Quick responses to ET 336
Date: 05 Feb 97 12:10:01 EST
From: Discipline Global Mobile <73064 dot 1470 at CompuServe dot COM>
Subject: Quick responses to ET 336
Tuesday 4th. February, 1997.
Dear Team,
Quick responses to ET 336 ...
I
Date: Mon 27 Jan 1997 14:27:26 -0500
From: sid smith <106050 dot 2211 at compuserve dot com>
Subject: Crimson Connections
Can anyone find a link between legendary singer Tom Jones and King Crimson?
... Thus from Tom Jones to KC in six easy steps.
RF: Come on Sidney - you can do better than this!
Tom Jones recorded at Decca's studios in West End Lane. His
engineer (and Engelbert Humperdinck's) was Bill Price. Bill was the
engineer for "The Cheerful Insanity of Giles, Giles & Fripp".
So: Tom Jones > Bill Price > GG & F > King Crimson.
Sid: In Wrong Movements (the excellent hisory of Robert Wyatt by Mike King)
Bassist Bill MacCormack remembers the Fripp produced sessions for Matching
Moles Little Red Record. " Having Robert Fripp as the producer was an
absolute disaster, if only for the reason he reduced Phil Miller ( Moles
guitarist) to a quivering wreck so that he could barely move his
fingers"...
RF: Often interviewers, writers, journalists ask me questions about the
famous people I've worked for / with; e.g. biographies of Bowie and
Gabriel. I decline to comment, on the grounds that these relationships
while professional are also inevitably personal, and include private
moments. So, although I wouldn't like to change anyone's opinion of me a
towering and terrorising presence, there were other dimensions to the
production of that record which even someone as near to the vinyl as Bill
might not have seen. These were discussed between Robert Wyatt (a wonderful
spirit) and myself at the time, and are inappropriate for discussion here.
If we are going to make reasoned and reasonable judgements of an
event, we have to know all the circumstances relevant to the time, place
and persons. This is not the only way we arrive at or come to conclusions,
knowings, or judgements: some are direct, and penetrate the nature of a
situation. In Guitar Craft they are called "Points of Seeing". In the same
way that when a performance gets up and flies, normal time changes or even
stops, so with a point of seeing: its nature is creative, the perception is
non-sequential, it is direct and takes place in a flash. These "quality
knowings" or experiences become the basis for our judging or assessing the
rest of our mundane lives.
Yes! says Sid. Thank you, Sid.
II
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 17:35:34 -0500
From: rhino at indy dot net (rhino)
Subject: Fripp's methods in ET332
Hi Rhino!
But don't forget the practical: I was writing in the letter by hand
(now I have the current ETs on disk) and abbreviation was the order of the
day. The concision also served clarity of argument.
Cheers, Phaedrus.
III
From: "Ott, John" <John_Ott at ATK dot COM>
Subject: Uk project
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 17:52:28 -0600
>Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 00:32:04 -0400
From: Andre Godin <eag3374 at UMoncton dot ca>
Subject: U.K.
J.O. First a question. Does anyone know what became of the U.K. project
that was suppose to feature Wetton, Jobson, Fripp and an occasional
Bruford?
RF: I was never involved in this. While Crimson were playing at the
Longacre in New York Eddie and John asked me to play a session for the
album. I declined: working a week on Broadway with Crimson was already just
a little bit more than I could uncomfortably yet honourably handle, already
towards the end of a tour.
John came to DGM World Central recently and I contributed several
bars of melody and a little soundscaping to a ballad on his new album.
IV
Date: 27 Jan 97 18:59:52 EST
From: Keith Smillie <100650 dot 236 at CompuServe dot COM>
Subject: Mellotronics
KS: There was an article in the UK newspaper The Observer about the
Mellotron.
RF: Les Bradley, one of the two brothers that originated the beast, was
buried in Birmingham last Friday.
KS: ... Robert Fripp has five.
RF: Two double manuals from the earliest Crimson days (one was destroyed in
Chicago in 1969, one was sold to Genesis in early 1970) and three single
manuals including those used in 1972-74.
KS: No flute in the world sounds like a Mellotron flute. You play "Happy
Birthday" and it makes you want to cry.
RF: You play anything else and it makes you want to weep.
