Talk:Miles Davis
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
Miles Davis is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article Milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed. | |||||||||||||||
 |
This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on September 28, 2005. |
|||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| This article is within the scope of multiple WikiProjects Click [show] for further details |
||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
 |
This page has been selected for Version 0.5 and the release version of Wikipedia. It has been rated Start-Class on the assessment scale. It is in the category Arts. |
Because of their length, the previous discussions on this page have been archived. If further archiving is needed, see Wikipedia:How to archive a talk page.
Previous discussions:
[edit] NPOV
A Statement such as, "For the first part of that decade, although he gigged a great deal and played many sessions, they were mostly uninspired, and it seemed that his talent was going to waste" does not seem to be coming from a NPOV. This should be reworded.theomanno 15:17 11 December 2005 (EST)
[edit] Miles as Artist
somone should include Miles' stint as an artist. Seeing as how it is evident on his official website, it seems significant enough to include. --ch The electric recordings and live performances with electronic equipment began in 1968; hence the periodization was revised to 1968.
[edit] "understanding" recorded/live difference
My point is simple: WHO are the so-called "authorities" who claim that miles was the "first" person to "understand" the difference between live and recorded music? and secondly, WHAT are the differences? interestingly, none are given, no sources, no citations, and no description of what the "difference" is. so the sentence seems pretty nonsensical and ill-conceived, in fact it's pretty much "journalistic fluff" that has no meaning and is internally contradictory. IF ANYTHING, davis must have defined the difference, or somehow created a difference, if nobody else "understood" it yet. Is the writer trying to say somehow, a distinction existed between live and recorded music, but it just hadn't been put into practice, just hadn't ever been realized by any musician? this is absurd. i'm going to change the passage to say something more sensible.
- That sentence went in on the 20th of July [1], and you're right, it needs to come out until it's referenced. -- ajn (talk) 16:30, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Miles fan's critique
Has the length one would expect for a front page featured article, but as far as being a definitive overview of Miles, it falls utterly flat.
There's a lot of passive voice and nameless "critics" and "authorities", conveniently hiding exactly who is making an assertion or opinion.
There are some canards not founded in reality: Miles not having been a technical virtuoso, neglect of his studies at Julliard.
The musical analysis, describing the music with words and attempting to define what it is, is 9th grade.
The section on the 2nd quintet is criminally short, and the "fusion" section relatively out of balance. There must be a lot of contributors who are nuts about the period but don't have an appreciation of the entirety of Miles.
And of course what is the word "jazz" doing anywhere in the article?
— Shadowhillway 13:59, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
- Perhaps you'd like to fix the deficiencies?--malber 20:19, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
-
- That goes without saying here on Wiki! — Shadowhillway 22:58, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
- To pick up a few points - whatever Miles's objections to the word "jazz", especially later in his career, he undoubtedly was a jazz musician (prior to the late sixties, certainly). Duke Ellington didn't like the term either, but that doesn't mean it doesn't apply. Referencing could certainly do with tightening up (though the passive voice is normal for an encyclopaedia), and I agree the fusion section is too large relative to the rest of the article. It's generally accepted that Miles was not a technical virtuoso on the trumpet in the way that Dizzy Gillespie or Clifford Brown were. His style of playing arose in part because of limitations in his range - he couldn't play as high or as fast as some of his contemporaries (if I remember correctly he talks about this in his autobiography). He was, clearly, a musical genius. Here are Cook and Morton in the Penguin Guide to Jazz, for example: "It should be understood from the start that Miles was not a virtuoso trumpeter. There were plenty of other slim black men (and some heftier ones, like Dizzy) around at the end of the war who could blow him offstage without effort. Miles's great gift was musical rather than technical." -- ajn (talk) 07:49, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
It's certainly not "generally accepted" that Miles was not a technical virtuoso. Ian Carr and Guy Barker, for example, both feel that he was. It's interesting to notice that they are both trumpet players so know a thing or two about this. Anyone listening to "68 sessions" or "Live at the Blackhawk" or "Four and More" or "Live at the Fillmore East" who thinks Miles was not a technical virtuoso has cloth ears. the Penguin Guide to Jazz is full of exactly this sort of nonsense.
[edit] The Person
I think we need to expand more on the personality of Miles Davis, just as some other musicians. Focusing completely on music does not give us any perspective on what the person was like. Showing them as purely a musician makes reading their article dry, only full of album listings, ect. I will do more research on this subject when I can and then hopefully create a new section in the article for this PlasticMan 07:12, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Prince of Darkness
On the [[Jazz Royalty] page it refers to Davis as the Prince of Darkness. It is not mentioned anywhere in the article here. It should be removed or mentioned in this article. Also this looks like a plug for Marin Committee and should be verified to ensure that it is not: Davis played Martin Committee trumpets throughout his career.157.201.135.143 22:56, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Public Image Ltd.
I've removed the statement that says Miles played with Public Image Ltd. This session list doesn't mention it. But if this is indeed true, then please cite a reference for it. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 19:06, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
- According to Johnny Rotten in the liner notes of PiL's box set, Miles was at the sessions for Album but for whatever odd reason, his tracks weren't used. I gather from Mr. Rotten's comments in said liner notes that he and Miles got along pretty well though. Cjmarsicano 20:01, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Anti-White Racism
Yesterday I added a section on Miles Davis' hatred of white people as expressed in numerous quotes, some of which are referenced on his Wikiquote. This section was deleted. As a valid aspect of his life and one which is notable, I intend to revert. Similar references to personal life issues such as this are found on other people's Wiki pages and I see no reason why it should not hold true for Miles Davis. - Anonymous
Sorry about the multiple small edits. I made two mistakes I did not catch on two occasions. - Anonymous.
