What's a good smear tune that isn't Lassus?

[johntarr]

Russian music was meant to glorify czarist oligarchy. You can't even imagine the orchestral or chamber music worlds without Russian composers. Mozart largely wrote for the glory of monarchs who treated poor Europeans no better than slaves. Copland was reputedly a communist. You can't throw a stick in Hollywood without knocking over half a dozen people who glorify the misuse of guns, and yet we don't even dare to criticize these people. If you're going to start canceling music without being hypocritical, you really have to do it. Sure, Filmore can't defend himself. Easy target. Care to take on rappers that support violence today? Courage fades. Watch television after dinner and tell me where all this violence comes from, yet there is no backlash. Every problem can be solved with a gun, right? It's very selective and cowardly to pick someone long dead and lay the woes of society at his feet. Look at the damage present day artists are doing to present day culture. The sins of the past become diminishingly small.

As ithinkitnot said, we should all go back and read Doug Yeo’s articles because he addresses these very points. Choosing not to play a piece because of its unacceptable message is not attacking a dead person. Doug also said that we need to treat each individual case separately, so yes, let us have conversations about the Russian composers and how Mozart writing for monarchs makes his music unacceptable. I will definitely read your articles on those topics, hyperbolica.

As far as for violent rappers and Hollywood stars glorifying killing, I agree wholeheartedly. I will certainly not program any of their works written for trombone or any other of their music in my recitals. I also don’t listen to any music that, I am aware of being violent and/or demeaning. If I unwittingly do so, I am thankful for help in learning more so that I can increase my awareness and make better choices in the future.

[timothy42b]

Can we seriously say that this music is of such high quality that we are willing to overlook its origin?

This becomes complicated, and I'm not sure what the answer is.

But I'm not yet comfortable with blithely accepting something of "high quality" despite its other associations, while cancelling something of "low quality" that causes us no pain to discard. It seems to be ends justifying means again, and an easy rationalization.

[BGuttman]

You really can't apply 21st century aptitudes toward early 20th century music.

Arthur Pryor had a solo called "Coon Band Revue" which has been renamed "Cake Walk Contest" (long after his death).

In the 19th century we had Minstrel shows that made the Trombone Family subtitles look quite tame. In fact, one of the most popular tunes from the Minstrel shows was called "Dixieland" (now just called "Dixie").

There have been cringe-worthy Black, Jewish, and Italian characters in opera for centuries.

If you don't want to play any of the Trombone Family pieces, have at it. I understand that Fillmore was not racist; he was simply using a trope of his era to sell music.

Back to the original question, I still promote the Stravinsky Pulcinella excerpt.

[MrHCinDE]

You really can't apply 21st century aptitudes toward early 20th century music.
…
In the 19th century we had Minstrel shows that made the Trombone Family subtitles look quite tame. In fact, one of the most popular tunes from the Minstrel shows was called "Dixieland" (now just called "Dixie").

Would you extend the logic from your first sentence about not applying 21st Century aptitudes to early 20th Century music to 19th Century Minstrel shows? As you noted, we had Minstrel shows in the past. Do you think they should be brought back? If not, why are Minstrel shows offensive but not this work by Fillmore?

Please don‘t answer with „nobody knows Lassus is racist“, once you know, you know.

If someone really wants to play Lassus, they should be prepared to stand up and announce the background to it so the audience are fully in the picture and can walk out if they feel so inclined.

I‘m happy to have a conversation about whether other works which include racist/xenophobic/antisemitic caricatures or similar should also be relegated to the past or at least introduced in the performance with some historical context. Is it too much of a nuance to say there is a difference between a piece whose whole Raison d'être is a cheap racist joke or a long opera with one questionable character? Not sure there‘s an easy answer and plenty of room for interpretation, but for me Lassus is clear.

[Kdanielsen]

You really can't apply 21st century aptitudes toward early 20th century music.
…
In the 19th century we had Minstrel shows that made the Trombone Family subtitles look quite tame. In fact, one of the most popular tunes from the Minstrel shows was called "Dixieland" (now just called "Dixie").

Would you extend the logic from your first sentence about not applying 21st Century aptitudes to early 20th Century music to 19th Century Minstrel shows? As you noted, we had Minstrel shows in the past. Do you think they should be brought back? If not, why are Minstrel shows offensive but not this work by Fillmore?

Please don‘t answer with „nobody knows Lassus is racist“, once you know, you know.

If someone really wants to play Lassus, they should be prepared to stand up and announce the background to it so the audience are fully in the picture and can walk out if they feel so inclined.

I‘m happy to have a conversation about whether other works which include racist/xenophobic/antisemitic caricatures or similar should also be relegated to the past or at least introduced in the performance with some historical context. Is it too much of a nuance to say there is a difference between a piece whose whole Raison d'être is a cheap racist joke or a long opera with one questionable character? Not sure there‘s an easy answer and plenty of room for interpretation, but for me Lassus is clear.

