Name Your Favorite Thelonious Monk Album. Please.

No, you're "dicking around" with Monk, trashing is music by calling it a product of a mental illness. Plus, since when is yelling at a recording engineer proof of anything. Going by that logic, Buddy Rich is even crazier by yelling at his musicians the way he did on the bus!

 

Regardless of what outtakes any of us have heard, they have no bearing on the music that was ultimately created. I'm close to several people who have spent the better part of their lives studying Monk's music, and if I told them about your comments, you would be the one judged insane. Even then, it would have no bearing on your mastering.

 

Steve, interesting that you edited this post. And if you want to unsubscribe from this thread that's fine with the rest of us. Frankly, your initial comments about this record and Monk's comping behind soloists, and your subsequent remark about Monk's mental health issues being the source of his musical genius were erroneous. Now you're hiding behind the fact that you've heard the sesssion talk back that we haven't, and that you were just teasing Il pleut.
You're a smart guy. Admit you made a mistake.

 

How In Orbit is seen as representing the best of Monk is beyond me. Then using his yelling at a R.E. as proof of his mental illness, well, I'll just say that I respectfully disagree, and leave it that.

 

Monk was derided for "improper technique" from the beginning. Dismissed as a bit of hack early in his career, in fact. I don't think he mental condition had anything to do with that one way or another.

I do hear his stylings becoming a bit more 'erratic' (for lack of a better word) on some of his later live recordings, however. If this is directly attributable to his mental state at the time, I have no idea.

 

'Well hey, man, like that's your opinion'.
Just don't get all patronizing and authoritarian about the cause of Monk's organic mental disorder caused by traumatic head injury. It's well known.
And you're still wrong about Blues in Orbit (not a Monk album) and Monk's playing behind his soloists (did it all the time, unless Miles tried to punch him out).
Sheesh.

 

Great art comes from great suffering, said the immortal Dr House.
This thread reminded me of Bill Evans.
The 1st album I bought from him was The Paris Concert, volume 2.
The last trio, the last year, before cocaine problems killed him.
I was not really into jazz then.
I remembered listening over and over to his improvisation on Nardis. I was amazed by it. I stopped listening to Keith Emerson after that!
Beauty, poetry and suffering.
Was cocaine some ingredient in the mixture of that great poet mind?
I guess so. How could it not be?
If Monk was in some sort of mental illness, then it was part of his music. Music expresses the soul.
Van Gogh: you visit the Rijkmuseum, where his paintings are exposed in chronological order. You don't need to read the biography after that.
Just my 2-cents. Hopefully, I won't offend anyone.

 

I really went on a big Monk kick back in 2000 or so. It's hard to pick a favorite. I really like the live albums THELONIOUS IN ACTION & MISTERIOSO. They were recorded around the same time in 1958 at the Five Spot. I think Johnny Griffin sounds really good with Monk. MONK'S DREAM, which was his first Columbia album, is another favorite of mine. I like the Riverside solo albums as well. The live record with Coltrane from a few years back is fantastic. I can go on.

 

I totally get what you're saying about how mental illness makes one look at ones work with a different perspective. Seems like an obvious 'duh' to me. But I'm guessing that some here are offended because they think you're saying that that 'different perspective' is one of viewing the work in a less-favorable light.

I don't think that's what you're saying at all. At least it doesn't make ME view the work as lesser. Just puts it into a certain perspective.

But back to the IN ORBIT sessions--those predate his beating which you say contributed to his mental condition, don't they?

 

I'm not taking offense of the fact, and it is a fact, that Monk suffered from mental illness in his life, or that, in some ways, it did influence his music. What I am taking offense to is that his mental illness was the major factor in his music. Monk studied music all his life, he practiced intensely, and he was creative and unique. How your comments are coming to me (probably only me) is as blowing Monk off as a nut case, who didn't know what he was doing. Interviews of Monk, music scholars, and fellow musicians all agree: Monk knew what he was doing when it came to music.

 

Sometimes mental illness and talent go hand in hand.

My fave Monk album is Monk's Dream.

