Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

SWP expulsions and squabbles

Maybe he has done that as well? This is our business.
Doesn't sound like it. " I'm not the most active of members, but I am a member and I see the -fairly public- weekly bulletin. I've also contacted three prominent members of the party about this matter. I've seen or heard nothing of this sort."
 
Well, that's your mistake right there. You should have used the scarf of a club with a less reactionary fan base.

Most of the squad based in Leeds were hard-core Leeds fans as it happens, one who previously ended up on the front page of The Sun newspaper, after a riot of Leeds fans in Paris, which in reality was a reaction to thuggery from French riot police. Another had been locked up in Long Kesh, after the RUC had behaved in a similar fashion towards a group from a local pub on a fishing trip. Not all Leeds fans were/are "reactionary" in the way that you suggest.
 
It wasn't academic gobbledygook - you said optimism is down to class and he asked how 'a psychological disposition to expect best possible outcomes' (ie. optimism) could be determined by class. It was probably his least stupid post on this thread and if anyone was conflating 'academic gobbledygook' with class it was you.

Whether you say, 'a psychological disposition to expect best possible outcomes' is not academic gobbledygook is irrelevant, as it is to me.
 
Most of the squad based in Leeds were hard-core Leeds fans as it happens, one who previously ended up on the front page of The Sun newspaper, after a riot of Leeds fans in Paris, which in reality was a reaction to thuggery from French riot police. Another had been locked up in Long Kesh, after the RUC had behaved in a similar fashion towards a group from a local pub on a fishing trip. Not all Leeds fans were/are "reactionary" in the way that you suggest.

Is anyone writing a book on this? If not drop mal a few paras
 
I did put sectarian blog in quotes as that's what will be said. I don't know the guy well enough to judge.

In fairness I haven't seen a single mention of this by WSM acquaintances on FB so it didn't seem like there was a feeding frenzy among the rest of the Irish left yet.
 
Most of the squad based in Leeds were hard-core Leeds fans as it happens, one who previously ended up on the front page of The Sun newspaper, after a riot of Leeds fans in Paris, which in reality was a reaction to thuggery from French riot police. Another had been locked up in Long Kesh, after the RUC had behaved in a similar fashion towards a group from a local pub on a fishing trip. Not all Leeds fans were/are "reactionary" in the way that you suggest.

All fucking northern monkeys though.
 
Most of the squad based in Leeds were hard-core Leeds fans as it happens, one who previously ended up on the front page of The Sun newspaper, after a riot of Leeds fans in Paris, which in reality was a reaction to thuggery from French riot police. Another had been locked up in Long Kesh, after the RUC had behaved in a similar fashion towards a group from a local pub on a fishing trip. Not all Leeds fans were/are "reactionary" in the way that you suggest.
75 eh?

simpson.jpg
 
The whole Novel therefore is nothing less than an attack on the SWP CC and their love of Jazz.
My interest was piqued, so I searched out a place called We Are Many dot org, and found a podcast by Martin Smith called John Coltane: Jazz, racism, and resistance http://wearemany.org/a/2010/06/john-coltane .

Now, I don't think it necessary to know anything about music theory to enjoy jazz, but I do think it necessary to understand a little about music theory before you start giving lectures in music theory.

Smith makes a complete twat of himself (quite apart from the toe-curling trendy vicar endorsement of LSD) by not knowing the first thing about music theory. For example, he talks about Coltrane's period with Monk, saying Monk used his percussive technique to “strike many chords at the same time”. First, Monk was a logician, and a master of precision; that's what Coltrane got from Monk. Monk's percussive playing was about articulation, not about note selection. Secondly, the sentence doesn't really make sense: a number of notes played at once is a chord. Two chords played at once is ... a bigger chord. Monk's chords were derived from his understanding of stride piano, not hitting random notes on a piano. In fact, Monk learned theory by dissecting piano rolls - and sheet music - of the old stride players. John Coltrane did not derive from this a “a system of playing chords on top of one another”, whatever that might mean. (Especially given that saxophone is a single-note-at-a-time instrument).