I think it’s interesting that the folks who are most worried about cancel culture are also the most vague/least nuanced in their criticism.

I think it’s pretty fishy to want to keep lassus trombone but cancel contemporary hip hop artists for rapping about police and gang violence.

[BGuttman]

My point is Lassus is a product of its time. I played Shoutin' Liza and described its non-PC background and the audience did not walk out.

There are non-PC characters all over the place. Swart Pete accompanies St. Nicholas in Holland and steals bad children. Monostatos tries to rape Pamina in "The Magic Flute". Should we drop all of these? I vote no. We must understand these things in the context of their time. We don't have to idolize them, though. Separate water fountains in Alabama is history. Bringing them back is a travesty.

I'm not putting the Fillmore Trombone Family in the same bucket as "The Magic Flute". Mozart wrote much better music than Fillmore. In fact, Fillmore wrote better music than the Trombone Family ("Americans We" as one example). I accept the music for what it is and try to look past the questionable aspects of its past.

[ithinknot]

I think it’s pretty fishy to want to keep lassus trombone but cancel contemporary hip hop artists for rapping about police and gang violence.

Yes, the implications of that particular whataboutasegue were fairly obvious.



Separately:

I understand that Fillmore was not racist; he was simply using a trope of his era to sell music.

This is an absurd position. It's true that you and I both probably have no idea about Fillmore's private behavior, but "doing racist stuff for money" is not a morally neutral proposition... and it's definitely more racist than, you know, not doing that.

(In any case, the point is irrelevant because 'the man himself' is not what's being considered - it's the specific piece of music.)

My point is Lassus is a product of its time. I played Shoutin' Liza and described its non-PC background and the audience did not walk out.

And of course you're free to do that. Indeed, in a pedagogical context there's absolutely a case for introducing 'problematic' material in an informative manner.

But as entertainment to foist upon others, it's an interesting choice. After all, there are so many other ways to bum out the audience...

[brassmedic]

My point is Lassus is a product of its time. I played Shoutin' Liza and described its non-PC background and the audience did not walk out.

There are non-PC characters all over the place. Swart Pete accompanies St. Nicholas in Holland and steals bad children. Monostatos tries to rape Pamina in "The Magic Flute". Should we drop all of these? I vote no. We must understand these things in the context of their time. We don't have to idolize them, though. Separate water fountains in Alabama is history. Bringing them back is a travesty.

I'm not putting the Fillmore Trombone Family in the same bucket as "The Magic Flute". Mozart wrote much better music than Fillmore. In fact, Fillmore wrote better music than the Trombone Family ("Americans We" as one example). I accept the music for what it is and try to look past the questionable aspects of its past.

So now an opera character who does something bad is comparable in your mind to a song written specifically to denigrate an entire race? You guys are really reaching.

[MrHCinDE]

Credit to Bruce for giving his audience an opportunity to choose, hopefully he would do the same with Lassus if he chose to play it. I don‘t thing it’s vague or lacking nuance to suggest, as I did, that if people really want to play this stuff they could do as Bruce has done, seems to me like a pretty unambiguous suggestion which empowers the audience to choose for themselves.

I prefer to hear everyone‘s point of view and be able to have a mature conversation about it, hence the question about whether Bruce would propose to bring back Minstrel shows and if not, why they are different to Lassus. I think the question was clear and direct, vague is the last word I‘d use to describe it. So far, Bruce chose not to answer that, which is absolutely his right, if he doesn‘t want to talk about it, so be it.

Whether Mozart or anything else I‘m not suggesting we should automatically cancel all characters who do or say something „bad“, whatever that means. I would prefer that people can think about this in context and make their own minds up what their personal threshold between non-PC and outright racist is.

As I see it, one character as part of a much wider plot is somewhat different to something which is entirely focussed on exploiting the prevalent racism at the time it was written. Even those defending the performance of Lassus seem to accept it was written as a deliberate caricature based on racial stereotypes and I don’t think I‘ve seen any post yet claiming it is anything more or less than that.

[BGuttman]

I don't want to bring back Minstrel shows; they wouldn't appeal to today's audiences anyway. Maybe a single performance to show what the genre was.

I also think it's wrong to choose not to play anything by Henry Fillmore (or any of his pen names) just because of the Trombone Family; any more than you should stop playing all Arthur Pryor solos because he wrote a piece called "Coon Band Revue". (Incidentally, I tried playing this piece, now renamed Cake Walk Contest, and I thought he wrote a lot better stuff to perform.)

As trombone pieces that feature the gliss (smear, portamento), Fillmore's pieces are better than some others. That's why we still see them from time to time.

Note that I chose to play Shoutin' Liza because I prefer it to Lassus (and I could point out the quote from Handel). I rarely play any of the other pieces because I just don't like them.

[MrHCinDE]

I don't want to bring back Minstrel shows;

On this at least we agree.

