Discussion in 'Music Corner' started by fenderesq, Sep 15, 2019.
Everyone dies. It's when and how that's note worthy.
Who’s the jazz or country scholar with impeccable credentials who’s shined such a light on those two genres for a mass audience in the past quarter century?
I’m sure as I watch the rest of this series, I’ll quibble with Burns’s choices or points of emphasis: I find it odd that the 5-CD version of the soundtrack doesn’t find room for On The Wings Of A Dove, Pop A Top, Fist City, I Don’t Wanna Play House, Ode To Billie Joe, Deeper Than The Holler, and other country songs that matter to me, and I really don’t care for Kris Kristofferson or the Nitty Gritty Dirt Band, both of whom apparently do get a lot of coverage here, but no project like this is ever going to satisfy everyone 100%.
At least he has Marty Stuart and Hag weighing in. Those two have Country gravitas.
Best string band of the 1920s not even mentioned in episode 1. I'll get over it.
He's made it clear, in virtually every interview he's done, that he recognizes that not everyone is going to hear or see their favorite artists or songs. To boil down a hundred years of history to 16 hours is quite a feat in itself, while trying to distinguish the pillars of the genre, when you clearly can't include everyone. He even alluded to this notion when it came to the "complaints" about Jazz's supposed shortcomings.
The up-thread posted Variety interview answers a LOT of the questions/gripes mentioned here...if one hasn't already, take the time to actually read it. If it's still "unsatisfactory", the obvious answer is to make your own documentary.
Hey, I agree—Jazz is a hell of a series that taught me a lot... up to a point. It's just a shame that it's so dismissive of more progressive forms of jazz.
Ahh.. gotta love 2019, where criticism of anything is unacceptable.
I don't find criticism unacceptable...I'm merely offering a solution.
Best string band of the 1920s not mentioned in your post, either.
Yeah, my wife glanced over to me and said, "There's your guy".
well, here's hoping that a lot of people taking the time to watch are feeling like it's time well spent - for my own part, i'm enjoying it, and i'm looking forward to checking out the jazz doc, too.
As a retired history teacher I'll give you a C- and I'm being very generous. You show poor command of the basic facts, over generalize and lack context. But good gosh it opens up a whole can of worms for others to chime in with their own half truths and over generalizations.
This may be the crankiest thread ever.
Oh yeah, I like the show.
It's not the acknowledging of a very real influence on country music ( and ALL American music forms) that rankles, it's that Burns tends to overdo it sometimes. Anyone who's familiar with his work knows this.
I watched episode 1 starting at the one hour mark, then watched the whole episode repeated immediately afterward. I watched episode 2 from start to finish and then watched it again immediately afterward. And I'm DVRing the complete series. Oh and inspiration and insomnia got me up at 3am to get the guitar out and work on WTCBU and Wildwood Flower for an hour. We should be alright.
not a fair criticism. pbs is still free if you pull it in with an antenna. streaming is the new physical media, and I don't think they were giving away vhs tapes and dvds back in the day.
Touché. Gid Tanner and the Skillet Lickers.
I didn't get that vibe at all. He shared how Wills music incorporated elements of several genres and made a keen observation regarding Deford Bailey's firing. The doc is so far doing a good job of pealing back the superficial overlay to reveal origins, influences and variations that evolved over the years that are the base for all American music. Sometimes, actually more often than not you need observers outside the flow of the river to point out the path.
But the casual fan isn't familiar with this sort of thing. Sure many of us here that are country fans know these sorts of things, but fans of other genres and your average Joe aren't. They are the audience. Heck, I don't think there were any major surprises in the first two episodes for me, a few minor ones. But I've listened to, read about, watched other docs, for all my life. It is more like a refresher course for me.
This is mostly true from what I've seen and heard from Burns in the past. He wasn't a jazz fan when he mead Jazz, nor a Civil War buff when he created The Civil War (still one of the greatest things ever on television) and I don't believe he was a baseball expert when he did Baseball. What he is an an explorer type of guy--he gets an interest in something and finds out as much as he can about it and looks for common threads. He's very good at creating a narrative by weaving old pictures, footage, recordings, quotes, on camera interviews--all of it masterfully edited. Yes, he's also very liberal politically, and it's no accident that he tackle big AMERICAN subjects ( you don't get more iconic American than baseball, jazz, country, The Civil War, etc) , so yes, his bias is going to come through either intentionally or not--especially where and when the subjects he tackles touch on The Struggle for Civil Rights ( which is basically what every Burns documentary is ultimately really about) , which being big American subjects, they always inevitably do.
There's no way around it.
I think he said he wasn't a fan in the past. I think he obviously is now.
That explains Mavis Staples' overwrought rendition of 'Hard Times' that opens Episode 2. (Could've been worse, I guess ... Beyonce, anyone?).
There will always be omissions. That is impossible to avoid. Charlie Poole was barely mentioned and he was a major figure as well.
Here's an unpopular opinion: I've always found Mavis overwrought in most things she did.
Separate names with a comma.