Smith then goes on to briefly talk nonsense about modal jazz, before saying Giant Steps was "the first time he [Coltrane] recorded openly in the sheets of sound thing". No it wasn't. "Sheets of sound" was Ira Gitler's description of Coltrane's playing on the song Russian Lullaby on the Soultrane album, released in 1958, two years before Giant Steps, by which time he had pretty much abandoned the style. (Which consisted of a bank of ultra-rehearsed rapid runs).

Giant Steps isn't about "sheets of sound", (nor is it about "playing chords on top of one another"); it's about a very logical sequence of chords following a rapid descending major third step pattern, meaning the key centre changes three times within four bars; Coltrane was exploring the technique needed by soloists to negotiate those "giant steps" (hence the name!). (This chord pattern is known as the Trane Changes, or Coltrane Changes, and could have been explained to Smith by any jazz musician, including Gilad Atzmon, had he but asked).

Non musos take heart: my diatribe is over. If your eyes glazed over, take at least this from it - Martin Smith is a gobshite. His love of jazz is, I have no doubt, sincere, but his understanding of music theory is dire.
 
15 quid for that and some racist stuff on top. OK then, give me ten. I'll obviously have the strength of character to challenge then overthrow an entrenched old fart bureaucracy.
 
My interest was piqued, so I searched out a place called We Are Many dot org, and found a podcast by Martin Smith called John Coltane: Jazz, racism, and resistance http://wearemany.org/a/2010/06/john-coltane .

Now, I don't think it necessary to know anything about music theory to enjoy jazz, but I do think it necessary to understand a little about music theory before you start giving lectures in music theory.

Smith makes a complete twat of himself (quite apart from the toe-curling trendy vicar endorsement of LSD) by not knowing the first thing about music theory. For example, he talks about Coltrane's period with Monk, saying Monk used his percussive technique to “strike many chords at the same time”. First, Monk was a logician, and a master of precision; that's what Coltrane got from Monk. Monk's percussive playing was about articulation, not about note selection. Secondly, the sentence doesn't really make sense: a number of notes played at once is a chord. Two chords played at once is ... a bigger chord. Monk's chords were derived from his understanding of stride piano, not hitting random notes on a piano. In fact, Monk learned theory by dissecting piano rolls - and sheet music - of the old stride players. John Coltrane did not derive from this a “a system of playing chords on top of one another”, whatever that might mean. (Especially given that saxophone is a single-note-at-a-time instrument).

Smith then goes on to briefly talk nonsense about modal jazz, before saying Giant Steps was "the first time he [Coltrane] recorded openly in the sheets of sound thing". No it wasn't. "Sheets of sound" was Ira Gitler's description of Coltrane's playing on the song Russian Lullaby on the Soultrane album, released in 1958, two years before Giant Steps, by which time he had pretty much abandoned the style. (Which consisted of a bank of ultra-rehearsed rapid runs).

Giant Steps isn't about "sheets of sound", (nor is it about "playing chords on top of one another"); it's about a very logical sequence of chords following a rapid descending major third step pattern, meaning the key centre changes three times within four bars; Coltrane was exploring the technique needed by soloists to negotiate those "giant steps" (hence the name!). (This chord pattern is known as the Trane Changes, or Coltrane Changes, and could have been explained to Smith by any jazz musician, including Gilad Atzmon, had he but asked).

Non musos take heart: my diatribe is over. If your eyes glazed over, take at least this from it - Martin Smith is a gobshite. His love of jazz is, I have no doubt, sincere, but his understanding of music theory is dire.

I don't understand a word of that but I 'liked' it because it sounds impressive and I don't like Martin Smith so anything that exposes him as a fake is good as far as I'm concerned :D
 
For example, he talks about Coltrane's period with Monk, saying Monk used his percussive technique to “strike many chords at the same time”.

I think you're wrong there, though. Last time i tried playing piano I'll swear i was striking many chords at the same time.
 
I don't understand a word of that but I 'liked' it because it sounds impressive and I don't like Martin Smith so anything that exposes him as a fake is good as far as I'm concerned :D
Aye my knowledge of musical theory is about as good as Smiths but that was a great post danny.
 
Seconded. I've discovered some amazing records over the years thanks to Danny's recommendations, and I'd love to learn more about the theory behind Jazz, of which I know nothing.
 
Back
Top Bottom