's strange, but "with all the problems we have," the figure and the music of Louis Armstrong affected some readers of a specialized forum, pushing me to a small controversy in defense of criticism and freedom of culture. fact I had read that the "bad press" in critical enjoyed the great Louis in recent decades would be - no less - because of a "critical intellectual, theoretical, pedantic, misleading, morally harmful, ignorant, politicized and perhaps (we added for good measure)" left ".
imagine, I have always criticized - in newspaper articles and not in the living room - the small faction of the pseudo-critical nourished only by ideology rather than cosmetic, short-style Seventies, "praising the militant affiliation or intentions and social policies (often only the song title ...) the musician, most of the music that he actually played. The same curious for which the saxophonist Archie Shepp enjoyed for many years in Italy, and only in Italy - while had little success in the United States - was perhaps caused by a detail of his resume: he had written a book entitled The Communist .
Besides, those were times when raising a clenched fist at the end of the song led to great applause in the audience of the Festival, despite the awkward modesty of a musician.
But this time, the controversy sull'Armstrong smaller than the decline, as opposed to the genius of the 20s ( Hot Five and Hot Seven , and contributions to the orchestra of Fletcher Henderson and others) not a word was spent on an expert member of the anti-party criticism and fool the fans in sull'imbarazzo that caused the most cultured and critical il vecchio Louis, con i suoi vocalizzi grotteschi ormai autoreferenziali (che se li avesse prodotti un cantante esordiente al Savoy Ballroom negli anni Trenta, sarebbe stato licenziato su due piedi), il macchiettismo deteriore da circo e il trito cliché dei duetti canori. Per tacere della canzoncina di Sanremo. E spesso, spiace dirlo, si trattava di mediocre musica leggera, della più commerciale.
Perciò non capisco come qualcuno possa ironizzare su certi osannati musicisti italiani, e non parlo dei bravi Bollani o Fresu, ma del già "vecchio mito" Rava, anch'egli trombettista. Imputare al povero Rava, per di più anziano, che più di tanto non aveva potuto dare neanche da giovane per ben noti limiti tecnici e stilistici, what you do not have the courage to charge the rich ex-genius Armstrong?
But another insidious aspect of counter-criticism comes forward. Not wanting to "reduce" Satchmo at his best decade, arguing that it would be good even in the very long period of his artistic decline, but from 1940 onwards, it is never clearly stated dell'Armstrong a reassessment of the decline, with the excuse of ' observation of the musician and human biography in its entirety. Would in itself a sort of "review", a "revisionist" historical and aesthetic, so a movement to some extent "read". As evidence, however, does not bring new music files, but just the fact that journalism has once again care for Louis. But enough?
"The large volume of Giddins [" Satchmo: The Genius of Louis Armstrong "] marked the start of a new critical interest around the figure of Armstrong - writes the critic Luca Conti, who has since been further strengthened the publication of two very different products, " Louis Armstrong: An Extravagant Life " Laurence Berggreen (1997) and the recent, remarkable " Pops: A Life of Louis Armstrong" Terry Teachout. The latter, in particular , draws huge collection of tapes from the same engraved privately Armstrong finished and now in the custody of Queens College; tapes in which Louis spoke for hours and hours of all what came into his head and revealing a man far different from the published handed down through the decades. In short, the criticism on Armstrong has made great strides in recent times, and it is no longer possible to think that we can assess the trumpeter according to the criteria in force in the fifties and sixties. "Thus ended the accounts.
But, I I ask and ask: "new critical interest" only because out of the books? As a writer, known to journalists and professional writers (think of the prolific and versatile Giddins) are made to write books. not always mean that the critics have found new documents music and why you changed your mind, not on life but on the music of Louis. So not a short book of 200 pages full of photos. And finally, what would be, if you please, the "new policy" of the updated critical sull'Armstrong of "Hello Dolly " or Sanremo?
On the other hand, as in all periods of decline, when lack of shared culture and ideas of reference, it is fashionable to "revise" or even try to rehabilitate the Bourbons. So I wonder if anyone tried to raise the declining part of the asymmetrical curve Armstrong quickly steep uphill and a long slow-down.
I just finished reading a new biography of Cavour, which highlights previously unknown correspondence and personal letters that outline in a slightly different way its relations with other politicians of Parliament transalpino. Benissimo. Ecco un pretesto per una piccola rivisazione critica.
Ma l'equivalente per una rivisazione critica d'un musicista come Armstrong (e in un jazzista, è noto, l'unico vero documento è, ben più di diari, interviste, foto, testimonianze o spartiti, la registrazione sonora, su lacca, cartone cerato, a filo o su nastro o su vinile, che dir si voglia) sarebbe il ritrovamento miracoloso in un baule di qualche decina di reperti del genere fatti da un musicologo o ricco amatore dal vivo, durante le esecuzioni ufficiali o - che so - after hours o in jam sessions in locali pubblici e privati.
