Love runs Amok

[Serial_Apologist]

No J to Z this week - the Master has to take priority

Sat 27 June
12midnight - Freeness
Kim Macari pays tribute to Bristol-born pianist Keith Tippett, who died earlier this month, aged 72. Plus collaboration by Jah Wobble and Evan Parker and music by Lucy Railton and Amok Amor.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000kh5t

Sun 28 June
4pm - Jazz Record Requests
Alyn Shipton with listeners' requests for recordings by Quincy Jones, Chick Corea and Carmen McRae.

http://www.alynshipton.co.uk/blog

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000kh8h

Also on Sunday, footage of Amy Winehouse on BBC4 from her 2007 Glastonbury, 9.30pm

Continung to stretch the thread's remit somewhat, Part 3 of the 4-part Black and British: A Forgotten History, David Olusoga's wonderful documentary, is on Monday 29 June at 8pm on BBC4.

And in case like me you can't get enough of him, a timely repeat of another Olusoga series commences on Thurs 2 July, also on BBC4:

9pm - Britain's Forgotten Slave Owners
1/2. Profit and Loss

Tues 30 June
11pm - The Jazz Show with Jamie Cullum

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000kh6b

[Jazzrook]

No J to Z this week - the Master has to take priority

Sat 27 June
12midnight - Freeness
Kim Macari pays tribute to Bristol-born pianist Keith Tippett, who died earlier this month, aged 72. Plus collaboration by Jah Wobble and Evan Parker and music by Lucy Railton and Amok Amor.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000kh5t

Sun 28 June
4pm - Jazz Record Requests
Alyn Shipton with listeners' requests for recordings by Quincy Jones, Chick Corea and Carmen McRae.

http://www.alynshipton.co.uk/blog

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000kh8h

Also on Sunday, footage of Amy Winehouse on BBC4 from her 2007 Glastonbury, 9.30pm

Continung to stretch the thread's remit somewhat, Part 3 of the 4-part Black and British: A Forgotten History, David Olusoga's wonderful documentary, is on Monday 29 June at 8pm on BBC4.

And in case like me you can't get enough of him, a timely repeat of another Olusoga series commences on Thurs 2 July, also on BBC4:

9pm - Britain's Forgotten Slave Owners
1/2. Profit and Loss

Tues 30 June
11pm - The Jazz Show with Jamie Cullum

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000kh6b

Will be watching the excellent David Olusoga programmes. We really need a truthful history of the British Empire and I hope one day he will write one.
Also, some boredees(Ian?) might be interested in Toots and the Maytals at Glastonbury 2010 on BBC4(Saturday 27 June, 7.30pm).

JR

[Serial_Apologist]

Will be watching the excellent David Olusoga programmes. We really need a truthful history of the British Empire and I hope one day he will write one.
Also, some boredees(Ian?) might be interested in Toots and the Maytals at Glastonbury 2010 on BBC4(Saturday 27 June, 7.30pm).

JR

Ah! Trust me to overlook that one!

[Old Grumpy]

No J to Z this week - the Master has to take priority

Sat 27 June
12midnight - Freeness
Kim Macari pays tribute to Bristol-born pianist Keith Tippett, who died earlier this month, aged 72. Plus collaboration by Jah Wobble and Evan Parker and music by Lucy Railton and Amok Amor.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000kh5t

Sun 28 June
4pm - Jazz Record Requests
Alyn Shipton with listeners' requests for recordings by Quincy Jones, Chick Corea and Carmen McRae.

http://www.alynshipton.co.uk/blog

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000kh8h

Also on Sunday, footage of Amy Winehouse on BBC4 from her 2007 Glastonbury, 9.30pm

Continung to stretch the thread's remit somewhat, Part 3 of the 4-part Black and British: A Forgotten History, David Olusoga's wonderful documentary, is on Monday 29 June at 8pm on BBC4.

And in case like me you can't get enough of him, a timely repeat of another Olusoga series commences on Thurs 2 July, also on BBC4:

9pm - Britain's Forgotten Slave Owners
1/2. Profit and Loss

Tues 30 June
11pm - The Jazz Show with Jamie Cullum

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000kh6b

Should have read your post more thoroughly, S_A. Got home from shopping just in time for J to Z, turned on my radio...

..F'ing Wagner!

[Ian Thumwood]

Will be watching the excellent David Olusoga programmes. We really need a truthful history of the British Empire and I hope one day he will write one.
Also, some boredees(Ian?) might be interested in Toots and the Maytals at Glastonbury 2010 on BBC4(Saturday 27 June, 7.30pm).

