Portland Jazz Fest: Ornette the Wise

Filed under:General, Music — posted by Barry Johnson on February 16, 2008 @ 12:11 pm

I tried to keep up with Ornette Coleman’s onstage conversation Friday with jazz writer/historian Howard Mandel, one of the many Portland Jazz Festival activities this week.

It wasn’t easy. Was what he was saying at any given time actually making sense? Was there a thread to his interview, a philosophy embedded somehow? Was he answering the questions, or questioning the answers? Was he here with us, and if so, could I remember enough of what he said, once I’d figured out what it was, to record it in my notebook? Ornette, you are one tough cookie to convert to print. And the heroic Mandel was by turns bewildered and frustrated as he attempted to corral Ornette’s responses into something the rational mind might contemplate without throwing up its hands.

ornette-talk.jpg
As I was squeezing the things that made sense out of my notes and reciting them to Marty Hughley, longtime arts writer for The Oregonian (after Ornette’s evening concert but before the SFJazz Collective played Friday night), a music fan behind us piped up: “I can’t believe you got all of that from the talk.” And another friend had earlier described what Ornette had said as “gibberish.” But come on! Ornette Coleman! Even random sonic expressions are going to have meaning! Aren’t they? Yes, they are…

Five life-changing things Ornette said on Friday.

1. “You don’t have to make a sound to hear, right?”

2. “We’re all breathing life, but what is life breathing?”

3. “I don’t think I’m making music. I’m translating something because of what I feel.”

4. “Everything we do is about being better and more precise… We would never exchange creativity for repetition.”

5. Mandel: “Is your music improving?” Ornette: “Every day (emphatically). The only thing I have to do is learn how to play it.”

6. “We cry and we pray because that’s all we know how to do. I cry because of the meaning I can’t express of the quality of the thing that’s making me feel that way.”

OK. I know. That was six. A bonus! It could have been 10. Maybe. Some sentences in my notes started out promisingly but dwindled into nothing as I struggled to make sense of Ornette’s thoughts. We can look at them one by one.

1. “You don’t have to make a sound to hear, right?”

A lot of the interview (and by the way, Ornette’s son, drummer Denardo Coleman, was there, too) had to do with Ornette noodling around the idea that actual sound and how we represent sound, the word sound, are very different and confuse us. He also said, “Sound has no parents,” which I like a lot but have no idea what he meant.

I think Ornette focuses on paradoxes inherent in language to help him play the kind of music he does. It’s useful to unhook his thinking from conventions — in language AND in music. So he talks in language games because it leads him to some genuinely original thoughts. At least for him. So: We forgive him the Delphic riddles and hunt for the expressions that will somehow lever us out of our well-worn troughs of thinking/listening/acting. This makes him a pragmatist in my book, and really, much of what he said had a direct connection to John Dewey-like American pragmatism!

Back in the mid-’50s when Ornette stormed into the hard bop world of Manhattan and threw down microtonality, fragmented melodies and rhythmic irregularities (and I think I’m quoting almost directly from Mandel in the roundtable discussion right after the interview), he was really suggesting a deeply creative approach to sound-making, not a method or technique. And he will do whatever it takes to keep the creativity flowing. He protects himself!

2. “We’re all breathing life, but what is life breathing?”

More language games, maybe, but for a sax player especially, that whole breathing thing is at the heart of things. Watching Ornette Friday night, resplendent in a shiny blue suit, huddled over his sax, spinning himself into sonic worlds that were by turns thrilling, crazy, tiring and profound, it wasn’t hard to imagine that he was taking the measure of what life was breathing, somehow.

3. “I don’t think I’m making music. I’m translating something because of what I feel.”

Maybe the most conventional thing he said during the afternoon conversation. We’ve often heard artists talk like this. But in Ornette’s mouth it comes out a little different. “I’m translating something” is not the same thing as “I’m translating what I feel,” which is how we usually hear it. What is he translating? What’s the something? I don’t think he would name it if he could. And if he did, he would move on. There’s simply no underestimating how fiercely attached to creativity Ornette is…

4. “Everything we do is about being better and more precise… We would never exchange creativity for repetition.”

… which leads to four. One of several utterly pragmatic things Ornette said (such as, “How do we know something? By its title and what it does.”) He believes in “improvement” and has a definition for it that I wasn’t able to transcribe. “Precise” doesn’t come to mind with Ornette, not with wilder yawping his sax (trumpet and violin, too, on Friday night) does. But there it is. In his mind, he’s being very precise at the instant we think he’s anything but.

Here’s John Coltrane on Ornette, from Ben Ratliff’s wonderful “Coltrane: The story of sound”: “I only played with him once in my life, and he asked me to join him. We played two pieces — 12 minutes to be exact — but I know that that was the most intense moment of my life.”

5. Mandel: “Is your music improving?” Ornette: “Every day (emphatically). The only thing I have to do is learn how to play it.”

A thought experiment. Ornette referred to the 12-tone scale (the notes on the piano that make up an octave) once on Friday, something about there being 12 notes you could identify, and then he launched into something that seemed totally unrelated and I lost the thread. Anyway. Ornette doesn’t confine himself to the 12 tones. He’s in between those tones. A lot.

OK. Imagine that between C and C-sharp, say, there are 12 more tones, a whole new octave, with much smaller intervals between the tones. I imagine Ornette playing on that scale. Anything he plays in the space between the original C and C-sharp is going to sound completely different from anything in our original 12-tone scale, even if it’s just “Happy Birthday.”

