Re: promiscuous fusionizers

[Kame'a Media <media...>]

> Henry Sapoznik wrote:
>
> >I think klezmer suffers from both high artification and from the
> promiscuous
> >fusionizers who meld it with music forms they understand far better than
> they
> >do klezmer.
> >IMnotsoHO...
>
> Very well said and right on target.   "Promiscuous fusionizers"

H-mm.  So the creative non-conformist who expresses him/herself witha lot of
personal and contemporary style, and not from an expected  position based on
archived yiddishkayt-in-a-box nostalgia or novelty, is now musically immoral,
too?  Interesting concept.

In my experience, the word "promiscuous" is usually trotted out by the envious
and the vengeful in an attempt to besmirch somebody's character because they
are perceived as having too much or the wrong kind of close interpersonal
contact.
I don't like it.

Please, -- Kabalas, Alan Eder/Pesach Posse, Klezperanto, Neshama, et al.,
keep making more great, original and  "promiscuous" music.

Remember to practice safe sax.

Wolf Krakowski


Kame'a Media
http://www.kamea.com



> - I really
> like that phrase very much.   They are the ones filling up most of the
> concert halls, because where else can such artifice go today?   I can say
> that very little of it is really creative and I have been to the last
> Ashkenaz Festival where some of the best of that was presented.   (There
> was one moment [in the concert of all new compositions] where the noisy
> jazz in the all new compositions program was so annoying that I truly felt
> like throwing a Molotov Cocktail just to stop that pure noise.  I soon
> found out that many others were equally annoyed.)  There are reasons why
> opera companies know that they can present the same operas year after year,
> and theaters succeed in showing revivals and mothers keep on baking the
> same meatloaf for generations or people continue listening to the same
> classical musical repertory.   When people have refined a grammatical form
> to become a classics in that genre, they respect and cherich it.
>
> Reyzl
>
> ----------
> From:  ganzl azoi freyl [SMTP:d6l (at) hotmail(dot)com]
> Sent:  Wednesday, October 13, 1999 12:27 PM
> To:  World music from a Jewish slant
> Subject:  re: klez go classical
>
> i'm flattered to be described as "difficult to keep on a leash" <smile>
> and 'course i don't mind being shredded and reassembled, but i would prefer
> my tangents and asides be less central to your response, josh...
>
> my basic point (as distinctly opposed to your 'socratic summary') has
> always
> been about *emphasis*, not exclusion (the first time "banning" anything
> came
> up in this thread was when you put it in my mouth--please take it right
> back
> out, 'kay?).  i'm in no way opposed to sitting in a concert hall listening
> to klezmer (or tuvan 'throat singing' or stravinski for that matter).  what
> i see as potentially dangerous is the concert hall becoming the *only* or
> *primary* site for klezmer music.
>       the 'change and development' in music which i've said is necessary
> can
> happen in any context.... *but* when it mainly happens in concert halls it
> seems to me far more likely to lose its connections to other parts of the
> culture it's rooted in than when the experimentation is happening in a
> variety of venues (among which the concert hall should of course be
> present,
> but not dominant).
>
> incidentally, you imply that there's a contradiction between dancing to and
> listening to music.  if anything, i'd want to argue that the opposite is
> true-- you just *can't* dance without paying serious attention to the
> musicians; it's easy to sit and drift...  it's also worth mentioning that
> venues with space to dance tend also to accomodate those who just want to
> sit, while concert halls tend to frown upon dancing (with some
> exceptions--the 'in the fiddler's house' tour being the first to occur to
> me).
>
> finally, it seems more than a bit disingenuous to describe "listening" in
> the concert-hall sense as part of the traditional wedding context of
> klezmer.  then again, it seems thoroughly unnecessary to appeal to that
> context to establish something as worthwhile for klezmer in 1999 (yes, i do
> think that concert-hall type listening is worthwhile)
>    --unless, that is, you want to insist that all klezmer contexts should
> include dancing, wine, and a rabbi (which is probably closer to my position
> <wink>)--
>
> that's it for me....
> ideologically yours,
> zayt gezunt,
>
> daniel
>
> p.s. "hidden agenda"?  what's *hidden*?
>
> p.p.s.
> for reference, snipped for concision--
> josh wrote:
>
> >That "variety of directions" excludes the classical venue, seemingly
> >because it doesn't allow for you to breakdance and also because it
> >encourages the act of listening (in your former email, you refer to >this
> >as the "sit-in-yer-seat experience").
> >
> >In spite of the fact that listening was a part of the original context
> (the
> >wedding) in which klezmer music developed, and represents a further
> >possibility for "change and development," it >is banned from your list of
> >outlets which allow klezmer music to >evolve.
> >
> >Rather than antithesize the contradictions in your argument, I would
> >rather manipulate them into a synthesized Socratic summary, using
>
> >In spite of actually sympathizing with some of your sentiments, Dan,
> >it's hard to resist uncovering a hidden agenda in your ideology. Josh
>
> ______________________________________________________
> Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
>



---------------------- jewish-music (at) shamash(dot)org ---------------------+