Would you share the reasons why you look at Minstrel shows differently to Lassus? You don‘t say explicitly that it’s the lack of audience appeal, is that it, or is there more to it?

[MrHCinDE]

And by the way, as well as explaining to the audience, in my opinion the suggestion from Michael Dease and quoted in Doug Yeo‘s follow-up article to discuss with a black friend or colleague prior to performance is very meaningful. Did any of those posting on here who would like to perform Lassus after becoming aware of its background do this already?

[BGuttman]

I don't want to bring back Minstrel shows;

On this at least we agree.

Would you share the reasons why you look at Minstrel shows differently to Lassus? You don‘t say explicitly that it’s the lack of audience appeal, is that it, or is there more to it?

The offensive part of Minstrel shows is not the music but the banter between the two comedians in blackface making jokes about Blacks. I find ethnic humor about any group but mine cringeworthy; and sometimes even jokes about my group that don't appear to be funny.

[spencercarran]

Just popping in to observe that in this thread, as in every discussion of Lassus (or alleged "cancel culture" more broadly) it seems that the people getting most worked up about it are the ones who think they should be allowed to say/do racist things without consequence.

No one's passed a law banning Lassus Trombone (or blackface for that matter), but yeah at this point if you do that stuff in public people are gonna draw some conclusions about what sort of person you are.

[brassmedic]

I also think it's wrong to choose not to play anything by Henry Fillmore (or any of his pen names) just because of the Trombone Family; any more than you should stop playing all Arthur Pryor solos because he wrote a piece called "Coon Band Revue".

Are you aware that nobody here has suggested doing so? I believe Doug's article is titled, "It’s time to bury Henry Fillmore’s “Lassus Trombone.”, not "It's time to bury everything ever written by Henry Fillmore. "

[MrHCinDE]

The offensive part of Minstrel shows is not the music but the banter between the two comedians in blackface making jokes about Blacks. I find ethnic humor about any group but mine cringeworthy; and sometimes even jokes about my group that don't appear to be funny.

Thanks Bruce for your explanation.

Isn‘t the sole purpose of Lassus also cringeworthy ethnic humour, at the very least? I think the facts are clear that it was intended to be entertainment based on racial stereotypes, much like Minstrel shows.

[timothy42b]

Isn‘t the sole purpose of Lassus also cringeworthy ethnic humour, at the very least?

I don't see how that follows.

I've played that since I was a kid in many community bands, and the editions we used didn't contain the racist descriptions in the title. None of us knew about either the titles or that it came from the minstrel show era. The sole purpose was to play a catchy tune, which it is.

It's only relatively recently that this became more well known.

Up until now my main gripe about Lassus was the inability of the average community band to deal with the road map (multiple repeats, DS's, codas, etc.). It's been quietly shelved now in the bands I play with.

[MrHCinDE]

I don't see how that follows.

I've played that since I was a kid in many community bands, and the editions we used didn't contain the racist descriptions in the title. None of us knew about either the titles or that it came from the minstrel show era. The sole purpose was to play a catchy tune, which it is.

It's only relatively recently that this became more well known.

Up until now my main gripe about Lassus was the inability of the average community band to deal with the road map (multiple repeats, DS's, codas, etc.). It's been quietly shelved now in the bands I play with.

Well I‘m not suggesting that anyone who played it as a kid and did not know about the background should somehow be held accountable for that.

It‘s about choosing to play it now once in full possession of the facts.

[BGuttman]

I got a version of the 12 Rags when I was a kid with those same subtitles. My reaction? Geez! How racist. But back then a lot of things like that were still in public. Think of Rochester, Jack Benny's chauffeur. Amos 'n' Andy. Lots of the Loony Tunes and Merrie Melodies cartoons with black caricatures. Steppin Fetchit was still around. I learned to just turn off when that happened. Divorced from the awful subtitles, the Fillmore Trombone Rags are above average music. None of my Black friends ever said anything, but maybe they were being polite (or trying to not draw attention).

This whole thing exploded when a White Woke bass trombonist took offense. I only heard Black members of this Forum being vocal after the fact. Maybe they were also trying to not draw attention up to then. Now everybody is joining in to jump on the bandwagon finding all the typical "Darkie" artifacts of 100 years ago offensive. I am not fond of these either, but I leave them in their context. If you feel you don't want to listen to Amos 'n' Andy or a Jack Benny episode with Rochester (which made the actor who played him a wealthy man), be my guest. Don't play Pryor's "Coon Band Revue" either. But much like with today's Pro Lifers, please let everybody make their own choices.