KS: You have to fight with a Mellotron!
RF: And then you die.
IV
Date: 27 Jan 97 19:15:38 EST
From: "Neil J. Cavanagh" <76111 dot 3636 at CompuServe dot COM>
Subject: or so it seems to me (NetSaga part 38473367)
NJC: ... The presence of Robert Fripp in this forum, be it temporary or
permanent, ... invites more careful consideration and reflection to the
table.
RF: Why?
NJC: The exchange regarding performer/audience relationships points out
many contradictions to me. It's likely useful for a reader to separate and
define the words: *responsibilities, expectations, and hopes*. All three
relate to the problem, but each has a different meaning.
RF: I agree.
NJC: I don't personally know Robert Fripp, but yet I view (what I hear of)
his actions onstage and off as completely appropriate behavior.
RF: Hey, you're beginning to persuade me too.
NJC: I don't think I am alone in that viewpoint.
RF: Have you checked in with Matt the Three-Headed Beast lately? Or Randall
Powell, the former naive fool?
NJC: Sometimes a smile is an illusion, sometimes a smile keeps an illusion
alive.
RF: Wow. That's profound.
NJC: I see a lot of energy wasted in myself and others with our personal
opinions and expectations.
RF: Yes! That is exactly and precisely accurate.
NJC: Related to all this in some ways is Martin Scorsese's "The King of
Comedy" film (1983) with Robert DeNiro and Jerry Lewis. Go and rent this if
you can, even Mr. Fripp may appreciate it; I think there's something to it.
RF: I'd rather see the new Steven Segal with my Sister. Van Damme ain't
quite doing it to me lately - my sister even told me not to bother with the
last one.
V
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 21:45:41 -0800 (PST)
From: Robert Cervero <rob at popper dot ced dot berkeley dot edu>
Subject: KC boots -- continuing saga
RC: Crimson bootlegs have always been a touchy issue, especially in these
cyberpages, in no small part because Mr. Fripp himself has been so
outspoken against them.
RF: Too true.
RC: I find contradictions in Fripp's views and attitudes about live
audience recordings and bootlegs.
RF: Firstly, you don't show and develop what those contradictions are, to
my satisfaction anyway.
Secondly, you would rather not agree with my views in any case.
Thirdly, my views are now more developed, and sophisticated, than
those expressed in the Musician article of some 17 years ago. My main
concern with bootlegging has not been discussed in ET (only briefly touched
upon). And no-one has even mentioned my secondary concern (see below). The
financial aspect is not the key issue for me.
RC: Moreover, the recent flood of Crimson bootleg CDs, mainly from Japan,
underscore the tremendous pent-up and largely unmet demand for Crimson live
materials. Robert/DMG/Possible Productions should take serious notice to
what's going on in the way of new unauthorized Crimson releases, and get
some good stuff out, and soon!
RF: Firstly, I / we do, at least to some extent.
Secondly, I thought (on the basis of commentary in ET) that the
feeble flow of KC releases such as it is, live and otherwise, was in itself
evidence of my greed and status as "economic LeStat".
Thirdly, you don't take into account the differing expectations for
bootleg bootlegs and "official bootlegs". Consider the reaction to
"Earthbound", even the KC video "Live In Japan 1995". Buy / trade a manquy,
pathetic, distorted recording of Crimson in a wind-tunnel and your low
expectations are fully met. If DGM released the same, there'd be uproar in
ET. And I would feel ashamed. David and Hugh would give me a hard time for
allowing a dud release. Diane would be disappointed. Gill would avoid
looking me in the eyes. Beaton Bunnerius Bun, celebrity rabbit, would spray
my foot.
Fourthly, "good stuff" doesn't happen by accident. "Epitaph" has
taken up nearly three months of DGM time and attention. But then, it sets
standards for historic releases of archival / bootleg material. Commercial
bootleggers with the same material as we hold in the archives frequently
sell a fairly dodgy product with cheap packaging, at least by our
standards. And the descriptive information / credits shows the level of
care involved. (I accept there are exceptions).
RC: First to the matter of Fripp's contradiction... The contradiction,
however, lies in the fact that Fripp himself has many times boasted ...
RF: No boast: a statement of fact ...
