectful to one of my personal heroes.
But when Kenny G decided that it was appropriate for him to defile the music of the man who is probably the greatest jazz musician that has ever lived by spewing his lame-ass, jive, pseudo bluesy, out-of-tune, noodling, wimped out, fucked up playing all over one of the great Louis's tracks (even one of his lesser ones), he did something that I would not have imagined possible. He, in one move, through his unbelievably pretentious and calloused musical decision to embark on this most cynical of musical paths, shit all over the graves of all the musicians past and present who have risked their lives by going out there on the road for years and years developing their own music inspired by the standards of grace that Louis Armstrong brought to every single note he played over an amazing lifetime as a musician. By disrespecting Louis, his legacy and by default, everyone who has ever tried to do something positive with improvised music and what it can be, Kenny G has created a new low point in modern culture - something that we all should be totally embarrassed about - and afraid of. We ignore this, "let it slide", at our own peril.
His callous disregard for the larger issues of what this crass gesture implies is exacerbated by the fact that the only reason he possibly have for doing something this inherently wrong (on both human and musical terms) was for the record sales and the money it would bring.
Since that record came out - in protest, as insignificant as it may be, I encourage everyone to boycott Kenny G recordings, concerts and anything he is associated with. If asked about Kenny G, I will dissmis him and his music with the same passion that is in evidence in this little essay.
Normally, I feel that musicians all have a hard enough time, regardless of their level, just trying to play good and don't really benefit from public criticism, particularly from their fellow players. but, this is different.
There ARE some things that are sacred - and amongst any musician that has ever attempted to address jazz at even the most basic of levels, Louis Armstrong and his music is hallowed ground. To ignore this trespass is to agree that NOTHING any musician has attempted to do with their life in music has any intrinsic value - and I refuse to do that. (I am also amazed that there HASN'T already been an outcry against this among music critics - where ARE they on this?????!?!?!?!, magazines, etc.). Everything I said here is exactly the same as what I would say to Gorelick if I ever saw him in person. and if I ever DO see him anywhere, at any function - he WILL get a piece of my mind and (maybe a guitar wrapped around his head).
Wednesday, April 30, 2008
Boy, I wish I had written this...
This trenchant and hilarious piece is from one of my favorite Web sites The Onion.
You must check it out.
Please, don't for a moment think that I'm advocating violence. I am not.
I am, however, advocating good writing and this is an excellent example. Bonus that it is extraordinarily funny.
http://www.theonion.com/content/node/28459
Dog Day Afternoon
Here's a humorous anecdote... (Well, you decide.)
LOUISVILLE – My friend M. attempted to break up a dog fight between his son's pitbull-mix and his neighbor's mongrel a few weeks ago.
The dogs won.
Those who know M. know that he's quite fond of his potato squeezin's. I'm not implying that M. is at fault, but often when we drink, we make poor choices.
M. instinctively, albeit unwisely, used his hand and arm to disengage the two raging canines and the pitbull-mix, Larry, made short work of ripping into his hand to the tune of fifty some-odd stitches. Because the dog caught a taste of human blood, namely M's blood, the Animal Control Center by law had to take possession of the dog Larry and place it in quarantine for a number of days.
Apparently, once in the custody of the ACC, the dog blew a .08 on the breathalyzer, which is the legal limit in the Commonwealth of Kentucky.
Thursday, April 24, 2008
The obligatory family photo
My niece, Patricia, with her grandparents (my parents), Jan and Ken Martin.
At last: Khakis that really fit the Bills
(Note: This article was originally published in The Courier-Journal Saturday SCENE on January 13, 2001. The column was entitled "The Best: A Continuing Search for the Best of Everything" – CM)
To be sure, I can’t remember the last time I sported denim blues in favor of the classic, relaxed nonchalance of khakis. They’re roomier, nattier and, to my mind, seem to elicit a sartorially correct nod from those who appreciate a certain style.
Caveat emptor. All khakis are not created equal.
Take it from me. Over the years I’ve tossed away countless hundreds of dollars on inferior-quality khaki trousers cut from cloths so gossamer-thin you could wrap cheese in them. Many were hastily sewn together to prove perpetually ill fitting and looked as though they would make an unwelcome addition to the rag basket after six months of regular laundering. Within months, cuff folds tatter and fray, inseams rip, pockets mysteriously develop holes and become detached.