[spencercarran]

This whole thing exploded when a White Woke bass trombonist took offense. I only heard Black members of this Forum being vocal after the fact. Maybe they were also trying to not draw attention up to then. Now everybody is joining in to jump on the bandwagon finding all the typical "Darkie" artifacts of 100 years ago offensive. I am not fond of these either, but I leave them in their context. If you feel you don't want to listen to Amos 'n' Andy or a Jack Benny episode with Rochester (which made the actor who played him a wealthy man), be my guest. Don't play Pryor's "Coon Band Revue" either. But much like with today's Pro Lifers, please let everybody make their own choices.

Not sure that I would characterize Douglas Yeo as "woke." But in any case, as I said before - there's no law against playing Lassus trombone. You can go ahead and play it as much as you like, if you're not bothered by the social judgment you might face for doing so. The OP in this thread asked only for alternatives that don't have the same historical baggage, but instead of "let[ting] everybody make their own choices" you and a few others got all in a tizzy at the idea that someone would prefer not to perform music with a racist origin.

[BGuttman]

This whole thing exploded when a White Woke bass trombonist took offense. I only heard Black members of this Forum being vocal after the fact. Maybe they were also trying to not draw attention up to then. Now everybody is joining in to jump on the bandwagon finding all the typical "Darkie" artifacts of 100 years ago offensive. I am not fond of these either, but I leave them in their context. If you feel you don't want to listen to Amos 'n' Andy or a Jack Benny episode with Rochester (which made the actor who played him a wealthy man), be my guest. Don't play Pryor's "Coon Band Revue" either. But much like with today's Pro Lifers, please let everybody make their own choices.

Not sure that I would characterize Douglas Yeo as "woke." But in any case, as I said before - there's no law against playing Lassus trombone. You can go ahead and play it as much as you like, if you're not bothered by the social judgment you might face for doing so. The OP in this thread asked only for alternatives that don't have the same historical baggage, but instead of "let[ting] everybody make their own choices" you and a few others got all in a tizzy at the idea that someone would prefer not to perform music with a racist origin.

You REALLY misunderstand me. I don't care whether you choose to play Lassus or not. I suggested another thing to the OP (the Stravinsky Pulcinella trombone solo). I object to people deciding what I should do. My Dixieland Band used to love to play Lassus. I didn't. But I did it anyway because they wanted me to. One of the problems of playing in an ensemble is that you have to play what the leader (or sometimes the rest of the group) want to even if you don't agree or can't hack it. When the piece is too hard for me to play I practice what I can, and do my best.

I still cringe when I see titles like "Coon Band Revue" or "Darktown Strutters' Ball". I also cringe when a cartoon with "negro" crows do imitations of Stepin' Fetchit. I don't listen to Amos 'n' Andy programs. I tune out a lot of Jack Benny. I never even liked Redd Foxx in Sanford and Son". Not that I dislike Black performers (incidentally, Amos 'n' Andy were two white guys). I love listening to Paul Robeson, William Warfield, Kathleen Battle, and others who slip my mind.

Now I am in a situation where I can only play for my own enjoyment. So I can pull out Fake Books and play the tunes I like. I skip tunes I can't figure out or don't care for. I may embellish or improvise over ones I can master. People listening here tell me they enjoy listening to me. If they don't like it they seem to just not listen (an easy feat when you need hearing aids ).

If someone close to me asks me to not play a piece, I will bow to their preference. Part of civilization is learning to live with each other.

[Burgerbob]

Bruce, stop.

[Mr412]

[BaronVonBone]

There's a version of The Muppet Show Theme that puts a serious smear where the brief "tenor sax solo" is in the original--replaces that whole transition, IIRC. Even if the kids these days aren't familiar with it any more, it's a great song for kiddos (of all ages).

[brassmedic]

This whole thing exploded when a White Woke bass trombonist took offense. I only heard Black members of this Forum being vocal after the fact.

Yeah, how dare you invent racism, Doug Yeo.

Doug Yeo didn't make it explode, YOU did, Bruce. The thread was pretty relaxed, for about 9 posts, at which time you decided to drop in and start defending Lassus and suggesting that we are all hypocrites if we stop playing Lassus but still play Wagner (an argument that I STILL find to be incredibly weak). I don't know why you are so hell bent on making this a personal crusade, but you need to stop.

viewtopic.php?t=15627&hilit=lassus

[norbie2018]

Wagner's music was used by the Nazis. The danger is conflating Wagner's music with Nazism and having it banned from performance by decent folk. It is not that far a stretch, given our current political climate at universities and in the performing arts. A previous poster mentioned how a lot of great composers had relationships with seedy characters; will those composers become off-limits? I do not think this is a far stretch; our freedom of speech/expression is always under threat of censorship.

I am glad we have this forum to express common interests and appreciate all the points made by everyone. I posted merely because I thought the argument re other composers and their backgrounds is significant. Now I'm off to play trombone, the second love of my life.

[BGuttman]

Brad, I didn't say Doug Yeo invented racism. All he did is take umbrage at the racist titles on the Fillmore Trombone Rags. He is right to do that; there is no justification for those subtitles.