JR

Jazzrook

Thanks for the "heads up" up regarding Toots!

An interesting perspective on the British Empire was offered by Prof Niall Ferguson in his book from about 20 years ago which accompanied a Channel Four TV series. The conclusion was quite interesting because he saw the Empire's successes in terms of the ubiquity of the English language. I think that it is always difficult with applying current opinions regarding the actions of our ancestors which make us wince now and which may have been subject to resistance from within and without than has been previously acknowledged. He also commented that aspects of law and the importance of sport has been under-played by historians. I thought that it was an interesting book.

About 9 months ago I went to a series of lectures in Winchester Guildhall concerning the Norman Conquest and an American historian who works in the university did a presentation about the treatment of women in early 12th century England which centred around an event in Winchester. It was interesting but perhaps more so because she applied 21st century standards to something that had happened 900 years ago. The conclusions she deduced therefore struck me as a bit incongruous and more indicative of her "woke" credentials than an unbiased analysis. The most interesting aspect of the whole day was the fact that the series of historians giving lectures were decidedly "pro-Saxon" and "anti-Norman." I find the Saxons to be a real challenge because of the similar names which all blur in to one another because they always begin with AE. As a consequence, I had under-estimated them and the previous year's seminar had demonstrated that they were more sophisticated than I had envisaged. Within the academic circles of Winchester, there is clearly an "anti-Norman" bias amongst the historians! That said, last year's seminar ended with a presentation by TV historian Marc Morris which offered an alternative perspective which dismantled some of the arguments presented during the earlier part of the day. It was fascinating getting to hear two perspective on the same topic but Morris underscored by impression that the Norman Conquest led to an improvement in so many issues. Seeing history presented like this and appreciating that you can fall in to a trap of not understanding just how people might have perceived their circumstances makes the topic endlessly fascinating for me.

There are quite a few accounts of the British Empire or about various aspect which I have read over the years. I think it is a remarkably complex subject and more multi-faceted than people believe. I think the best account I have read is William Dalrymple's "White Mughals" which explains just how far the British engrained themselves on Indian culture and even adapted Islam, Hinduism, etc. The main thrust of the book concerned a British Army officer who ended up marrying a local princess.

[Serial_Apologist]

Should have read your post more thoroughly, S_A. Got home from shopping just in time for J to Z, turned on my radio...

..F'ing Wagner!

And there's not even the excuse they usually deploy - namely Opera at the Met having to be broadcast early due to the time difference - because this is a bloody repeat!!! A pure case of opera is more important than jazz, which we are expected to swallow uncomplaining.

[Serial_Apologist]

Jazzrook

Thanks for the "heads up" up regarding Toots!

An interesting perspective on the British Empire was offered by Prof Niall Ferguson in his book from about 20 years ago which accompanied a Channel Four TV series. The conclusion was quite interesting because he saw the Empire's successes in terms of the ubiquity of the English language. I think that it is always difficult with applying current opinions regarding the actions of our ancestors which make us wince now and which may have been subject to resistance from within and without than has been previously acknowledged. He also commented that aspects of law and the importance of sport has been under-played by historians. I thought that it was an interesting book.

About 9 months ago I went to a series of lectures in Winchester Guildhall concerning the Norman Conquest and an American historian who works in the university did a presentation about the treatment of women in early 12th century England which centred around an event in Winchester. It was interesting but perhaps more so because she applied 21st century standards to something that had happened 900 years ago. The conclusions she deduced therefore struck me as a bit incongruous and more indicative of her "woke" credentials than an unbiased analysis. The most interesting aspect of the whole day was the fact that the series of historians giving lectures were decidedly "pro-Saxon" and "anti-Norman." I find the Saxons to be a real challenge because of the similar names which all blur in to one another because they always begin with AE. As a consequence, I had under-estimated them and the previous year's seminar had demonstrated that they were more sophisticated than I had envisaged. Within the academic circles of Winchester, there is clearly an "anti-Norman" bias amongst the historians! That said, last year's seminar ended with a presentation by TV historian Marc Morris which offered an alternative perspective which dismantled some of the arguments presented during the earlier part of the day. It was fascinating getting to hear two perspective on the same topic but Morris underscored by impression that the Norman Conquest led to an improvement in so many issues. Seeing history presented like this and appreciating that you can fall in to a trap of not understanding just how people might have perceived their circumstances makes the topic endlessly fascinating for me.

