Bredonborough Today there is a
18.03
Bredonborough.
Today, there is a wedding in Seattle between two members of the Seattle Circle. Hooray!
In Bredonborough, a blowy, raining morning. To the newly redecorated Blower’s with the Weekend FT I…
II...
Morning skies begin to clear – a little I…
II...
III...
IV...
V...
Afternoon reading at HQ followed by e-flurrying.
Afternoon skies I…
II...
III...
This is the first day I feel human, following the return from Seattle, albeit fragile.
20.24 Practising.
Back to e-flurrying & computing. To be filed under Kicking The Wasps’ Nest: Polemic…
News-linked from Billy B by The Sidney on the DGM site…
The pungent aroma of revisionism…
Posted by Bill: Friday November 13th 2009
…is once again in the air. You know-King Crimson / Progressive rock / the Impressionists / the Pre-Raphaelites were brilliant, then crap, and then brilliant again. We ‘creatives’ are all hanging around for so long now that we can guarantee to see at least three or four of these shifts from the warm sunlight of acceptance to the drafty damp of disapproval and back again in our lifetimes. Pity the poor creative who died young in penury – if only he could have hung on for the surround-sound remaster and the deluge of fashionably revisionist reviews that once again hail the quality of the artwork.
Someone called Paul McGee at the Word Magazine tells us: “Listening to it now (King Crimson’s music) I can’t quite believe I was ever daft enough to denounce something this good: so much for the unwavering certainty of youth. All of which goes to show that, sometimes, the process of critical re-evaluation is simply a matter of admitting you were wrong” How true, Paul, how true. No problem at all really, except the poor bloody musicians who’d had the temerity in the first place to produce this thing you like / loathe / like / loathe, has to suffer the onslaught of the barbed pen with no right of reply until you make up your mind that, actually, we were OK after all. Thanks a lot! Which all goes to show that, as is well known, the review of the art work too often tell us more about the reviewer than the thing he’s reviewing.
The history of the period’s (primarily) English music writers is waiting to be written; but most likely not by a music writer. The nastiness, unkindness & hostility towards a category of players, presumed guilty until found guilty, might usefully be explained. One of the criticisms directed towards a player, the relevance of which escaped me, was premature balding. What? How does that effect anyone’s playing? (Fortunately, I had enough hair to escape criticism on this count). What? How? Why?
Good for Mr. McGee that he feels able to admit to error, but this does not undo the damage, nor limit ongoing repercussions from the received-conventional-wisdom established by a generation of writers lacking courtesy & objectivity, while well-fitted with an arrogance in inverse proportion to impartial commentary. These were writers writing about themselves, and they didn’t seem to like very much what they saw.
Fairly recently, one well-regarded US writer referred disparagingly to bands like King Crimson and Emerson, Lake & Palmer. To put this in perspective, ELP were never like KC. Another recent US writer recently commented very favourably on Red while contrasting it to the abomination of ITCOTCK. What? Something has escaped the ears of this man.
Hey! I liked Lester Bangs! He was funny & wore his prejudices honestly. I even saw Lester singing with a rock group. Lester was terrible & he acknowledged it: he had woman problems & got drunk. Lester could be negative, but somehow positively so. Lester was not English.
John Bungey has noted previous comments of mine on the music press, which have perhaps amused him. It would amuse me if John might explain the English music press of the period so that I can better understand what it was about. It was not much about music.
Continuing along from this…
The Revealing Science of Rude Audience Behaviour
:: Posted by lotusspray on November 13, 2009
… the following has come to my attention.
November 2nd, 2009
This Day in PROG History(Marking the first entry in a series of posts by this name. You know, maybe.)
On this day* in 1973, progressive rock fans got a short refresher course in the strangeness of Robert Fripp.
During a King Crimson concert at the University of Texas at Arlington, guitarist and bandleader Robert Fripp emerged for a moment from the shadows at stage left, where he lurks in darkness as a way of drawing attention to himself, and approached John Wetton’s microphone.
Since in the normal course of events Fripp does not talk to the audience, he does not require his own microphone. So the fact that he’s now emerging from both darkness and (vocal) silence suggests we’re in for a pronouncement of some significance.
(King Crimson in Toronto, 1974. Fripp not shown.)
The audience members, like good Texans, have themselves been rather vocal this night, a hootin’ and a hollerin’ like they will, including it would seem, issuing cries for the band to play louder.
King Crimson was known during this era in particular, for their mastery of dynamics, their tendency to build slowly from small beginnings up to “barrage” level. Lark’s Tongues in Aspic Part One comes to mind as the seminal example of this, being the first track on the first album of their 1970’s incarnation. The song builds slowly but relentlessly up to a highly-focused, highly-organized sonic assault. But, like the proverbial frog in the cooking pot, being brought slowly to the boil, maybe the Texans didn’t notice it happening?
In any case, I can only imagine the Texas crowd was not so much asking them to play louder, as asking them to play louder more often. They don’t like them quiet parts. Quiet parts are for sissies, like Canadians.