I say that absent the dissemination of the subtitles, there is only marginal indication that the music is derogatory to African-Americans. When I first heard Lassus Trombone I never thought it was about Black folks. I suspect a lot of other people feel the same way.

What I am hearing from the Yeo supporters is arguments similar to what I have been hearing from people who want to ban books in our libraries because the book is about something they consider "wrong" (Gay marriage, the premise that the US was founded on unpaid slave labor, teenage gender insecurity, etc.). I don't think we should discard music simply because it takes on a controversial subject. In fact, if we decide that a tune is really controversial, it will probably sink to the realm of the unperformed. If that happened to the Fillmore Trombone Rags, I have no problem with that.

It is kind of sad that everybody who has to demonstrate the trombone to kids seems to feel that the Glissando is a major feature of the instrument and should be emphasized. I get very few opportunities in my playing to use a Glissando (at least intentionally ).

[brassmedic]

Well you may believe that racism is not wrong, but is only "wrong" in the same sense that the far right in the US believes gay marriage and telling the truth about history is "wrong". I could not disagree more. I believe racism is objectively wrong, and people who say otherwise will not be judged well by history. The irony is that none of these racist things we have talked about have been banned in the US. We only have private companies and individuals who have decided not to present certain racist art, literature, or advertising (which is their right). What HAS been banned in the US are things that ackowledge the existence of LGBTQ people, or acknowlege that our country has a racist past (and present). It is indeed frightening, but not for the reason you think. Keep digging that hole, Bruce.

[johntarr]

Wagner's music was used by the Nazis. The danger is conflating Wagner's music with Nazism and having it banned from performance by decent folk. It is not that far a stretch, given our current political climate at universities and in the performing arts. A previous poster mentioned how a lot of great composers had relationships with seedy characters; will those composers become off-limits? I do not think this is a far stretch; our freedom of speech/expression is always under threat of censorship.

I am glad we have this forum to express common interests and appreciate all the points made by everyone. I posted merely because I thought the argument re other composers and their backgrounds is significant. Now I'm off to play trombone, the second love of my life.

Exactly, and this is why we need more nuance and differentiation in our discussions, and Doug Yeo has generously and carefully given us material for such a discussion. He didn’t say anything about banning Filmore’s other works, he followed up with another article, and reached out to other colleagues who also happen to be African American, to hear their perspectives. Doug also addressed the white washing by the publisher, and said, that it’s important to consider each situation separately, meaning, not using the argument that, because such and such composer’s music was also associated with racism, any further discussions are superfluous. It’s also illogical to claim that (mostly) collectively deciding to stop performing a work based on newly presented information will lead to further losses of freedom of speech. Referring to the above quote, we are talking about Lassus Trombone here, we can discuss Wagner or any other composer in another thread. As I wrote in an earlier post in this thread, I welcome further discussions on other works which might carry negative messages or are inappropriate for any other reasons.

The argument that, with the racial slurs removed from the manuscript, most people will not know of/hear the music’s original intent, is perhaps trickier for some. I was asked to perform Lassus Trombone here in Sweden and I declined, citing the reasons presented in Doug’s article. My colleague argued that no one here has any knowledge about the original racist intent, making those issues irrelevant. For me, knowing what I now know about the the piece, I simply could not feel good about playing it, even if the audience would never have a clue as to what was behind the composition.

As I navigate the second half of my life, I’ve become more sensitive to, and concerned with what kind of verbal and musical messages I communicate. I am convinced that as a musician and teacher, I have a responsibility to examine my own thoughts, biases and beliefs, and if I find something that could be, or is harmful to another being, revise my thinking. This does not mean that I don’t unwittingly think, say and play stupid things, but if I become aware of my errors, I hope to correct them and learn. I have played Lassus Trombone many times in a big band show, many years ago but will never play it again, and encourage fellow trombonists to do the same. Let us move forward.

Respectfully,

John

[BaronVonBone]

Well you may believe that racism is not wrong ...

I don't think that's what Bruce was trying to say.

We should all, always give each other the benefit of doubt.

It's too easy, esp with distance, to let our own sensibilities inform us.

Just the vagaries of human brain ownership--no one's at fault for the inclination.

[MrHCinDE]

The fact that we are having a discussion about it and to my knowledge (apologies if I missed it) nobody has yet proposed an absolute ban on Lassus is evidence that freedom of speech is still alive and well.

I found this case in the UK to be very interesting:
https://m.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/ ... 63814.html
On appeal the court could not be sure that the „performer“ intended to be abusive towards a black colleague when he performed a blackface number in her presence. The burden of proof is rather high it seems…

I don’t believe anyone posting on here intends to deliberately cause harm to their audience members or fellow performers. However, I ask them to consider that it should be up to the potential victims of that abuse to decide whether they consider it abusive for someone to knowingly play music to them which is rooted in the racism of its time, not the potential abusers.

