Double Bass Peacock Blows off Costello...

[Marc Piane]

Dissing an entire audience prior to playing one note is quintessential arrogance, and ultimately self destructive.

As evidenced by the quote from the festival organizer...

"He will always continue to be part of the history of the festival, but we will do without his music."

His apology was pretty lacking too. (from the Downbeat article)

"Keith did not mean to insult Perugia when he said 'this goddamn city'. He was olny trying to say strongly that if there were photos the trio would stop playing and leave. He could just as easily have said this in New York or Paris."



My friend started a blog post about this very incident and posed the questions,

So, what happens when you meet one of your personal, artistic, occupational or political heroes, and she or he turns out to be an unpleasant person?

Do you stop supporting their work?

Does the importance of their legacy outweigh the bad taste they leave?

 

[Michael Case]

Invalid Link Removed

That's my favorite kitty so far!

 

[Uncletoad]

Do you stop supporting their work?

Yes. Had a similar live performance here in the Land of Cows by Tori Amos when she was a rising star. Spit vitriol in the dumpy club she was playing and insulted our lousy town on the mic.

Never gave her another dime.

Does the importance of their legacy outweigh the bad taste they leave?

Their work stands on its own. Pete Rose is still a baseball badass even though he's a dipstick.

Jarrett can suck a rock. I never liked him anyhow.

 

[Michael Case]

Jarrett in Umbria:

We're not gonna take it!

No! We aint gonna take it!

We're not gonna take it anymooooore!

 

[M Ramsey]

So, what happens when you meet one of your personal, artistic, occupational or political heroes, and she or he turns out to be an unpleasant person?

Do you stop supporting their work?

Does the importance of their legacy outweigh the bad taste they leave?

I do. My only experience comes from the musical field called bluegrass and through the years I've come to know folks from Alison Krauss' band on down.

First, I'll state that I have NO problems with her or her band members, I know two of them pretty well, and have known them for years.

But after hearing first hand knowledge (by one of my current bandmates) of the actions of one long-time, highly regarded, musically gifted fiddler (going back to the 50's and Bill Monroe's band) I have no use to support this person, whatsoever.

This person's legacy was severely marred by the conduct he exhibited to everday folks.

Common decency towards your fellow man goes a long way with me.

 

[Michael Case]

Common decency towards your fellow man goes a long way with me.

Well then you don't understand what it's like to be a gifted musician who has paid his dues over a long period of time.

Some people are just so ignorant!

 

[Chris Fitzgerald]

Well then you don't understand what it's like to be a gifted musician who has paid his dues over a long period of time.

Some people are just so ignorant!

Link Removed

 

[Uncletoad]

I love the turn to felines and mammalian protuberances this thread has taken.



edit: Thanks Chris. Much better.

 

[Mystic Michael]

"Peacock's public disrespect and shunning of Costello could be seen as a reflection of the jazz community's attitude in general and this is why we must react. There is no doubt in my mind that a large majority of the jazz community (artists and fans) does NOT share Peacock's elitist disrespect toward Costello and the best pop/rock has to offer as a style/artform, which is well represented by Costello himself. Jazz music is universally regarded as the most malleable, inclusive and open-minded of styles. What a shame it would be to forfeit that reputation through a lack of respect for the very styles that contribute to its existence."

As one of those strictly-electric, non-upright players who spends his time on that other side of TalkBass, I couldn't help noticing the spirited debate going on over here about this Peacock/Costello dust-up. And as one who plays a lot more pop/rock than jazz, I'll offer the following observation:

While I hope it's true that a large majority of the jazz community does not share Peacock's elitist disrespect for "the best pop/rock has to offer as a style/artform", in my experience there are very many who still do harbor such elitist snobbery. Particularly here in the NYC area, where elitist snobbery - of whatever flavor - is considered a preferred lifestyle...

I share the author's disgust and outrage at such an attitude. And I agree that it's ultimately at least as harmful to jazz as it is to pop & rock, further crystallizing its unfortunate reputation in the eyes of many as a closed, insular, inaccessible, increasingly irrelevant genre. How ironic, considering the reputation of jazz at the dawn of its creation, as "the most malleable, inclusive and open-minded of styles."

While I have a good deal of respect for jazz, and am increasingly growing to appreciate and love it, the point at which it starts to become an institution, complete with credentials, gatekeepers and pecking orders - is the point at which I get off the train. While I personally am far from a hardcore traditional jazzer, I can improvise and groove like crazy - skills I learned from listening to jazz and playing jazz. And while there are things that a hardcore jazzer can do that I cannot, there are things I can do that a typical hardcore jazzer cannot.

I'm sure that such an implied equivalence drives the jazz snobs into a wild, turf-defending frenzy. But maybe its time for them to just get over it already...

MM

 

[Michael Case]

Do I hear 17?

I envy the kitty in Chris' last post.

 

[MingusAmongUs]

But after hearing first hand knowledge (by one of my current bandmates) of the actions of one long-time, highly regarded, musically gifted fiddler (going back to the 50's and Bill Monroe's band) I have no use to support this person, whatsoever.

Let's get specific. Kenny Baker? Vassar Clement?
Aahhh, I know you left the fiddler unnamed for good reason, I'm just ribbin' ya. I sure am curious though.

 

[damonsmith]

So, what happens when you meet one of your personal, artistic, occupational or political heroes, and she or he turns out to be an unpleasant person?

Do you stop supporting their work?

Does the importance of their legacy outweigh the bad taste they leave?

I think there are variables on both sides.
How important you find the work to be, and how offensive they are.
It would take a lot to overcome racisim, but just being grumpy or mentally imbalanced (obvious in Keithy-poos case) is not such a big deal.

