Re: Subject: [Harp-L] Re: Music and perception
My sentiments exactly Elizabeth. I did notice that the list of names
the other day only included Toots on chromo. The other names were ?
Cotton, Wilson, Piazza, Estrin, Mischo, Ricci, Levy, and others?
These are ALL basically diatonic players. I get the impression? that
diatonic players will be less inclined to hold Steevie up as high as
their own favorites? Note the number of question marks, as I wouldn't
want any of the experts to think I was trying to delve into THEIR
territory.
Each and every time I have said anything about Steveland Morris
Judkins, I have taken heat, so I don't talk about him any more. I
once made a statement and was barraged and reminded that someone
'else' had spent "More time than anyone" studying Steevie and his
works. When you think about it, that's a ridiculous claim and one
that's hard to prove. First of all, I have played like Steevie before
there WAS a Steevie. Fortunately, he passed me by and did something
with his time. :)
smokey-joe
On Nov 27, 2006, at 6:39 PM, EGS1217@xxxxxxx wrote:
Haka Harri responds to my post with:
"I doubt that being European affects one's view of multi-
instrumentalists
that play harp or makes their opinions even faintly ludicrous. As
I said
earlier, Stevie is not "faulted" because he plays other instruments"
... I didn't phrase it clearly. I didn't mean to imply that being
European
and having that attitude was "faintly ludicrous". My comment about
"faintly
ludicrous" was in direct comment about Stevie Wonder being faulted
for not
focusing solely on his harp playing. I obviously did not make
that point clear
enough.
Being European myself would seem to make it obvious I don't
consider ALL
Europeans as not respecting Stevie Wonder's talents; was merely
making an
observation about those who consistently put him down on these lists.
But I WILL disagree with your take that Stevie Wonder is "not
faulted for
playing other instruments". Clearly that IS the case, when it is
so often
used to describe him compared to other harpists.
Every time the "Stevie" argument comes about ...on this list as
well as on
others, it inevitably involves two or three people who use the
same old
argument that he doesn't "play enough harp". "Doesn't devote
himself as
'so-and-so' does to playing chromatic for X amount of
years"....."plays other
instruments"....."sings"...."writes"...."plays keyboard", "drums".
(Ergo cannot be a
serious enough, devoted enough, "good" enough, harmonica player?)
Like it or not, all the practice in the world cannot make a silk
purse out
of a sow's ear. For all any of us know, Stevie Wonder just may
not HAVE to
practice constantly or devote himself to the harmonica every day
to STILL be an
absolutely brilliant chromatic harmonica player...sometimes natural
talent/genius will have out. But I can't speak for him..the thing
is that his life
isn't an open book. None of us know what he does in his daily
life, nor how
much time he devotes to his harmonica playing.
In previous outings his version of Alfie was brought up with the
description
of it as "Schmaltzy" and "boring". The two people who dissed him
then (just
a few short months ago)comparing him to Toots and if I remember
correctly
went so far as to bring in discussions of European classical
composers of the
17th century....were German and Dutch, and were like dogs with
bones about the
subject....wouldn't let it go until I simply stopped playing
their game.
Am I wrong about you and Pierre both being European as well? Many
apologies,
then....if I find it all a bit odd.
When pointed out then that he issued the Eivets Rednow album when
he was no
older than 21 (I believe between the ages of 18 - 21)....it was
discounted
...shunted aside. Then his next 30 - 40 years of growth as a
composer/arranger/writer/musician was dismissed as "pure pop",
"Motown".... So???
...as if somehow that made him "less" of a musician. Stevie
Wonder can
hold his own with any top Jazz/Blues artist I can think of. Has
the chops,
proves his chops... doesn't HAVE to prove his chops.
...(I was trying to be kind and assuming that living in Europe
precluded
them from exposure to the Stevie that we Americans are exposed
to...that was
kind of what I was getting at...perhaps some folks are still
thinking of him as
someone in his 20's and not the 50+ year old man he is today....)
Many of us have heard him....perhaps those who constantly seek to
diss him
haven't been exposed to all of what we've heard. I only ask that
instead of
jumping to constantly refute his talents and skill every time his
name
surfaces, that these people who seem to really dislike him enough
to leap at every
opportunity to put him down....actually LISTEN to what he's able to
do...instead of using something he did or performed over 30 years
ago as an
"example".
Or....how about just stop putting down a musician a lot of other
people hold
in high esteem? What a concept!
When did it get to be de rigeur to put down one, in order to elevate
another? I never understood that mindset. Just because David
first said what he
did about Stevie Wonder's solo with Tony Bennett...with reverence
and so
obviously moved by the experience, there was absolutely NO need to
begin to dump on
his take on it. Most people didn't....the few who did, did so for
some
strange reason of their own. What did they think? That a simple
statement of
awe by David, if allowed to remain unchallenged on THIS list
somehow elevated
Stevie Wonder above their favourites...so must be refuted? How
absurd...
it gets wearying....
I'm not going so far as to say there's an innate prejudice against a
contemporary American player/composer but to me it seems to always be
there...hanging in the air, and the "multi-instrumentalist"
argument used purely as a red
herring.... make of THAT what you will...
Just my take on it...in my most humble opinion......as a naturalized
American from Europe... and please note I never once discussed
"best" or "better".
:)
Elizabeth
This archive was generated by a fusion of
Pipermail 0.09 (Mailman edition) and
MHonArc 2.6.8.