Maybe those who are exercising their right to free speech by knowingly performing music with a racist heritage are the very ones who may drive tighter legislation for us all? I’d rather not get to the point where these sorts of things have to be legally banned. I still like to think we can rely on basic human decency and consideration of others.

[brassmedic]

Well you may believe that racism is not wrong ...

I don't think that's what Bruce was trying to say.

We should all, always give each other the benefit of doubt.

It's too easy, esp with distance, to let our own sensibilities inform us.

Just the vagaries of human brain ownership--no one's at fault for the inclination.

Bruce wrote:

"What I am hearing from the Yeo supporters is arguments similar to what I have been hearing from people who want to ban books in our libraries because the book is about something they consider "wrong" (Gay marriage, the premise that the US was founded on unpaid slave labor, teenage gender insecurity, etc.). I don't think we should discard music simply because it takes on a controversial subject. "

I read that as equating those of us who don't perform Lassus Trombone with those who ban books about critical race theory and LGBTQ people. I don't see ANY equivalency between the two. Then he says not to discard music "simply because it takes on a controversial subject". I don't consider Lassus to be "simply taking on a controversial subject." There is a difference between addressing racism and being racist.

If that is not what Bruce wrote, kindly tell me what he DID write.

[norbie2018]

Maybe those who are exercising their right to free speech by knowingly performing music with a racist heritage are the very ones who may drive tighter legislation for us all? I’d rather not get to the point where these sorts of things have to be legally banned.

You cannot have them banned as that would be unconstitutional in the U.S. Even if most people in American society agree that certain speech - or in this case the heritage of a tune - is reprehensible does not mean it can be banned.

We are unique in the world when it comes to our free speech rights and for the sake of the people - us - I am glad government cannot intervene in the vast majority of cases. I'd rather work things out between us than have big brother try to do so.

[ithinknot]

I found this case in the UK to be very interesting:
https://m.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/ ... 63814.html

The judge said Davies was not “a man of profound intelligence, wisdom or judgment”

i.e. you're so stupid you might actually have thought this was ok

[MrHCinDE]

I found this case in the UK to be very interesting:
https://m.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/ ... 63814.html

The judge said Davies was not “a man of profound intelligence, wisdom or judgment”

i.e. you're so stupid you might actually have thought this was ok

Indeed

[MrHCinDE]

Right, I know the right to freedom of speech is extremely valued in the US.

However unlikely, even the mighty US constitution could theoretically be amended with enough popular and political support (I have something about 2/3 of both houses in the back of my mind?).

To be absolutely clear, I‘m not suggesting constitutional change is necessary for Lassus or any other freedom of performance topic. Better we are able to question ourselves whether we should be playing it.

[BGuttman]

Freedom of Speech allows a lot of unpopular topics to be covered. You can print out anything you like that denigrates Blacks, Hispanics, Jews, Irish, Italians, etc. You are not allowed to deny any of these people their rights. We allow the publication of pornography, and we allow people to demonstrate against it.

You folks have every right to bring up the racist subtitles (or even racist titles) of music. I value the comments of people of the targeted factions expressing disapproval. If only the most radical of these people are willing to provide an opinion, I consider that not a general opinion. I still agree with everyone that the subtitles are not complimentary to African-Americans.

I haven't played Lassus in a long time, and now I probably won't ever more (no more Dixieland Band). I am just pointing out that sensibilities of the early 20th Century are different from sensibilities of the early 21st Century. What people considered acceptable then is not what is considered acceptable now. I am certain that if Henry Fillmore was writing those Trombone Rags now he would never have attached those offensive subtitles and would probably have attached a different backstory to them.

[Burgerbob]

I haven't played Lassus in a long time, and now I probably won't ever more (no more Dixieland Band). I am just pointing out that sensibilities of the early 20th Century are different from sensibilities of the early 21st Century. What people considered acceptable then is not what is considered acceptable now. I am certain that if Henry Fillmore was writing those Trombone Rags now he would never have attached those offensive subtitles and would probably have attached a different backstory to them.

...which is why we shouldn't play them now. Done!

[BaronVonBone]

Bruce wrote:

"What I am hearing from the Yeo supporters is arguments similar to what I have been hearing from people who want to ban books in our libraries because the book is about something they consider "wrong" (Gay marriage, the premise that the US was founded on unpaid slave labor, teenage gender insecurity, etc.). I don't think we should discard music simply because it takes on a controversial subject. "

I read that as equating those of us who don't perform Lassus Trombone with those who ban books about critical race theory and LGBTQ people. I don't see ANY equivalency between the two. Then he says not to discard music "simply because it takes on a controversial subject". I don't consider Lassus to be "simply taking on a controversial subject." There is a difference between addressing racism and being racist.

If that is not what Bruce wrote, kindly tell me what he DID write.