Ma finché queste impossibili prove di un Armstrong "segreto e diverso" dal 1930 al 1970 circa non verranno prodotte, shall bear the state of the art of historical criticism thus established, supported by trained ears for most of us fans.
And on the basis of the hundreds of conclusive evidence that the records we have, it appears that confirmation of what we know for some time. A Genius of the melodic rhythm and, among many other virtues, even the supreme synthesis (in seconds every time, let's say, instead of many minutes you would then be taken, thanks to the long-playing technology, from the musicians' hard-bop on, not to mention the "slowness" of Coltrane and others). And the art is also able to synthesize so brilliant, so often - vulgarized - what is little more than what which is great, as it is easier to find a more perfect short story of a long novel (see EA Poe, Cross and vexed question of the Divine Comedy, etc.). But a genius
ephemeral. Why start now to limit their physical and intellectual (is not that it was an eagle ... ... eehm) and sins of his advisers, a decline with highs and lows that had a disastrous long agony, whose "quiet is beautiful. "
So I've always loved that very young Louis (from Hot Five and Seven , Henderson's orchestra, etc.), already 16 years I was ashamed literally, with a shiver of embarrassment unbearable, listening to some of its outputs voice or duets or solo instruments. And I will not mention the song in Sanremo.
Well, so much great music on the first floor Louis that each operation aims to upgrade the second musically, aesthetically and historically impossible besides, it would be a waste. Would not be worth the effort. The Genius of Louis can also afford an unseemly decadence, from commercial pop music and even the best. You know how it is in mass society: you get used to the beautiful as ugly. If you have a name. And if someone has elected to Myth. Therefore, in humans exist (should be) the critical function.
.
PS. For supreme honesty (a little 'narcissistic, perhaps, but still better than being dishonest) I remind myself and all that many years ago, a critic, I wrote an article apparently contrary to what I just said, very polemic against the "mania romantic emphasis, that the habit of considering the history of jazz a mere sequence of genes, Sacred Monsters, Super-artists, prima donnas, etc. of superior individuals. Typical of Romanticism. But a low level is a handy Shortcut to reporters and titlists. A classic: a jazz musician dies? Well, certainly the Father of Jazz is dead, the king of the trumpet or the saxophone or the "clarinet" (sic). Possible, I wondered, that everyone (in life or after death) were kings, counts, emperors, presidents, dukes? And the soldiers, the Sidemen, the musicians in common? Granted, the ads, but ... "criticism"? I meant with that challenge, to be secular and rational, cut the legs of the Myths, and also re-evaluate the routine, the jazz standard every day, the many interpretations Replay or, the honest and hard working dignitori jazz musicians in the mainstream (old , ie, swing, modern, or hard-bop) without invent or innovate anything, just keeping the connective tissue but the DNA of jazz, for future reference.
Well, by examination of conscience, but can not see a contradiction to my position on Armstrong. In fact, no jokes about his genius, without question, but rather on the ... brevity of its duration. Also because l'ex grande Louis durante la lunga decandenza non fu un anonimo ma dignitoso uomo di fila di orchestre mainstream, ma, sul piano strettamente musicale, molto, molto meno.
.
JAZZ. Il Grande Louis Armstrong in Potato Head Blues (con gli Hot Seven, 1927). In alternativa lo si può ascoltare qui , come ai suoi tempi, da un disco a 78 giri su un giradischi meccanico non amplificato dell'epoca. Si noterà, intanto, la coralità del jazz di quegli anni, che ancora ricorda la banda. Il solismo infatti è molto limitato: a suonare non è un solista o un gruppo di solisti, ma un collettivo. E com'è coeso, elastico e dialogante al suo interno, questo collettivo! Spicca, però, la centralità della tromba di Armstrong, soprattutto nel secondo, inimitabile, assolo, genialmente condotto come un curioso call and response con i break dell'orchestra. In questo come in altri brani con gli Hot Five e Hot Seven, Armstrong ha un fraseggio rapido, potente, fantasioso, essenziale, insieme melodico e profondamente ritmico, che letteralmente conduce e domina l'orchestra. Nulla di tutto ciò si ritroverà nei decenni bui dell'estrema decadenza, quando impietosamente le ragioni del business Myth and forced him to tread the boards again. 40 years later (but they seem percent), here is the painful and sibizione San Remo Song Festival in 1968 ( I like to sing ), where any amateur singer and trumpeter of the province would do much better. But the embarrassment of lovers of jazz with the reasons you said the "show", in short event. We there really ashamed, and for years, partly because Armstrong reinforces the old myth that the jazz subculture was nothing but a pop music performed in a somewhat 'different and aesthetic criteria of sleeves (eg. In. .. singing). These and other even the worst falls in more commercial Kitsch (because the dull mass-man without taste bad taste "sells") never forgave not the former great Louis Armstrong, genius just 20 years, and then brainwashed for 40 years from eyes manager, cynical journalists and record incensed, if only for the need to still have the "character".
0 comments:
Post a Comment