Evan

 

True mental illness is usually an impediment to an artistic career because it causes disorganized behavior and communication problems or interpersonal issues. Monk might have been more productive had he not had mental health issues.
The issues in this thread have been turned around somewhat so that the initial challenges to the accuracy of some statements have been reflected back on the challengers, who are now accused of being 'personally offended' and ignorant of the cause of Monk's eccentricities.
About art and inspiration in general, I think that it's naive and sentimental to cite mental illness as an inspiration to artists. No denying that the two have coincided. Case in point is trumpeter Tom Harrell who has been public with his diagnosis of schizophrenia and the fact that he is functional because of good treatment. Artistic achievement, in my opinion, is a triumph over disability in cases like this. Romanticizing mental illness is a mistake.
As long as Steve wants to defend his remarks, I'm going to repeat mine. Where are the examples of Monk laying out behind his soloists most of the time that he's referring to? It's a flip statement, and it's incorrect.

 

If you think that Eastwood's film on Bird is "the truth" about his life, well, why not tell me that Bird Lives!: The High Life and Hard Times of Charlie (Yardbird) Parker by Ross Russell is a real biography that tells "the truth" also...

 

Wow. This turned out to be a very thought-provoking thread.

I've seen the documentary ("Straight, No Chaser") where Monk spins around in the airport in (Stockholm?). The guy was clearly non compos mentis, although I can't say when it started.

At the end of the day, we're left with the music. And it is glorious. Whatever drugs the Beatles were using, whatever demons possessed Brian Wilson's mind, there's no escaping the fact that they made some pretty tremendous music.

You want some Monk? These are the first three I would recommend...

Brilliant Corners
Art Blakey's Jazz Messengers with Thelonious Monk
Live at the It Club

 

never thought this thread I started would turn out so 'lively'...

some great thoughts and insights took shape, however let's close this one up now before it gets out of hand.

thanks all who turned me on into checking out even more monk!

 

Look Steve, I am most certainly not taking any of this personally. Monk is not even one of my top five jazz artists. Thats just me. However, this statement you made is pretty strong, and not as widely accepted as you seem to think it is. Did he have mental problems, perhaps. Does this mean he played the way he did "because he was literally going insane"? I think you need more evidence than his studio ravings.

Also, what do you mean by, "at least at the end". Of course not. He hadn't been pioneering anything for almost a decade and a half by the time of his death.

I like the Charlie Parker analogy. He was a well know addict. So what. Was that the source of his brilliance? I think not. Was Charlie Mingus' talent due to his politics and antisemitism? Not likely.

I could really care less whether his mental issues were the source of his genius or not, I just wouldn't make statement to the fact with out knowing it to be the case, and then I would not shout down the opposition by saying they are taking it personally.

 

hmmm....i'm honored (i think).

monk's style was pretty firmly established much earlier in his career. he was marketed as a controversial figure by blue note in the late 40s. i believe from what i've read (and it's hard to find much definitive on monk, apparently the truth is well guarded), that he had emotional and substance abuse problems for a long time. so who can say how much and in what way all that affected his musical ideas, and does it really matter? if i got rid of all my records made by people who had quirky or unpleasant personalities, i'd have about 2 misterrogers albums left (and we're still waiting for the tell-all bio of him!).

i'm interested in the story of the 1958 police beating- i've never heard it. where is that documented? i guess monk was in good company with having to deal with that crap...miles and bud powell to name two others.

 

i have also tried to find more info on the beating - to no avail.

 

Monk basically quit for the last 10 years of his life, so yes, definitely he may have done more if he didn't have problems.

Monk often layed out for long stretches behind soloists. It's well documented in the case of Coltrane, and you can hear it on a lot of the records with Charlie Rouse.

I don't think that's a bad thing, I like the pianoless sound. Monk would often use his comping as a way to direct the soloist back to the tune (as opposed to just playing on the changes without reference to Monk's composition), but he also knew how to stay out of the way if necessary.

 

For me, Genius of Modern Music Vols. 1 and 2