And, mind you, these were trousers purchased from high-end, mainstream retailers, designed and marketed by designers so well known that my 6-year-old niece is familiar with their latest fashion offerings. All met with the same unremarkable, premature demise.
Alas, no longer. I’ve discovered the king kahuna of khakis – Bills Khakis.
Apparently, I’ve not been alone in my quest for the superior khaki. In 1984, a college student, Bill Thomas, tired and frustrated of buying cheap, throwaway khakis, stumbled upon vintage World War II khakis for $12 a pair from an Army-Navy store. He liked them because they were made from heavy cotton cloth with deep pockets and resonated with the simplicity and quality of an era long past.
(Khakis are a product of British colonialism in the 1840s. British officers, while stationed in India, would dye their white ducks and cotton pajamas with a tawny-colored plant extract, mud and tea to create a uniform more suitable to the climate and better to match the sands. The actual word “khaki” is derived from the Hindu and Urdu word for “earth” or “dust colored.”)
Six months later, the surplus store’s stock was sold out and had no prospect of getting more.
Instinctively, Thomas knew that if he was searching for quintessential khakis, then there must be others searching, too. Just months before starting a job as an advertising copywriter at Chicago ad agency, Thomas found a manufacturing plant in Pennsylvania to produce 250 pairs of pants from his own design. He sold them from the trunk of his car for $59. He soon sold out.
By 1990, he had his startup business with only $10,000 in capital. By 1991, Bills Khakis had produced 350 pairs and was beginning to sell them to upscale retailers. Today, Bills Khakis in Reading, Pa., produces more than 100,000 pairs. The product is sold in more than 400 stores nationwide. Bills Khakis are worn by such exacting consumers as David Letterman and Bill Gates.
What makes Bills the daddy of khaki?
Bills Khakis are constructed from heavy 8.5-ounce cotton twill. They possess drill cloth pockets that seem to run almost knee deep. They’re roomy. They’re comfortable. They’re stylish. They meet rigorous quality control standards and sport twill seams, heavy brass zippers and horn buttons. They are lavish in a crumpled, casual way.
When I purchased my first two pairs of Bills Khakis, the salesperson told me upfront that they would quickly become my favorite khakis. Well, he was right. All other khakis in my wardrobe have been summarily relegated to the second string – the back of the closet. After more than a year of repeated wearing and washing, my Bills show little sign of giving up the ghost any time soon. They still look, feel and fit great.
If you’re like me and disdain the wasted effort and money invested in replacing your longstanding favorites, you’ll appreciate the consistency, solid workmanship and value of Bills. You’ll be comfortable. You’ll be happy. Bills, moreover, come with a 100 percent guarantee.
You can find Bills Khakis locally at The Fashion Post and Rodes. They retail for about $90 per pair.
Worth every penny.
– Christopher Martin
He's cut from a different cloth.
Don't get me started on this ... This really grinds my gears... (Thanks to Peter Griffin, Family Guy)
Throughout the past eight years of the Bush mal-administration, I've been giving our world, our planet quite a lot of thought.
• The Americanization of world cultures. I find it truly disturbing what is happening in India (Mumbai, Delhi, Varanasi or Chenai). I suppose the same is happening throughout China and much of Asia as well. Sadly, it's not only about food. (According to NOVA, PBS, Beijing, once a town of bicyclists, is now surrounded by beltways and over run with internal combustion engines.)
• Cooking our planet. The politicization of science. Wow.
• Music. What the hell is going on here? Talent is no longer a factor; apparently, it is now entirely market-driven. Kids, root through your parents' closets and find some of their The Beatles lps. They were extraordinary. Hear why.
• Bush, once again, is threatening to sign legislation permitting oil exploration and drilling in the Alaskan National Wildlife Preserve. In his way of thinking, this will lessen America's dependence on foreign providers and reliance on those who "just don't like us." One sagacious senator likened Bush's logic as akin to leveling Mt. Everest in order to obtain gravel for paving your driveway.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
