John Surman on Private Passions - 19 November 12 pm

[Serial_Apologist]

Just to draw this to attention:

As part of Radio 3's coverage of the London Jazz Festival, Michael Berkeley talks to saxophonist and bass clarinettist John Surman, who has enjoyed a career of dizzying versatility spanning more than 50 years. He has played with Ronnie Scott, Alexis Korner and Gil Evans and at the Paris Opera, GHis choice of music ranges from Bach to Duke Ellington.

You can bank on Berkeley. And two Ts in clarinettist! How could I have missed this?

[eighthobstruction]

....oh good, thanks for your flag....

[BLUESNIK'S REVOX]

Thanks also. C90 in slot.

[DracoM]

Came across as a completely unstuffy, genuinely good bloke. Saw him give an almost solo recital - like a pianist for three or four numbers only, but mostly him, talking about improvisation including taking a strong of notes sent up by a member of the audience to work on there and then. Utterly brilliant. Brought the house down.

Good memories of Gil Evans and Miles Davis too.

[Serial_Apologist]

Kathleen Ferrier singing "Blow the Winds" would be marmite for anyone like me, but the best reminiscence for me was when he talked about Sonny Rolins coming down to the Old Place for a blow, when it was all happening. Wonder what Ian makes of his claim about the best thing happening in jazz today being that it has outstripped the old notions of what jazz once was.

[LMcD]

Came across as a completely unstuffy, genuinely good bloke.

I couldn't agree more.

[BLUESNIK'S REVOX]

He certainly knows his "Norwegians". I'm no great fan of his current genre* but he presented a very good R3 series way back on the baritone in jazz, featuring all his heroes...Cecil Payne, Lars Gullin, Pepper Adams etc...

Thought the Bartok was really wonderful. That's what I tune in far more now on R3 rather than the notional "jazz".

*A long way from playing Coltrane to Mike Westbrook's Fats Domino triplets in Gerrard Street at 4am in the morning... Toto.

[BLUESNIK'S REVOX]

Btw, Surman said (paraphrasing) that you don't hear so many players directly coming out of Rollins as per Coltrane. True, but Steve Grossman very definitely sounds "Rollins" now. And better for it. In my jazzical opinion

[Ian Thumwood]

Btw, Surman said (paraphrasing) that you don't hear so many players directly coming out of Rollins as per Coltrane. True, but Steve Grossman very definitely sounds "Rollins" now. And better for it. In my jazzical opinion

Well, I think that the whole Coltrane dominance is starting to seem less significant and can see the idea of improvising on motifs a la Rollins is probably more in vogue these days. The programme sounds like it was a repeat from a number of years ago in which case it would be ironic commenting on the demise of a "traditional" approach to jazz being outstripped by new notions as it is a case of regretting what you might wish for.

I had a really interesting conversation with Kevin Appleby at Turner Sims regarding the unpredictable nature of trying to second guess what artists attract audiences and what artists are a "hard sell" when it comes to jazz. His opinion is always worth listening to as you get the sense that he listens to an awful lot of jazz around the world in trying to attract talent with a very small budget. The Christian Scott gig clearly caught the imagination of the public as the gig was sold out and the audience gave the musicians a rousing standing ovation. Prior to this , he stated that a piano trio from Luxenbourg had generated the best sales and drew a large audience whilst, by way of contrast, the gig for Mike Gibbs big band was less than 50% full. I am not sure that he agrees with my opinions but is open minded to listen to what I have to say whenever we have a conversation. What was interesting was his comment that the late John Abercrombie had made a comment to him several years ago that he felt "non-jazz" acts were staring to get booked in lieu of genuine jazz groups at many jazz festivals and he felt that it would be increasingly difficult for jazz people to pick up gigs in future because they are being squeezed out.

Of course, John Surman has been a driving force for nearly forty years in constructing a "European heritage" for jazz and, by and large, he has amassed a commendable body of work. As was mentioned above, he has easily got to be the most approachable and friendly of all jazz musicians - an absolute gent. What I would say if that he may feel different about this if he was losing gigs to bands like Go Go Penguin or found artists like Mary J Blige being booked ahead of him for jazz festivals. Part of me agrees that the music has expanded and changed over the years for the better but the "interesting" stuff always retains a recognisable sense of being jazz. I suppose what I am trying to say is that players like John Surman and John Taylor have immeasurably contributed to the broadening of what might be considered jazz but maybe things have gone too far in that direction.