Whet he didn't say, to the point I made, is that he doesn't think racism is wrong. Maybe you didn't pull that out of thin air, but don't you think there's a good bit more room for the benefit of doubt before going with that kind of conclusion? The problem with human brain ownership is that when you go there--when you choose a conclusion--you've started to dig in, and the facts start to degrade in importance and interest, even if just a little. It only gets worse from there, unless the human brain owner at the helm is self-aware enough to realize what's happening, and can muster up the fortitude to swallow some pride, recuse personal sensibilities and perceptions, and put sincere effort into making the correction.


For the record, I'm more in agreement with you on the underlying discussion. It's easy for me to take that position though, because I dislike music that makes a cartoon of the trombone to begin with. It can be comical given the right context, but absent such context it's just boorish to me, At the very least I would move over a section and switch to euphonium on a song like Lassus, even aside from the nastiness of the concept and message of the piece. But when a song makes a cartoon of people (not in a fun way, but rather nasty--not characters like clowns or Mr. Magoo, but our neighbors--our fellow citizens of humanity), that's 14 orders or so more ugly.

I'll have to check into the history on Wagner (maybe starting by seeing what's been said about it in here), because I do like that music. I won't any longer, though, if what I learn imbues it with a dark, ugly meaning, targeting people. Although Wagner isn't a composer I listen to on a regular basis, so it's likely likely to be A Thing for me any time soon, and to that end I again have an easier choice than many, because it's not a very significant personal sacrifice on behalf of my fellow citizens.


But more important than my position or your position or anyone else's position on this stuff, is that we maintain the humility to accept that others are deserving of respect whether they agree with us or not, as long as they don't get nasty and hateful and disrespectful about it and spend their benefit of doubt about such things. That's a bigger problem, because it kills genuine dialog--ensures no one learns about others' positions or the bases for them, and such. And when it does get into nasty territory I advocate the there but for the grace of God go I ethic (or there but for the vagaries of the cosmos or of nature if you prefer). It becomes very hard to hate or vilify if you can internalize that ethic. It's also a hard ethic to argue against ... and there's a very good reason for that.

[brassmedic]

Bruce wrote:

"What I am hearing from the Yeo supporters is arguments similar to what I have been hearing from people who want to ban books in our libraries because the book is about something they consider "wrong" (Gay marriage, the premise that the US was founded on unpaid slave labor, teenage gender insecurity, etc.). I don't think we should discard music simply because it takes on a controversial subject. "

I read that as equating those of us who don't perform Lassus Trombone with those who ban books about critical race theory and LGBTQ people. I don't see ANY equivalency between the two. Then he says not to discard music "simply because it takes on a controversial subject". I don't consider Lassus to be "simply taking on a controversial subject." There is a difference between addressing racism and being racist.

If that is not what Bruce wrote, kindly tell me what he DID write.

Whet he didn't say, to the point I made, is that he doesn't think racism is wrong. Maybe you didn't pull that out of thin air, but don't you think there's a good bit more room for the benefit of doubt before going with that kind of conclusion? The problem with human brain ownership is that when you go there--when you choose a conclusion--you've started to dig in, and the facts start to degrade in importance and interest, even if just a little. It only gets worse from there, unless the human brain owner at the helm is self-aware enough to realize what's happening, and can muster up the fortitude to swallow some pride, recuse personal sensibilities and perceptions, and put sincere effort into making the correction.


For the record, I'm more in agreement with you on the underlying discussion. It's easy for me to take that position though, because I dislike music that makes a cartoon of the trombone to begin with. It can be comical given the right context, but absent such context it's just boorish to me, At the very least I would move over a section and switch to euphonium on a song like Lassus, even aside from the nastiness of the concept and message of the piece. But when a song makes a cartoon of people (not in a fun way, but rather nasty--not characters like clowns or Mr. Magoo, but our neighbors--our fellow citizens of humanity), that's 14 orders or so more ugly.

I'll have to check into the history on Wagner (maybe starting by seeing what's been said about it in here), because I do like that music. I won't any longer, though, if what I learn imbues it with a dark, ugly meaning, targeting people. Although Wagner isn't a composer I listen to on a regular basis, so it's likely likely to be A Thing for me any time soon, and to that end I again have an easier choice than many, because it's not a very significant personal sacrifice on behalf of my fellow citizens.


But more important than my position or your position or anyone else's position on this stuff, is that we maintain the humility to accept that others are deserving of respect whether they agree with us or not, as long as they don't get nasty and hateful and disrespectful about it and spend their benefit of doubt about such things. That's a bigger problem, because it kills genuine dialog--ensures no one learns about others' positions or the bases for them, and such. And when it does get into nasty territory I advocate the there but for the grace of God go I ethic (or there but for the vagaries of the cosmos or of nature if you prefer). It becomes very hard to hate or vilify if you can internalize that ethic. It's also a hard ethic to argue against ... and there's a very good reason for that.