So Robert Fripp takes the microphone from the much taller Wetton’s mic stand, and delivers this pronouncement in his precise, upper-class Dorset accent: “I have heard requests that we should play louder….May I suggest instead that you might listen more attentively?”
Whereupon he returns to his stool, his throne of darkness, perhaps leaving some to mutter to themselves: “listen a-what-ively?”
This interchange was made famous on a bootleg recording released on vinyl back in the day, which is how I am able to pretend I was actually there. Also, having attended several shows from this period (see photo above), I can channel my memories of those shows into extra realism.
The recording is also available for download from the DGM website. Along with just about every second of every performance the band ever gave. Making me think those rumours may actually have been true, that Fripp would show up at the homes of advertised bootleggers, demanding they hand over his intellectual property.
*One last thing: for the purposes of this article, “this day” in PROG history was actually October 06. But let’s not split hairs.
This is reminiscent of many fan interchanges & ET postings; and shares with them a number of similarities that may conveniently be described as thoughtwaves wafting from The Basement. From time to time it is useful to remind myself of what life is like in that awful state & condition, which I know too well. But, useful also to be reminded that we are held accountable for our public declarations & are responsible for them, however dopey they may be. This online Diary is one example of engaging as a pointed stick. The internet is a remarkable opportunity for developing community in a more-than-trivial way; participation requires due respect for its power & repercussings and a willingness to accept responsibility for how we participate.
Judging from his blog pix, Mr. Daniel has a genial appearance; I would be surprised if he were unkind to animals and/or pulled the wings off small flying creatures. Nevertheless, his posting is rude, unkind & impressively uninformed. It typifies the tone & attitude that has characterized much of the fan commentary (and press reportage during the Golden Years) over 30-35 years during which touring as a working player was the centre of my professional life. Mr. Daniel’s blog is most informative, although perhaps not in the way he intended.
RGD: On this day * in 1973, progressive rock fans got a short refresher course in the strangeness of Robert Fripp.
RF: Mr. Daniel’s asterisk indicates that the day he refers to is October 6th. 1973 & that his blog titled On This Day for November 2nd. is for the purpose of (his) article sufficiently accurate. The difference is only 3 weeks & 6 days. For Mr. Daniel perhaps, you don’t get much closer than that.
RGD: During a King Crimson concert at the University of Texas at Arlington, guitarist and bandleader Robert Fripp emerged for a moment from the shadows at stage left, where he lurks in darkness…
RF: Throughout KC touring between 1969-74, in 3 live incarnations of the Crimson Beast, the guitarist was as well lit as anyone; this governed by the choices of the Lighting Person. The pic that Mr. Daniels uses, where Fripp is not shown, is a pic where Fripp is not shown. Recently on the
DGM Site an image, courtesy of Philippe de Louraille, from March 23, 1974 at the Salle Vallier, Marseilles where we have this picture of Fripp lurking in the spotlight…
If this is the guitarist lurking in darkness, then Fripp is doing a pretty poor job of it.
RGD: … as a way of drawing attention to himself…
RF: In the pic above, Fripp seems to have opted to attract attention to himself by hiding in plain sight; even, with a spotlight to help.
Mr. Daniel is correct in suggesting that we all need attention. Kick psychology (in Transactional Analysis) suggests that, if we don’t get positive attention, we attract to ourselves negative attention instead; eg by upsetting others. I saw this for myself on a 3-month retreat at Claymont Court in the Autumn of 1984. The Blind Spot of one of the students was to attract the attention of others by reminding them of negative events. This was an effective technique & it became clear that this was entirely automatic; the student was unaware of their strategy.
Adopting the principle that we attribute to others the motivations we have for ourselves, Mr. Daniel is suggesting that, were he himself to be onstage & sitting in the shadows, it would be to attract attention. Mr. Daniel is therefore claiming an equivalency between his own aims & motivations in life and my own, so closely matched that he can understand & authoritatively explain what it is I have done and for what reasons. Mr. Daniel’s confidence in his powers is impressive.
Mr. Daniel fails, however, to distinguish between different qualities & kinds of attention.
The touring player receives a privileged education in experiencing the power of audient attention, how attention may be attracted, directed and, in some cases, manipulated. It is a very rare audience indeed which has the power, as a singular person / body, of volitional attention; this in distinction to the attention of lotsa audients.
In Guitar Craft, the primary emphasis in beginning-work is on cultivating & training the volitional attention. Students are provided with many opportunities to experience qualitatively different kinds of attending to. Very briefly put, if an audient/audience do not have the power of volitional attention, the quality of attention available to be attracted to oneself is better avoided. The total attention of audients at any event covers a spectrum between dispersed, disruptive, supportive, focused, becoming a Mother To Music, and sometimes dangerous. When audient attention moves outside the specific performance event & is directed to imaginary connections to the band, its members, its music, the repercussions involve varying degrees of fandom: fetishism, fanaticism & fantasy. This / these is all part of the liberal education available to a working player, and worthy of commentary elsewhere. This is not a quality of attention that I need; rather, it is a quality of attention to be avoided.
May I assume that Mr. Daniel feels that, by giving me his attention, my life is in some way richer? Mr. Daniel, on the strength of his blog, doesn’t see me. How therefore can he give me anything?
