1.why is he among the group of artists who forever feel the need to raise their own flag while at the same time stomp and descrate other folks flag.
where do you get that from. In all my public interviews-I have only said negative things about 3 musicians ever-wynton-keith jarrett and wayne shorter the vast totality of my interviews are 100 per cent positive,and im completely open minded about what everyone is doing-at least in my public persona -and ive been interviewed more than anyone I know in the last 20 years. If you look at the people ive come down on-wynton has used his position as a millionare with corporations as a bully pulpit to say that nothing is valid except what he does-ie the avant garde is wrong-rock is wrong etc etc. keith jarrett basically thinks he is god and tells audiences that have made him a millionare that its their privilige to hear him and not his privillige to play for him. And wayne –well that’s another whole story that I will not get into but everyone knows that he and herbie make substandard cds and performances while getting the top possible fees and constantly get away with faking it these days despite there great history in the 60s and early 70s-everyone in jazz knows that. So I find it interesting that you would say come down on someone like me who ekes out a living in this and not these other people who are all very wealthy. That to me exposes you as possibily one of the biggest jazz industry whores alive.
2. Why does he forever seem to feel a need to down others in favor of his means of music making.
that actually sounds like you are talking about wynton-who you wrote a letter to downbeat defending against what I said about him once.again that to me says more about you mr jazz prostitute. When have I ever downed others in favor of my means of making music.
3. From someone as exalted as miles davis such putdowns often come off as humorous—but frankly matthew hasn’t reached such an exalted position
willard this really exposes you as someone severly fucked up-what does someones exalted position within a business structure jazz or otherwise especially considering the jazz one is desimated nowadays- have to do with there acumen for seeing the truth about an issue. Anyone that would make the statement you made is a sick sick person.also a lot of people did not think the miles was funny-you can look at the letter section of old downbeats to find that out.this statement makes you come off as some type of upwardly mobile jazz business prostitute again.
4. Why is that impulse toward negative putdown necessary to act on in print.
has it ever accured to you that there might be some issues that need to be put out there and its about more than saying nice things about the jazz success mafia that you willard jenkins want to be assiociated with because you think it makes you look good
5. Is the forever angry artist posture really necessary and productive toward meeting his musical goals.
willard I would not worry about me meeting my musical goals-I have that taken care off-gary giddens once called me insatiably productive-so thanks but don’t worry about that.
again the thrust of my public presentation has been positive in the 20 years ive been giving interviews. I consider myself a positive force –unlike your friend wynton who I consider the most negative force ever in the music. And you willard are everything that is wrong with jazz-a 100 percent negative force- so please stop you why can’t we get along jazz dribble-its transparent-its tired –you are tired and everything you represent is tired.
thanks
matthew shipp
On 7/14/09 1:11 PM, Willard Jenkins wrote:
Thanks for forwarding the Matthew Shipp piece from the Boston jazz blog. However the piece again raises the same question I always have whenever I read an interview with Matthew: Why is he among the group of artists who forever feel a need to raise their own flag while at the same time stomp on and desecrate other folks’ flags? Why is he not simply content with striving to be the best Matthew Shipp that he can be and allow others to do likewise in whatever artistic manner they choose? Why does he forever seem to feel a need to down others in favor of his means of making music? That inclination on his part is forever perplexing and frankly doesn’t really serve his purposes well. From someone as exalted as Miles Davis such putdowns often came off as humorous more than anything else – particularly if you’d followed Miles’ career arc and/or ever had a real conversation with the man; but frankly Matthew hasn’t reached such an exalted position and his career arc continues on an upward path – at least as I hear his music. Again, why is that impulse toward negative putdown necessary to act on in print? And is the forever-angry-artist posture really necessary and productive towards meeting his musical goals?
Peace,
Willard Jenkins
No comments:
Post a Comment