I don't think you read what I wrote. I never claimed that Bruce said racism wasn't wrong. I only pointed out that he equated it to the book bannings that are going on in the South right now, which are happening for reasons he labeled as "wrong" (In quotes, i.e., only situationally wrong and not absolutely wrong.) And I said I disagree. Lampooning black people and portraying them as inferior to white people is wrong, and it always WAS wrong, whether or not it was allowed by society. It's not wrong only because someone labeled it as wrong; it IS wrong. This is my opinion, not a fault in my brain, thank you very much. Can't just take the first part of a sentence out of context. And I'm perfectly open to Bruce explaining how that wasn't what he meant.

And I'm gonna go ahead and disagree with you - I don't believe we have to respect other people's opinions if those opinions are objectively immoral.

[BaronVonBone]

I don't think you read what I wrote. I never claimed that Bruce said racism wasn't wrong. I only pointed out that he equated it to the book bannings that are going on in the South right now, which are happening for reasons he labeled as "wrong" (In quotes, i.e., only situationally wrong and not absolutely wrong.) And I said I disagree. Lampooning black people and portraying them as inferior to white people is wrong, and it always WAS wrong, whether or not it was allowed by society. It's not wrong only because someone labeled it as wrong; it IS wrong. This is my opinion, not a fault in my brain, thank you very much. Can't just take the first part of a sentence out of context. And I'm perfectly open to Bruce explaining how that wasn't what he meant.

Not sure where the "fault in your brain" thing came from, but no problem. That all seems fair enough to me. My apologies if I misread your post and/or your intent.

And I'm gonna go ahead and disagree with you - I don't believe we have to respect other people's opinions if those opinions are objectively immoral.

TheWhoWhatNow did I say!?

Never said we had to respect anyone's opinions, just others--people, and to the extent that they haven't spent their burden of doubt, at which point there but for the vagaries of the cosmos go I comes into play.

No worries. Humans and words are involved--things will get messy--care has to be taken to avoid various forms of ... ruptures.

Yup--heh.

[brassmedic]

And I'm gonna go ahead and disagree with you - I don't believe we have to respect other people's opinions if those opinions are objectively immoral.

TheWhoWhatNow did I say!?

Never said we had to respect anyone's opinions, just others--people, and to the extent that they haven't spent their burden of doubt, at which point there but for the vagaries of the cosmos go I comes into play.

I didn't say you said that. What you said was, "others are deserving of respect whether they agree with us or not", and I said they are NOT deserving of respect IF their opinions are immoral. What's complicated about that?

Oh, I see - you're nitpicking that I said "people's opinions" and you said "people". Um... ok - I don't agree that we have to respect people who hold immoral opinions. Obvious example: I don't respect Hitler. Is that more clear to you now?

[BGuttman]

Brad, I think you are confusing the fact that I said racism was common in the early part of the 20th Century with my endorsing racism. I do not endorse racism. Or anti Irish, Italian, Chinese, Polish, Chicano, or other types of prejudice.

I just say we should understand the situation under which the music was written. Why aren't you folks going after Darktown Strutters Ball? Darktown was an uncomplimentary way of describing the African-American ghetto. Also comes from the same period of time.

[BaronVonBone]

.

I moved this tangent about respecting others vs. others' highly objectionable notions discussion to Tangents. It's developed a life of its own.

If there's any life left in the Lassus discussion, this tangent shouldn't derail it..

[Mr412]

Smart move, if it works. LOL!

The OP probably left the room shaking his head wondering why we can't just answer his freaking question. Uh, no - we can't, without drama. Welcome to the Trombone Chat.

[BaronVonBone]

Smart move, if it works. LOL!

The OP probably left the room shaking his head wondering why we can't just answer his freaking question. Uh, no - we can't, without drama. Welcome to the Trombone Chat.

Heh ... humans in groups.

This is why, when a company comes up with one of the worst possible responses to a problem, we know odd are a committee came up with it.

[harrisonreed]

Maybe the real problem with the OP's question is just the premise -- "Good" smear tune? Never heard of one.

Next slide

[Burgerbob]

I just say we should understand the situation under which the music was written. Why aren't you folks going after Darktown Strutters Ball? Darktown was an uncomplimentary way of describing the African-American ghetto. Also comes from the same period of time.

Bruce, for the 1000th time, "whataboutism." Stoppit. Please. just stop.

[MrHCinDE]

I just say we should understand the situation under which the music was written.

Considering the situation the music was written is is precisely the reason I don‘t play it, namely that it was targeted to make fun of a group of people based on racist stereotypes.

[BaronVonBone]

Maybe the real problem with the OP's question is just the premise -- "Good" smear tune? Never heard of one.

I tend to agree on that one, although I do like The Muppet Show Theme with the glissando, and they are a great fit with Dixieland Jazz.

Has to be loud, noisy music, basically. I'm generally less of a fan of loud and noisy, but there are exceptions--a lot of exceptions in rawk.