There are quite a few accounts of the British Empire or about various aspect which I have read over the years. I think it is a remarkably complex subject and more multi-faceted than people believe. I think the best account I have read is William Dalrymple's "White Mughals" which explains just how far the British engrained themselves on Indian culture and even adapted Islam, Hinduism, etc. The main thrust of the book concerned a British Army officer who ended up marrying a local princess.

Adopted or adapted? There's a major difference! More a question of co-option, namely legitimising domination by cosying up to the prer-colonised indigenous ruling classes. Britain got in first because of "our" geographical advantage, and was first to learn the lessons of placating local populations, keeping the iron fist in reserve. We were taught this method at school: indirect rule: the notion of respect for an enemy who puts up a worthy fight. Other nations went more for the full-on direct, bull-in-china-shop approaches, leaving little for local populaces to feel other than resentful for.

We seem to be hearing a lot about retrospective self-righteousness at the moment - put back in historical perspective, capitalism meant that wealth came to mean something quite different to the conqueror nations than to the peoples taken over and looted. My own theory as to how come the British are so good at laughing at our foibles is that we were groomed to think that having ruled the waves we earned had the right to be able to laugh at ourselves. We may well waddle down Bournmouth esplanade beer cans in hand with shorts hanging halfway down our arses, look what our ancestors achieved! We can now turn around and accuse others of having chips on their shoulders, etc etc. No wonder racism is proving so durable in the primarily English speaking world.

[Serial_Apologist]

Sun 28 June
4pm - Jazz Record Requests
Alyn Shipton with listeners' requests for recordings by Quincy Jones, Chick Corea and Carmen McRae.

http://www.alynshipton.co.uk/blog

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000kh8h

Just to say Track 9 of today's JRR, Johnny Keating and his All Stars, is dated as a 1957 release.

[BLUESNIK'S REVOX]

Adopted or adapted? There's a major difference! More a question of co-option, namely legitimising domination by cosying up to the prer-colonised indigenous ruling classes. Britain got in first because of "our" geographical advantage, and was first to learn the lessons of placating local populations, keeping the iron fist in reserve. We were taught this method at school: indirect rule: the notion of respect for an enemy who puts up a worthy fight. Other nations went more for the full-on direct, bull-in-china-shop approaches, leaving little for local populaces to feel other than resentful for.

We seem to be hearing a lot about retrospective self-righteousness at the moment - put back in historical perspective, capitalism meant that wealth came to mean something quite different to the conqueror nations than to the peoples taken over and looted. My own theory as to how come the British are so good at laughing at our foibles is that we were groomed to think that having ruled the waves we earned had the right to be able to laugh at ourselves. We may well waddle down Bournmouth esplanade beer cans in hand with shorts hanging halfway down our arses, look what our ancestors achieved! We can now turn around and accuse others of having chips on their shoulders, etc etc. No wonder racism is proving so durable in the primarily English speaking world.

I can HUGELY recommend Pankaj Mishra's masterful (and very funny) extended review & take down of Naill Ferguson, and his "Civilization" in the London Review of Books from November 2011. This is behind their paywall for non subscribers, but was briefly free earlier this month. It is a classic of measured demolition. Ferguson became so enraged that he threatened to sue both the author and the LRB itself. (But bottled it). I've got a copy and would post here? (but it's probably too long and this is a"jazz site"). Ferguson is a clown looking for the circus.

[Serial_Apologist]

I can HUGELY recommend Pankaj Mishra's masterful (and very funny) extended review & take down of Naill Ferguson, and his "Civilization" in the London Review of Books from November 2011. This is behind their paywall for non subscribers, but was briefly free earlier this month. It is a classic of measured demolition. Ferguson became so enraged that he threatened to sue both the author and the LRB itself. (But bottled it). I've got a copy and would post here? (but it's probably too long and this is a"jazz site"). Ferguson is a clown looking for the circus.

Thanks a lot for mentioning this - about which I knew absolutely zilch. I can probably find my way to the above spat by roundabout means.

[Jazzrook]

I can HUGELY recommend Pankaj Mishra's masterful (and very funny) extended review & take down of Naill Ferguson, and his "Civilization" in the London Review of Books from November 2011. This is behind their paywall for non subscribers, but was briefly free earlier this month. It is a classic of measured demolition. Ferguson became so enraged that he threatened to sue both the author and the LRB itself. (But bottled it). I've got a copy and would post here? (but it's probably too long and this is a"jazz site"). Ferguson is a clown looking for the circus.