I am not the biggest Jarrett fan, I normally fast forward after the Peacock solo. I still think him a abusing the audience is pretty well worked to the act - clearly it is working for him.

 

[Damon Rondeau]

If we wrote off the great art of every great artist who happened to be an ***hole, we'd have less great art. Is that a good thing? I don't think so.

Got a hero who's an ***hole? First bit of advice: don't do the hero thing if you can't take disillusionment. It's bound to happen. Second bit of advice: enjoy the art, but don't lend them money, don't give them dope or booze within a day or so of having to hit, don't let them near your wife and don't let them hurt your feelings. Keep them on the pedestal but keep them the **** out of your life.

 

[Chris Fitzgerald]

While I have a good deal of respect for jazz, and am increasingly growing to appreciate and love it, the point at which it starts to become an institution, complete with credentials, gatekeepers and pecking orders - is the point at which I get off the train.

Well spoken, sir.

 

[Michael Case]

Honestly, I'd have to draw the line at racism or any other act that is hurtful to people. After hearing the Costello quote about Ray Charles I'm kind of sickened. I've never been a fan of his, but I have been known to enjoy a couple of his tunes when they pop up. Knowing what I know now, I'd never let a dime of mine slip into his hands.

The Keith Jarrett thing, even though it goes against my beliefs of how one should act doesn't diminish my respect for his talents. Even Gary Peacock's behavior that has been discussed in this thread to death doesn't diminish my respect for his work.

 

[Michael Case]

I'm sure that such an implied equivalence drives the jazz snobs into a wild, turf-defending frenzy. But maybe its time for them to just get over it already...

MM

This statement by itself drives me crazy!

I've never heard your playing, probably most posters hear could say the same. You're implying that based on the fact that you only play electric and mostly pop/rock we "jazz snobs" would be up in arms by your stated ability to improvise and groove. That statement is about as biased and full of poo as anything a so called "jazz snob" could say about your musical abilities without hearing you play.

It's all music people, get over yourselves. We aint curing cancer, ending wars, or bringing an end to global warming.

 

[damonsmith]

As one of those strictly-electric, non-upright players who spends his time on that other side of TalkBass, I couldn't help noticing the spirited debate going on over here about this Peacock/Costello dust-up. And as one who plays a lot more pop/rock than jazz, I'll offer the following observation:

While I hope it's true that a large majority of the jazz community does not share Peacock's elitist disrespect for "the best pop/rock has to offer as a style/artform", in my experience there are very many who still do harbor such elitist snobbery. Particularly here in the NYC area, where elitist snobbery - of whatever flavor - is considered a preferred lifestyle...

I share the author's disgust and outrage at such an attitude. And I agree that it's ultimately at least as harmful to jazz as it is to pop & rock, further crystallizing its unfortunate reputation in the eyes of many as a closed, insular, inaccessible, increasingly irrelevant genre. How ironic, considering the reputation of jazz at the dawn of its creation, as "the most malleable, inclusive and open-minded of styles."

While I have a good deal of respect for jazz, and am increasingly growing to appreciate and love it, the point at which it starts to become an institution, complete with credentials, gatekeepers and pecking orders - is the point at which I get off the train. While I personally am far from a hardcore traditional jazzer, I can improvise and groove like crazy - skills I learned from listening to jazz and playing jazz. And while there are things that a hardcore jazzer can do that I cannot, there are things I can do that a typical hardcore jazzer cannot.

I'm sure that such an implied equivalence drives the jazz snobs into a wild, turf-defending frenzy. But maybe its time for them to just get over it already...

MM

These are a lot of mis-guided assumptions. I don't feel that we have a lot of choice in what our own music is. I know I don't. If I had the constitution to play pop songs it would make life a lot easier - but I don't, end of story.
I have a friend who doesn't like fruit. I don't get it, but I don't try to force apples down his throat. I do get his fruit salads and juices on the plane when we tour together, though.

All the assumptions can go both way. A case can be made for Costello being arrogant enough to just assume anyone will play his music just as well as for Peacock being elitist.

I don't see why him not being into it has to be such a big deal. If was he would have had a different carreer and made different choices altogether.
Let me again point out it was nobody's birthday.

 

[Michael Case]

Come on 17!

 

[Mystic Michael]

I've never heard your playing, probably most posters hear could say the same. You're implying that based on the fact that you only play electric and mostly pop/rock we "jazz snobs" would be up in arms by your stated ability to improvise and groove. That statement is about as biased and full of poo as anything a so called "jazz snob" could say about your musical abilities without hearing you play.

I think you miss my point. Though I have no idea whether you would consider yourself to be a "jazz snob", my point is that jazz snobs would tend to take exception to the notion that jazz is not necessarily superior to pop/rock - anymore than pop/rock is superior to jazz. They are simply different...

Yes, jazz generally tends to require a higher degree of technical skill, and is frequently much more sophisticated in its forms & expressions. But whether one finds these reasons sufficient in and of themselves to pronounce jazz the superior genre is very much a value judgment - one which is very much open to debate on the merits.

As for myself, while I value and respect the discipline of the craft and the form, there's much more than this alone that goes into forming my aesthetic impressions (i.e. content & message). I try to evaluate music of all genres by this same standard. Hence, jazz gets no free pass from me, simply because it is jazz...

MM

 

[TroyK]

I still think him a abusing the audience is pretty well worked to the act - clearly it is working for him.

It got him banned from future Umbria Jazz Festivals.

Certainly he lost some fans or potential fans that day.

Do you think he gained any as a result? It might have made some of his fanatical one's more fanitical, but I don't know if it's working for him.

That's like saying that Lindsey Lohan's drug problems are working for her since she is still getting cast in movie roles. Or Robert Downey Jr, since he continues to be a gifted actor inspite of every effort he's made to destroy his carrer and self.