I'm sure we will laugh in 20 years about the critics inaccurate/poor assesments of current geniuses. Some would say that said geniuses don't exist. Will they eat their words?
It can all be camouflaged under the 'not my taste anyway' banner. I listen to people who explain why they don't like Coltrane, think the Beatles are overrated, or try to make the point that funk musicians can't write proper songs. It's great to find counter examples in a discussion, but it is also great to learn something for yourself, from different lines of thinking. Regards, Remco Takken
True. As someone who is not an extreme post-Atlantic Trane fan, I know I'm not towing the party line the way I'm supposed to in some quarters. But I also know that, when you hear someone say "Coltrane was boring" or, for that matter, that funk guys can't write proper songs, it's usually because the have such a narrow view of what form is allowed to be. They want the stuff to fit in a box, and they hate anything that defies the shape of the box. I concur. I never really thought funk or Coltrane, for that matter, were admired for their songs. Funk is for the groove - a great groove is a rare thing - and the way it makes you feel (like dancing). Coltrane for prodigious playing and stretching what can be done with simple rhythms and chords. I always admired the near meditative state it seemed like Coltrane achieved while playing and despite the chaotic façade of his later work it is actually quite conducive to meditation for the listener. I would like to know some GOOD reasons why Coltrane isn't so hot. I'm genuinely curious. I don't want to hear that he's boring or sounds bad. Zach np: Miles Davis - Water Babies