Thanks to all of you who shared your perceptions of Friday's concert/bronchial symposium by jazz piano legend Keith Jarrett. I've spent a bit of time ruminating, too, and have a few more cents to chip in:
- I've seen a number of brilliant pianists in my time -- McCoy Tyner, Brad Mehldau, John Lewis -- and with every one sans Jarrett I had the impression they we're so deeply involved with what they were playing that someone could have set off a pipe bomb without interrupting their playing. It's a curious muse that gives a genius a train of thought as easily derailed as Jarrett's.
- Upon consideration, I'm quite sure I resent being referred to as an "impurity," which would seem to the logical extension of Jarrett's remarks. (Imagine if he had said it with a German accent -- would have sounded positively sinister.) But more than that I feel sorry for someone who has become so estranged with the world outside his head.
- I've been to Davies dozens of times, and by those standards, Friday's audience was about as reverent as one can expect. (I was more annoyed by the visual distraction of glowing phone screens from those who can't bear to message-less for more than two minutes.) If you want to see a fidgety, restless crowd, try one of the Wednesday symphony rehearsals, when it's all senior citizens jacked up on coffee and free donuts.
- Yes, we do put up with a fair bit of grief by accepting Jarrett's right to vandalize his own art with persistent vocalisms that sound like nothing so much as a gang of agitated rodents. Mutual goodwill suggests the audience deserves of consideration, too.
- I don't buy the complaint/theory about the audience perversely making more noise during the quiet passages. Just because you're not hearing certain sounds doesn't mean they're not there. In fact, not hearing would be a very useful skill to develop.
- One of the key concepts in psychology is "maladaptive behavior," actions taken through habit or perversity that actual put you further away from a desired outcome. I'd argue that Jarrett's interruptions fall in that category, The audience is a little restive, you rip 'em for that, and now they're so tense and hyper-aware that all kinds of stuff is going to slip out. A polite request at the beginning of the show noting some ground rules (the "how to know when a piece is actually finished" policy, for example, would be helpful) and a bit of flexibility are far more likely to keep the audience working with you.
- Whatever happened to the tradition of symphony ushers handing out free cough drops to those who need them?
Send tips, comments and good karma to the author.
Comments
Ok, so I've read three of your "reviews" of KJ and am still waiting to hear about the music, sans ridicule. Now it's a critique of Mr. Jarrett's personality issues?! I'm at a loss here, are you the Examiner jazz reviewer? the Examiner's resident psychoanalyst? suffering from a case of "pianist envy"? I doubt that the towering, otherworldly music emerging through Jarrett and into the moment-to-moment, improvisational space has much to do with his ego development, much less what is going on in his "mind." Apparently Beethoven was kinda grouchy too but do we really care?
Then you insist on describing Friday's audience as "reverent"?! Based on the heckling, the outbursts, the epithets coming from some audience members? Some audience education at the beginning would have been good, and it seems like SFJazz dropped the ball on that one. But I'm still trying to understand why some people continued coughing after being asked not to. That's not even respectful, much less reverent.
After all the awkwardness and outright discomfort of KJ-audience interchange, KJ proved he can entertain and proved he is a virtuoso performer. He turned audience requested old standards into modern jazz improvisations. He had the audience eating out of his hand and begging for more, which he slowly accommodated via 5 encores, something I am sure he has never done before in his entire life. Can KJ be behave like a diva, a prima-dona? Yes, because he can afford to.
thank you, mr. becker, for your thoughtful comments regarding mr. jarrett's performance (or lack thereof). i posted my own thoughts on the evening in response to your prior article ('Jazz giant Keith Jarrett delights and baits SF audience'). i appreciate your willingness to acknowledge when an artist has not lived up to his part in the artist-audience relationship. in my mind, when that trust is broken, it's hard to merely comment on the music. i, for one, remained quiet throughout the performance, and found myself increasingly on edge...not in anticipation of what 'otherworldly music' would next emerge from jarrett's imagination and fingers, but rather, nervously waiting for the next cough and the next petulant rant against the 'impurities' (namely, US, his audience). coughs, by the way, that i really wouldn't have noticed much at all if he hadn't continually pointed them out. glenn gould ultimately retreated to his studio. perhaps jarrett would benefit from doing the same.
This 'performance' capped his self indulgent audience bashing that has grown as he ages and has escalated at the last three solo concerts I have seen in the bay area (Zellerbach, Opera House and Davies). I disagree with comments that he rose above the angst he created. In 55 years of concert attendance I have never experienced such disrespect for an audience. Talent alone is no excuse. I have come to expect the groaning and gyrating and simply close my eyes to enhance listening. His petulant diatribe after intermission took care of any higher states of concentration. Why do I need to hear about some perfect Yokohama audience, a weird wandering into some 'Glass Menagerie' of a scene. His behavior shredded any illusion the music could have built and re-focused anyone who was paying attention into a very unhappy place. I think he should stay at home and have a little 'quiet time'. Also refund those who find his concert not worth the price.
This concert was a once-in-a-lifetime experience. The improvisations were transcendent, almost superhuman and almost impossible to sustain. Jarrett's playing had all the passion of the Koln concert but with more complex internal melodies. A full return to virtuosity after the clear spare voice he gave us in the wake of Chronic Fatigue. Then the spell was broken. The pause between riffs is the point of greatest tension, before a new creative leap. Can't we forgive an artist of this caliber (one who has always pushed himself beyond his physical limits) for being sensitive to stimuli? It is, after all, a small price to pay for the sublime. The ugly comments from the gallery shamed me. Perhaps we've gotten too used to hearing our own voices---even in these online forums--to politely listen to an artist's lament and then move on--and our need to shout back is the height of narcissism. The call for requests was an indication that the magic was gone and Keith was following instructions...
This 'performance' capped his self indulgent audience bashing that has grown as he ages and has escalated at the last three solo concerts I have seen in the bay area (Zellerbach, Opera House and Davies). I disagree with comments that he rose above the angst he created. In 55 years of concert attendance I have never experienced such disrespect for an audience. Talent alone is no excuse. I have come to expect the groaning and gyrating and simply close my eyes to enhance listening. His petulant diatribe after intermission took care of any higher states of concentration. Why do I need to hear about some perfect Yokohama audience, a weird wandering into some 'Glass Menagerie' of a scene. His behavior shredded any illusion the music could have built and re-focused anyone who was paying attention into a very unhappy place. I think he should stay at home and have a little 'quiet time'. Also refund those who find his concert not worth the price.
The simple fact is that if a performer asks for quiet, he is entitled to it. Nothing can excuse the pathetic behavior of certain audience members. Don't want to be lectured? Leave. Don't like KJ's vocalizing? Leave.
The fact is, everything KJ said was true, it struck a chord in certain members of the audience who reacted with abusive, angry language. That is indefensible.
As for comparing KJ to McCoy Tyner, Brad Mehldau, John Lewis... hmmm... not even in the same league.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!