RGD: …and approached John Wetton’s microphone. Since in the normal course of events Fripp does not talk to the audience, he does not require his own microphone.
RF: As a point of information, in the normal course of events Fripp talked to audiences over much of the period 1969-74; and this deliberately. I was unimpressed by the announcements of other members (clearly a comment on the guitarist, not the announcements of fellow Crims) and set myself to walk forward & speak to the audience/s. And did so, most nights in the 1973-74 band.
If Mr. Daniel is using this one announcement, on this one evening of KC performing, as a singular event & therefore a short refresher course in the strangeness of Robert Fripp he needs to try harder.
Why John Wetton’s mike? For one announcement, setting up a separate microphone took up a separate channel on the desk; and was unnecessary anyway.
RGD: Since in the normal course of events Fripp does not talk to the audience, he does not require his own microphone. So the fact that he’s now emerging from both darkness and (vocal) silence suggests we’re in for a pronouncement of some significance.
RF: To recap:
1. In the normal course of events, Fripp does talk to the audience/s.
2. For this he doesn’t need a separate microphone.
3. Fripp walks from the light & towards JW’s microphone.
4. To speak once more.
Perhaps Mr. Daniel might substantiate his argument further?
RGD: The audience members, like good Texans, have themselves been rather vocal this night, a hootin’ and a hollerin’ like they will, including it would seem, issuing cries for the band to play louder.
King Crimson was known during this era in particular, for their mastery of dynamics, their tendency to build slowly from small beginnings up to “barrage” level. Lark’s Tongues in Aspic Part One comes to mind as the seminal example of this, being the first track on the first album of their 1970’s incarnation. The song builds slowly but relentlessly up to a highly-focused, highly-organized sonic assault. But, like the proverbial frog in the cooking pot, being brought slowly to the boil, maybe the Texans didn’t notice it happening?
In any case, I can only imagine the Texas crowd was not so much asking them to play louder, as asking them to play louder more often. They don’t like them quiet parts.
Quiet parts are for sissies, like Canadians.
RF: Quiet parts are also for bands who use dynamics.
The power of KC surely rests upon it being what is, not on doing what it was paid to do in response to audient–industry-fan demands? That some audiences, and members of the press, missed what was available at the time is / was KC’s responsibility?
RGD: So Robert Fripp takes the microphone from the much taller Wetton’s mic stand, and delivers this pronouncement in his precise, upper-class Dorset accent..
RF: Upper-class and Dorset accent are a contradiction in terms. A Dorset accent cannot be upper class: the two accents are quite different, other than sharing a nominal common vocabulary (as an example, go look for wazzon in RP).
I appreciate that it may be difficult for a non-English ear to understand how one English person can hear the accent of another & know the place of their arising, their education, social & cultural background, area of employment & gross annual income. At least, this was the case 35 years ago. The social, economic, political & cultural changes since the mid-1980s have altered the social matrix, making accent alone an unreliable guide to power-possessing & influence.
RGD: “I have heard requests that we should play louder….May I suggest instead that you might listen more attentively?”
Whereupon he returns to his stool, his throne of darkness…
RF: The Dark Throne in the spotlight?
RGD: perhaps leaving some to mutter to themselves: “listen a-what-ively?”
RF: Mr. Daniel may be suggesting that words of four syllables in the English language provide him with significant challenges; but now he has twice demeaned this particular Texan audience. The first… maybe the Texans didn’t notice it happening?
A working player assumes the virtue in & of any audience, even where long & hard experience provides many examples where audiences do not always quite find the virtue in themselves. But, to assume the ignorance of an audience is one form of death for the player, a contributory element to cynicism.
RGD: This interchange was made famous on a bootleg recording released on vinyl back in the day, which is how I am able to pretend I was actually there.
RF: Wow! That explains a lot.
RGD: Also, having attended several shows from this period (see photo above)…
RF: Perhaps see both photos above?
RGD: …I can channel my memories of those shows into extra realism.
RF: I agree: Mr. Daniel’s memory-channeling is extraordinary.
RGD: The recording is also available for download from the
DGM website. Along with just about every second of every performance the band ever gave. Making me think those rumours may actually have been true, that Fripp would show up at the homes of advertised bootleggers, demanding they hand over his intellectual property.
RF: Hey! That’s a great idea.
RGD: *One last thing: for the purposes of this article, “this day” in PROG history was actually October 06. But let’s not split hairs.
RF: Well, the article is misnamed. But let’s not split hairs: the naming & the date is as accurate as anything else on Mr. Daniel’s blog.
Fripp strange? No argument there. But why is Mr. Daniel unable to explain how & why? What I find strange is that a young player, tone deaf & with no sense of rhythm, brought up to take over his Father’s small real estate firm, might have become a guitarist & player of some prominence, working with several of the leading figures of his generation, and is attracting comment for that work some 52 years to this day of becoming a guitarist, on Christmas Eve, 24th. December 1957. Well, let’s not split hairs: you don’t get much closer than that.
23.18 An evening practicing.
23.41 Yippee! The Minx has returned from Vamping in Bedford. Late gentling ahead.
