Today's symposium at the New School (these are held every Wednesday, 1-3pm, in the Cinema at 66 Fifth Ave, NYC) featured Steve Coleman. Having enjoyed some of his playing on recordings (eg with Dave Holland) and knowing that he's done some interesting work, I decided to go. I took a few notes:
His first instrument was violin. "In Chicago I didn't see much future for young black violin players." He "stumbled" onto the saxophone (I'm not sure how, I was late...). When he first came to NYC he played in big bands. But Coleman's main message concerned "creativity". He talked a bit about schools, and voiced the opinion that what is typically "concentrated on least, is individuality". He said that developing one's own voice was the crucial task. He spent a lot of time talking about how what we consider "normal" or "natural" is in the result of cultural conditioning. He talked a bit about "traditional" styles, and said how many people seem to restrict their focus to a very narrow part of jazz. To him, the important musical tradition is "the tradition of music on this planet". He prefers not to use the word "jazz". He said that "rhythm is a big problem" (with players, and especially with the approach taken in jazz schools, I guess). He pointed to the shape of the room, the shape of the piano, all the stuff in view, and noted how "square" it was. This, he argued, was not "natural"; in other cultures people made things with different shapes. And in nature things are quite different. He said "most people think of music like that; there's nothing normal about that [pointing to the piano]". He talked about instruments being considered "monstrous" at first, like the modern piano and the saxophone, and said that there will come a time when people will think of the computer as being as `natural' as, say, a trumpet.
Coleman said that the emphasis is generally on teaching harmony, with little attention paid to rhythm. He sang what I think was the "Looney Tunes" theme song, then tapped a counter-rhythm with his feet and hands that was very simple (the oom-pah oom-pah oom-pah-pah thing which I think is in the original arrangement). Then he tried to get people to tap a different counter-rhythm. Then he did a more difficult one, and then he flipped that one around making it even harder. His rhythmic fluency was very impressive.
He had some people come up on stage and he tried to teach them a short tune, "Fidgit Time" by Doug Hammond (I think that's the name; the tune is also on a Dave Holland album). It was a cool tune, consisting of two "questions" and two "answers". He wanted people to learn it by ear, and not count the time but feel the phrases. He said "I don't count anything. I hear phrases and relationships." He said he would fill up the space between phrases with rhythms and sounds. He demonstrated by improvising in the space between phrases, filling them with lines is his own (quite recognizable) style.
The students had a lot of trouble learning this tune. The first drummer who tried it really didn't seem to have any intention of actually playing the drums. Shit, I could have done better -- at least put something into it even if I didn't do much better with respect to keeping the form or whatever (and I bet there's a relationship between those two things, anyway -- in fact that's part of what Coleman was saying perhaps...). The second drummer did a much better job. At least he was being musical with the elements Coleman had indicated should be in the drum part. But he didn't quite succeed either. One thing I found pretty interesting was that I've always had a problem with a certain thing he does (sort of a fill with a drum roll that often seems out of control and disruptive to the pulse) and Coleman immediately said something about it when he did it during this tune.
Coleman eventually broke down, saying "I didn't want to do this..." but explaining that the first phrase in the tune (question 1) was 2 bars, the first answer was 5 bars, the second question was 2 bars, and the second answer was 4 bars. He said that relying on theory is bad, using your ears is what you should do.
After this, Coleman just decided to talk some more. I guess he felt he had made his point about how lame schools are, or something... :) Personally I have some reservations about his methods; mainly that if one really feels the music and can achieve a certain fluency, if you're listening and playing what you hear (or want to hear), then FUCK THE FORM!!! The music is the important thing. If I stay on something that is strictly "inside", ok, maybe I won't get lost, but as soon as one starts improvising, it seems to me that you're attention should be on the music, the sound and not anything else. He could have addressed this issue directly by not using such a "difficult" tune, which allows people who don't agree with him to simply explain the problem as relating to the tune and not to his general principles.
Some other Steve Coleman quotes: "When you practice you shouldn't sound too good; you're practicing shit you already know." On the concept of a quarter-note: "That's not music, that's notation." "Birds are not singing in 4/4, I'm not talking to you in 4/4."
I enjoyed Steve Coleman's visit. I hope it had some impact on others who might not necessarily have already agreed with everything he had to say...
-Ed
PS For anyone who enjoyed the 12-tone bebop line I posted a while ago, here's a longer version ("\" means go down to next note, "/" means go up, all notes have equal duration, ie fast 8th-notes, starts on E a tenth above middle C):
\ \ \ / \ \ / \ / / / \ \ / \ / \ / / \ \ / \
|| E B A F Bb Ab Eb Db D F# G C | B C Bb C# Gb D D# A Ab E G F ||