RC: ... that King Crimson live performances are and have always been
superior to their studio work (which I concur with).
RF the Pedant: "With which I concur". And always is a long time.
RC: In the Frame by Frame booklet, Fripp writes:
`Studio and live are two worlds. Would you, the audience, prefer
to have a love letter or a hot date? Each have their value. Crimson were
always the band for a hot date. From time to time they could write a love
letter too, but for me they were better in the clinches'.
Is this a tease or what?
RF: No tease. I'm suggesting that you go and hear Crimson live.
A recent commentator asked: then why record? I don't consider this
a very well considered question. You might as well ask a good studio band:
Why bother playing live?
I'd rather hold my wife, but I love her letters. They reveal and
develop a different aspect of our intimacy which then enhances our time
together. Our clinches are more all-embracing than our letters, but I'd be
bereft if my wife stopped writing to me because she prefers holding me.
A good studio band should improve in live performance, and a good
live band's recording might even get better. Both aspects feed the other.
RC: Here's Robert telling us on the one hand nothing could top live
Crimson, and then scolding die-hard fans for trying to capture live Crimson
for personal pleasure and prosperity sake. (RF the Pedant II interjection:
Surely "posterity"?)
RF: You can't capture Crimson, or anyone else, live (for either prosperity
or posterity). We can't capture life: we live it, in the moment. That's all
there is. This is something like the different natures of a literate and
oral / aural society. Both have their value, both are very different ways
of experiencing, perceiving and living.
If we try to capture the moment, the moment escapes us. This is a
key principle. When we are present in the moment, our experience of time
changes. Then, our experience of the event changes. Then, the event itself
changes in response to us. Then something changes in us in response to the
event. That's take-off. Then, we wonder that life is not like this all the
time! How we could not live like this always! Then, we fall to earth. Then,
we wonder how we can get back to Paradise again.
Perhaps when we go to shows we feel pretty helpless to contribute,
or participate, or affect what is happening. Yes and no. The outcome of any
performance is subject to the quality, quantity and intensity of energies
available to the performance. The concern of the performer is how to
realise the potential within the event. This is by:
1. Defining / delineating the boundaries of the performance: that is,
containment. This increases the intensity of the event.
2. Raising the quality of attention (or presence) available;
3. Increasing the quantity of energy to take-off point.
<An analogy: boiling water. To boil water you contain the water
within a kettle. Then you change the nature / quality of the fuel available
(e.g. gas) into heat. Then, you turn up the gas (increase the quantity of
the quality) to bring the water to boiling point. If you use an open
saucepan, a lot of the water is dispersed (wasted) in steam. If you use a
candle, you'll never reach the critical heat either. And if you hold a
handful of matches under the open saucepan, you might have the right to
boil the water - hey! you paid for it with hard-earned pay and struck the
matches politely - but you probably won't be making tea for me>.
Good natural performers have an instinctual sense of the dynamics
of performance: how to tweak the expectations of a crowd so their attention
becomes engaged; once engaged, their attention is directed and encouraged;
once encouraged is increased; once increased, the performance takes
off. Then, the crowd is transformed into an audience. Then, the audience
listens to the music; then, perhaps the music is heard. Then ... life
begins again!
Other performers, perhaps less naturally gifted, may nevertheless
be sensitive to the energies involved. It is quite possible to sense the
"envelope" of energy surrounding, containing, protecting the
performance. Some people can even see it: something like an aura writ
large. Probably, most ET contributors have experienced this and would be
able to describe it, in their own form of words, if they examined their
experience of their most moving / powerful / intense performances (some of
which they may not have "liked" at all).
Where the envelope is punctured, the event doesn't properly come to
life. Or perhaps, the "life" of the event isn't properly conceived. The
audience and performer don't quite "spark" each other. When the
relationship between audience and performer does come together, as if
tangibly, the performance may become an event and acquire a life of its
own. Sound becomes transformed into music, and the music is "born".
Our experience of shows like this can have an utterly revolutionary
and transformational effect in our lives: an eternal moment within our
experience is not likely to be forgotten. At a certain level of
"transformational intensity", some shows acquire a resonance in their
society and community, like Woodstock.