Stick with me: He takes the space between the C and C-sharp of that knew scale and creates 12 more tones, and he plays another phrase. To us, it’s just a wobble in the vibration, to him it could be a phrase of great complexity and importance. And then he takes the space between THAT C and C-sharp and starts all over again. Forever. All possible sound is lurking in there somewhere, like the great library of Borges contains all possible combinations of letters, from “Hamlet” to utter nonsense (and more of the latter than the former). Music combines the infinities of the library and mathematics. The space between 1 and 2 can be divided infinitely, we know, and then combined infinitely.

There is no evidence whatsoever that Ornette thinks like that. But I do think he courts the infinite somehow. He talked about the “eternal” a lot. And at one point, he said, “There must be human beings who know what it is to be human in relation to God…”

6. “We cry and we pray because that’s all we know how to do. I cry because of the meaning I can’t express of the quality of the thing that’s making me feel that way.”

See? It’s not easy to get your arms around a sentence like that second one. But… I love it. The admission of his own limitation: Ornette can’t express everything. He’s not infinite, even though sound is (and I really believe Ornette thinks that). Onstage he looks fragile, fit but fragile. He’s not forever. The work is hard (”We work hard so we don’t have to work,” he said at one point!). Creativity is a challenge. Failure is everywhere. Repetition is a trap that snares us almost every time. We cry and we pray. And maybe we even look to Ornette to give us some ideas about how to get out of this mess.

11 comments »

  1. As Richard Pryor (whose spirit Ornette stood in for on Joe Henry’s “Richard Pryor Addresses a Cheerful Nation”) might’ve put it: “Freaky-deaky.”
    A fascinating peek at the puzzle. Wish I’d been there.
    One addendum: I’d take “sound has no parents” to be Ornette’s way of saying that sound is both something unto itself — original and self-sufficient, important in its own right — and that the conventional systems of notation, chord structure, time signature and other methods of musical organization/description do not precede sound, have no authority over it.

    Comment by Hugs — February 16, 2008 @ 2:57 pm

  2. I think your addendum is exactly right.

    Comment by Barry Johnson — February 16, 2008 @ 4:19 pm

  3. you might take a look at a book called “Creating Consciousness” by Albert Low to get a better understanding of what Mr. Coleman is talking about.

    Comment by Cibyl Kavan — February 16, 2008 @ 7:09 pm

  4. I’m sure Albert Low has lots of great things to say about creativity (even a quick Googling convinces me of that!). I have SOME doubts about whether what he says will speak directly to what’s ricocheting around the brainpan of Ornette Coleman, unless Ornette is a Zen student of Low’s. Mostly, I think that Ornette has developed a very practical (if complex) way of approaching creativity, and I can see how it might resemble the few Zen formulations I know about.

    Comment by Barry Johnson — February 17, 2008 @ 11:26 am

  5. I don’t anything about Ornette Coleman’s spiritual life….However, Albert Low does have some VERY interesting things to say about music and consciousness and devotes an entire chapter to this topic (Chp. 23), with some interesting citations ranging from Wittgentstein to Stephen Hawking to Marie-Loiuse Von Franz. Some of it is WAY beyond me…but I think it might have relevance to what I think I hear Ornette saying about creativity beyond any emotional content….it sounds a bit like how i paint!!

    Comment by Cibyl Kavan — February 17, 2008 @ 8:08 pm

  6. I like the sound of that! And now I really want to see your paintings — you are in a show at the First Unitarian Church in March, yes? (The miracle that is Google!)

    Comment by Barry Johnson — February 17, 2008 @ 9:50 pm

  7. yes. only an extremely emerging painter though and a late bloomer at that! I could pass the book over to Bob and he could pass it on to you to peruse.

    Comment by Cibyl Kavan — February 17, 2008 @ 10:49 pm

  8. thanks for insightful and enlightening comments on the conversation — I must say I was not frustrated though yes, sometimes bewildered, by Ornette’s comments — I was very pleased to be involved in his creative process which extends to talk as it does to sound. He is very charismatic and even when Delphic, he stimulates thinking and re-thinking all sorts of assumptions. Engaging with his mind, whether through music or talk, delights me, and I’m glad others (such as Art Scatter) got something from the conversation, too. There’s more like that — several of Ornette’s Socratic dialogues, in my book Miles Ornette Cecil — Jazz Beyond Jazz - for a sample check out my website http://www.HowardMandel.com.

    Comment by Howard Mandel — February 19, 2008 @ 7:30 am

  9. Howard, Thanks for your comments. Your sang-froid and obvious knowledge of jazz on both panels on Friday led me to put your book on my list immediately. Glad you came to Portland, and really happy you visited the site.

    Comment by barry — February 19, 2008 @ 11:18 am

  10. brenda strong…

    Man i love reading your blog, interesting posts !…

    Trackback by brenda strong — March 4, 2008 @ 7:06 pm

  11. [...] at just the right time for me, just as I was thinking seriously about the problem of creativity, and I loved his utter pragmatic dedication to sustaining his creative [...]

    Pingback by Art Scatter » Wanted: Portland Jazz Festival sugar daddy — September 8, 2008 @ 10:03 pm

Copy link for RSS feed for comments on this post or for TrackBack URI

Leave a comment

Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

(required)

(required)