Many thanks, BN.
There are some letters between Niall Ferguson & Pankaj Mishra here:

https://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v33/n21/pankaj-mishra/watch-this-man

JR

[Serial_Apologist]

Many thanks, BN.
There are some letters between Niall Ferguson & Pankaj Mishra here:

https://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v33/n21/pankaj-mishra/watch-this-man

JR

Fantastic - gold dust - thanks to the both or yer.

[Alyn_Shipton]

Just distracting ourselves from that UK expatriate fellow of Stanford and Harvard, the excellent Henrybebop site tells us this about Johnny Keating:

Keating's second album was a series of groups varying in size from a sextet to a big band. Musicians for this album were selected on the odd basis that they had to be genuine Scotsmen! Again, all the arrangements were by Keating...
Johnny Keating All Stars - April 29th and 30th, 1957 (Swinging Scots - London LTZD 15122)(JM1058)
Bobby Pratt, Tommy McQuater, Eddie Blair, Duncan Campbell, Jimmy Deuchar (tp), Jock Bain, Jimmy Wilson, Wally Smith, George Chisholm (tb), Burt Harden (tu), George Hunter, Ronnie Baker (as), Tommy Whittle, Duncan Lamont (ts), Ronnie Ross (bs), Andy Dennits (p), Alan Metcalfe (g), Jack Seymour (b), Bobby Orr (d).
Hampden Roars*/Down South Blues*/Clachnacudan Canal*.
Bobby Pratt, Eddie Blair (tp), George Chisholm (tb), Burt Harden (tu), George Hunter (as), Tommy Whittle, Duncan Lamont (ts), Ronnie Ross (bs), Andy Dennits (p), Alan Metcalfe (g), Jack Seymour (b), Bobby Orr (d).
Headin' North*/Loch Ness Monster*.
Eddie Blair, Jimmy Deuchar (tp), Ronnie Baker (as,cl), Tommy Whittle (ts), Ronnie Ross (bs), Andy Dennits (p), Alan Metcalfe (g), Jack Seymour (b), Bobby Orr (d).
Thistle Swing*/Tam O'Shanter*/Kiltie*.
Duncan Lamont (ts), Ronnie Ross (bs), Andy Dennits (p), Alan Metcalfe (g), Jack Seymour (b), Bobby Orr (d).
Double Scotch*.
I did not go along with this in saying that both McQuater and Campbell (both of whom I played with a lot in the 80s) were the the trumpet soloists on Headin' North. Sounded to me less like Pratt and Blair...

[BLUESNIK'S REVOX]

Johnny Keating & band, live 1964, "What d'I Say", which here owes vastly more to Jerry Lee Lewis than Ray Charles, you pays yer money...http://youtu.be/IZPHYcJpvoE

[Ian Thumwood]

Johnny Keating & band, live 1964, "What d'I Say", which here owes vastly more to Jerry Lee Lewis than Ray Charles, you pays yer money...http://youtu.be/IZPHYcJpvoE

Form recollection Johnny Keating was the principle arranger for Ted Heath's band and, I think, the writer responsible for trying to give it more of a jazz feel.

I am curious as to why so many British jazz musicians from the 1930s through to the 1960s all seemed to come from Scotland.

Not read anything else by Ferguson as he subsequent books tended to deal with 20th century history and I have little interest in history after 1918. The most embarrassing put down by a historian I have seen was Sir Max Hastings on Channel Four where he denied the torture of Kenyan civilians in the 1950s and was absolutely destroyed by a journalist. I find military historians a really weird breed and nowhere as near a rigorous as either social historians or those historians who interrogate archaeological evidence. I have never rea any of Hasting's books but he is a regular contributor at the BBC History magazine events in Winchester which offer the chance to hear a diverse range of populist and niche historians give presentations. Unfortunately, it is really difficult to get tickets to see the likes of Michael Woods but have been impressed by the likes of Tom Holland and Sam Willis, the latter being great entertainment.

The recent discussions about the British Empire represent a fascinating contrast with the Roman history which currently appeals to me. I have just finished Miranda Aldhouse--Green's excellent "Sacred Britannia" which is primarily about the range of religions practiced in Roman Britain but also looks at this from a cultural point of views as to the cross-pollination of different cultures between the indigenous Celts, the Romans and the various parts of the Empire from where the soldiers originated. I find it really difficult not to see parallels with Brexit and broader discussions regarding nationality and identity that have occupied the press of late. Quite interesting to read of prejudices 1600-2000 years ago but there is a sense that the Romans were far more broadminded and tolerant with culture in this era. Anyone familiar with history between say 43AD and 14th century will recognise that there are whole swathes of history where our history cannot be considered outside of European context.