If I bring my attention and presence to bear in a concert, as an
solitary individual I might not be able to plug a puncture, or punctures,
caused by an inattentive or dispersed audience (= crowd). But I might just
equilibrate and balance out a noisy drunk; or balance out a series of
disruptive camera flashes; or the constant motion of the man next to me
whose lease on four beers is up for renewal.
But if I place a demand on the moment, I am not in the moment which
is available to me now: I am in the moment I want / demand / expect /
imagine. Outside the moment, I deprive it of part of its possibility. If I
sacrifice what I want, what I know, what I like, if I give up my
guarantees, something else becomes available: something "real" (whatever we
might understand by that). I may not like or dislike it, but it's
real. "Real" has a different flavour: clean, straightforward, transparent -
it is what it is, not what we think it is.
If we sleep through the moment, we don't contribute much to it but
we probably don't much disturb it either. If we deliberately put our
attention outside the moment of the show, we create a puncture. Intensity
escapes. If there are enough punctures, the show may be professional, even
exciting - but not transformational. Agents of the Puncture Pin:
expectation; reification of the intangible by putting a microphone on it;
constructing my wheelchair so that it records in digital stereo; ducking my
video camera into a bag every time a security man walks by; a personal
state modified by chemicals or ingestives which put me in a different time
and place.
Anything which disturbs the flow of the energy field will cause
repercussions. Like all of the above, plus constant movement among the
crowd so that it never quite coheres into an audience. A crowd is plural,
an audience singular. Repeated disturbances unsettle a performance. Beyond
a point, when it loses its intensity, this show simply won't boil.
If we are not in the present, we can't direct the future. Or to put
it differently, we do direct the future but it's not a future we'd hope to
see. Guitar Craft aphorism: The future is what the present can bear. Blake
said it quicker: "He who catches joy as it flies lives in Eternity's
sunrise. He who doth bind to himself a joy, doth the winged life destroy"
(close).
If, friendly and supportive ET reader, you are prepared to accept
that for me this is true (regardless of your own persuasion, feelings, and
rights as consumer) perhaps you are prepared to accept the pain I feel when
anything nails the event to the earth: like bootlegging, like photography,
like unrestrained substance ingestation (to coin a phrase).
I accept not everyone is prepared or likely to share my views on
this, but there are now a large number of people with a Guitar Craft
background, open minded or formally sceptical of my views, who have
experienced for themselves how easy it is to damage the web of energies
which hold together the fabric of a performance.
There are subtleties involved in performance, but they are also
open to practical study, application and testing. Much of the Guitar Craft
training takes place in performance, with students as both performers and
as audience. This takes place both outside and inside the professional
world of performance; between the two there is are worlds of difference.
Readers might suggest that a rock concert just ain't the place for
subtlety. My own view is both yes and no. Potential remains, particularly
for each new generation of listener. Lennon was a poet for one generation,
Cobain for another.
There are other issues involved in bootlegging. Most of my supposed
views (presented on my behalf) in ET misrepresent them.
If we accept the analogy of a marriage / relationship / hot date /
love letter relationship between audience and performer, what views do we
take on groping and date rape? Most of the KC enthusiasts are, I suggest,
well aware of my views on bootlegging (however much the booters might
disregard them, misrepresent them, and seek to expose "contradictions" in
them). The point is, many of the tapes in circulation have been recorded
knowingly against my expressed, declared, and well-publicised objection,
even displayed requests to refrain.
So, this is an open question for the readership, as I kick the wasp
nest of "Bootlegging Theory: A Deconstructionist Approach To
Post-Modernism?":
What view do we take of a non-consensual act?
And now an offer: if any readers have prime boots (of KC and / or
Fripp related) which make the spine tingle, or viscerally activate any
other parts of their anatomy, send them to DGM World Central. We'll make a
transfer to our archives and then return the tape to you. No prosecutions
will follow. I shall not spit on your foot (either of them). If we are
convinced by the music, we'll make it available, whether on general release
or by mail order, when time permits.
To those of careless thinking procedures: this is not
contradiction. If you claim that is, please present your arguments very
carefully. Otherwise I probably shall spit on your feet (both of them).
Meanwhile, "Non-consensual Acts - The Way Forward?" and get your
hot boots in the post!
Sincerely,
Robert Fripp.
Mike Stok