Add New Comment
Comments (3)
-
Brian Morton wrote on November 03, 2006 report
I don't know if it's appropriate for one of the authors of the Penguin Guide to Jazz Recordings to respond to John Eyles's very kind review, but here goes . . . This is very much a personal response not an "official" one.
First of all, thanks for your kind words and for your comments. As you will understand the PGJR is now just about as big as it can get which means that our commitment to coverage of as much new material as possible does occasionally mean that existing entries are . . . we don't like to say dropped, but sidelined for an edition. If the book were only to appear every ten years, that would be an issue, but given the two-year cycle and a certain continuity of use by regular users, it doesn't seem too damaging, though perhaps troubling to an artist so treated. Keith Rowe might seem to some readers to be at the fringes of what would be defined as "jazz" so there is perhaps more logic to his omission this time than if it were, say, Bobby Watson or Don Braden or JoAnne Brackeen. We have in some instances omitted artists whose entry hasn't changed substantially for a couple of editions. Michael Mantler is not included this time, though I very much hope he will return. And so on, through many similar examples.
As to the difference between rosetted items and "core collection" records, I do see your point, but you also answer the question by making clear that the rosettes are given to our special favourites, which is why some will seem blindingly obvious while others are perhaps more surprising; the "core" records are a somewhat more objective representation of discs that we feel ought to be in a basic collection. As to changes of heart, I'm quite ruthless about that. Soemtimes the (re)appearance of a record changes the nature of a discography quite substantially and since the book has the pragmatic aim of steering readers to what we consider the best or most representative records it would seem odd if those ratings never changed. That would imply a level of objectivity we could never hope to reach.
As to our standing as the jazz Stasi, what can I say? We all made mistakes under the old regime and we strive to atone for them! But no-one's airbrushed out, any more than an old friend who's not invited to every single dinner party hasn't been dumped.
Thanks to John and to everyone else for pointing out omissions, errors (inevitable, given the bulk of it), anomalies and apparent contradictions. There are two of us. We're not conjoined twins and we sometimes differ sharply, though we sometimes also forget who wrote what . . . and that IS alarming! -
well, there goes my main reason for picking up the new edition. :)
on a more serious note, Brian, you might be interested in learning that I first discovered AMM in the initial edition of your guide, along with the roughly contemporaneously published Euro Free Improv site, as maintained by Peter Stubley. FWIW, I don't disagree with the rationale behind dropping the Rowe entry, now that two distinct generations of freely improvised music have followed in jazz's lineage, it's even harder to figure out where to draw the lines, I'm sure.
Jon
www.erstwhilerecords.com -
Gordon Fick wrote on February 20, 2007 report
For a list of all discs given 4 stars in any edition of PGTJ, go to:
www.ucalgary.ca/~ghfick/jazz.html