I would say that, if you want a "Contemporary" solution then Christian Scott's band offered the compelling version of what the music can sound like in 2o17. It is strange that he no longer considers his music to be "jazz" and has come uo with the term "Stretch music" instead. Oddly, to my ears it sound like nothing else other than jazz. I think the problem is with people trying to distance themselves from jazz, they are alienating future audiences from the music. As you said yourself last week, if the musicians don't want to play jazz, then they should foxtrot Oscar.

[BLUESNIK'S REVOX]

I'm not sure if Surman said it in this interview but one/main? reason he moved to Paris at the end of the 60s is because the "non rock" UK jazz scene was actually contracting, even Tony Oxely and Mike Osborne at one point going to play a gig in Coventry for £30, and paying for their own petrol. Paris (and Europe) was far more open. He is a very nice guy, he was when he played Ronnies in the late 60s, but it's the very "Englishness" that now puts me off. The same with later Graham Collier and Michael Garrick, with thier English literature referencing. It's not "the tradition" I look for in my jazz ...or indeed "literature".

BN.

[eighthobstruction]

I'm not sure if Surman said it in this interview but one/main? reason he moved to Paris at the end of the 60s is because the "non rock" UK jazz scene was actually contracting, even Tony Oxely and Mike Osborne at one point going to play a gig in Coventry for £30, and paying for their own petrol. Paris (and Europe) was far more open. He is a very nice guy, he was when he played Ronnies in the late 60s, but it's the very "Englishness" that now puts me off. The same with later Graham Collier and Michael Garrick, with thier English literature referencing. It's not "the tradition" I look for in my jazz ...or indeed "literature".

BN.

....what is it then man....???....you like it to be like a kick inthe head??....you want it to be like a good Burgandy??....like the relief when you wake up in the morning and realise that big dry marshmallow in your dream was your pillow....????....Phwat!!

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

....like the relief when you wake up in the morning and realise that big dry marshmallow in your dream was your pillow....????....Phwat!!

You call that "relief"??!

[Ian Thumwood]

I'm not sure if Surman said it in this interview but one/main? reason he moved to Paris at the end of the 60s is because the "non rock" UK jazz scene was actually contracting, even Tony Oxely and Mike Osborne at one point going to play a gig in Coventry for £30, and paying for their own petrol. Paris (and Europe) was far more open. He is a very nice guy, he was when he played Ronnies in the late 60s, but it's the very "Englishness" that now puts me off. The same with later Graham Collier and Michael Garrick, with thier English literature referencing. It's not "the tradition" I look for in my jazz ...or indeed "literature".

BN.

I would not put either Graham Collier of Michael Garrick in the same league as John Surman. The latter's music had a twee-ness about that , coupled with the happy-clappy Christianity made it almost unlistenable for me. I also felt that it was odd that Trevor Cooper used to rave about Garrick and then was lukewarm about Ellington! The other "problem" for me with Garrick was that there was the air of "establishment" about him similar to Dankworth albeit he never had the decent body of work behind him that the latter had.

Returning to Surman, I would have to admit that as a teenager I found his music to be a massive shock. I can remember hearing him perform a tack called "My friends" with Karin Krog and being totally aghast because it didn't sound anything like Coleman Hawkins! I feel that he has produced an amazing body of work even if it has increasingly been informed by English folk music and hymns. I don't believe this has always been the case and albums like "The amazing adventures of Simon, Simon" that he made with Jack DeJohnette is pretty much uncompromising. This is a terrific record . He has also cropped up with John Abercrombie. If you want, there are parallels with Jan Garbarek but whereas the Norwegian's music has long since petered out into New Age / World Music and totally lost it's way, Surman still remains relevant. John Surman has managed to give jazz an "English" identity in the way that you could argue the same for the likes of John Taylor, Peter Hurt or Mike Westbrook. None of the musicians can be argued to have "lost their way" or move too far from the notion of "tradition." In all cases, it is clearly jazz.

It wold be interesting to hear what John Surman makes of bands like "Go Go Penguin" or the bands that feature of JLU with instruments like hangs and their leaders declaring that they like jazz but don't want to be limited by it and are more influenced by Bjork. The difference is that John Surman doesn't seem to be a musician limited by jazz or dissatisfied enough with it to dilute the contents down to Garbarek-like owl hoots.

[BLUESNIK'S REVOX]

"They are mixing AE Housman in my Mingus, Mingus, Mingus, Mingus, Mingus", as Chuck Berry (a better poet) once almost said.

BN.