this is the thread where Flamencology answers my questions about Ken Burns' Jazz

Flamencology said:
I haven't watched that recently - it's been a few years - but, IIRC, what pissed me off most was its coverage of the AACM. Maybe Ornette, too, I don't remember.
Click to expand...
Why is that? Because they spent so much time on it that could have been shared with other just as worthy topics?
 
Gary Blanchard said:
If I am not mistaken (though I frequently am), Wynton Marsalis was deeply involved in this documentary, and he is known to have very strong views as to what constitutes jazz. Probably had a lot to do with what Mark reported on the last episode.

That would be like having me as an advisor on a program on Americana. :grin:
Click to expand...

It's very Marsalis and Friends. There are lots of strong voices, but Marsalis suggested like-minded ones, for the most part.

There are some really great exceptions, though.
 
Mark Wein said:
meh. I could do without it in this context.
Click to expand...

I wasn't being honest, just fucking with the trolls. :wink:

I need to watch the series again. Even though I grew up with jazz playing in the house, it has such a deep history and is so complex, I find myself discovering new layers in songs I've listened to many times throughout life. Diving into the series will likely feel new in some ways as my appreciation evolves.
 
Mark Wein said:
Why is that? Because they spent so much time on it that could have been shared with other just as worthy topics?
Click to expand...

No, the AACM is fantastic, and has produced oodles of brilliant music over a half-century. The documentary totally disparages them. They're a pillar of Chicago culture, and the voice-over is like "that music was only really embraced by college kids in Europe."

A Power Stronger Than Itself is a great history of the AACM, and well-worth reading. I'd probably put it on a "best jazz books ever" list.
 
Flamencology said:
I haven't, but I'll check it out.
Click to expand...
For someone like you, it may be somewhat superficial. Maybe akin to a community college treatment of the subject. He also will spend time explaining some musical concepts and terms as he knows his listeners may not all be musicians. I think he seems pretty open minded and fair. He also has a logical and seemingly well thought out way of presenting things. And seems to truly love the music, and to give insights into particular artists, who their influences were, where their styles came, etc. Same with different styles of jazz. He is always tracking it back to somewhere.
 
Also, I took an introductory history of jazz course at the University of Washington back in the 80's. I have to admit that due to extracurricular activities that term, I did not pay as close attention in class as I should have and recall dosing off as the professor played examples for us. I could have and should have learned more back then, but ended up relying on the cliff notes you could purchase to study for exams rather than gaining the deeper understanding I could have had I applied myself.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top