- This is not something which is as clear-cut as you seem to think - see the talk archive. In any case, Davis's attitudes to race certainly don't deserve this prominent placement (as important as his discography?). If you want to include a balanced description of his views on social issues, rather than cherry-picking one extreme quote (which was probably intended to wind people up and certainly seems to have succeeded), go ahead. --ajn (talk) 07:00, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
One must take into account the larger context of Davis' life and his actions. For one thing, throughout his life he collaborated with and hired white arrangers and musicians, among them, Gil Evans, Stan Getz, Bill Evans the pianist, Chick Corea, John McLaughlin, Harvey Brooks, Joe Zawinul, Dave Holland, Keith Jarrett, Mike Stern, Bill Evans the saxophonist. He received many affronts among them violent attacks by officers of the law, and racial snubs whites of his high position in the popular arts world never received. --Anonymous
One only has to read the liner notes to Davis' 1957 Album Miles Ahead (q.v.) to realise that Miles got on extremely well with Gil Evans as a result of Evans' indifference at a colleague's racial background - there is a quotation from Miles milself on this matter. If I had the sleeve to hand, I would quote directly from it. Davis disliked the original image on the album cover (see the Miscellanea section in the Miles Ahead article) but only in jest. I really seems that he was just as racist as anyone else of those times - there is no real big deal about it just because it comes from a celebrity. --Edward Tambling
People might enjoy reading "Time of our Singing" by Powers - it describes the experience of a musical mixed-race family at around this time. The emphasis is more on classical music, but it includes some references to the Jazz scene and spends a lot of time conveying just what it was like to be black then. Frankly, I think Davis's comments on race are quite reasonable in that context. It sounded bloody awful. 139.229.7.34 17:27, 14 December 2006 (UTC) andrew cooke (white, as is Powers, afaik)
There is no way Miles was an anti-white racist, despite his living thro the years of 'Black power'. He hired Bill Evans simply because he was an excellent pianist. He later hired Dave Holland, John McLaughlin, Joe Zawinul and many other white musicians. This whole subject is rubbish. SmokeyTheFatCat 20:33, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
Miles Davis certainly had 'racist moods' as a result of his experiences and treatment. His hatred was against racist white people though, not white people. I remember reading in Davis' auto-biography something about Gil Evans (white) being his closest friend. Davis did think very racially though (it would be strange if he didn't given his experiences). That does not mean he wa a racist though. Remember that many such comments Davis made also occured in the context of the civil rights movement era and before then when blacks didn't have civil rights. Remember while Davis' genius, wit, and intelligence are undeniable in the world of music, he could be a bit overly 'simplistic' when making comments about topics outside of his mastery. This goes for all of us of course, especially if we are frustrated. Davis received a lot of criticism from other black musicians for including Bill Evans in his band. Davis said something to the effect of "I don't care what color they are, as long as they can play". This doesn't mean he didn't notice a difference between how most black musicians played compared to white musicians at the time, but it's obvious that for him the auditory (music) trumped the visual (skin color). I'm not one of thos people that puts Davis on a pedestal in this area though and excuses everything he did--he certainly wasn't someone to model when it came to his social life, drug use (which had a great deal to do with all the negative things), and his treatment of others close to him.
But personally, I think this subject should just be left out of the page because in order for it to be in context and balanced out, it would need to be very long/yawn-inducing, and would therefore overshadow the much more significant aspects of his life that don't require as much explaining. If people are interested in the tabloid subjects there are several great biographies about Davis and the autobiography as well. What I find most fascinating about Davis' life is that for much of his life he was always pushing to change and grow musicially. He seemed to have a real fear of being stale and playing things he loved to play so much. There is so much to be learned from him in that regard. Siraj555 22:04, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Health
According to Ian Carr, MD's health problems just before retirement in 1976 were rheumatism, bursitis, and osteoarthritis which led to a hip replacement (which in turn had to be replaced a few years later). It's pretty clear MD was diabetic (Carr mentions it a few times), though possibly not before 1976. I can't find any reference to sickle cell disease, and I think it's unlikely but not impossible - MD's occasional physical collapses seem to have been due to pushing himself too hard. I'd say keep in the diabetes, scrub the sickle cell disease unless someone can provide evidence that he had it, or probably had it. --ajn (talk) 21:40, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
- I've toned down the stuff about his health pre-retirement - I've just said "illegal drugs" because I'm not sure he took up heroin again (I don't have Carr's book with me now). The diabetes, and the stroke a few years before the one that killed him, need to go into the next section. It's been a while since I read Carr rather than flicking through it, but my recollection is that the post-retirement years were a heroic struggle against ill health. --ajn (talk) 09:32, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Mone Peterson???
At the age of nine, one of Davis's father's friends gave him his first trumpet, but he did not start learning to play seriously until the age of thirteen, when his father gave him a new trumpet and arranged lessons with local trumpeter Elwood Buchanan and, later, a man named Mone Peterson.
I've never heard of anyone by this name associated with Miles' past. Can we get a source for this information?
- This is surely a joke. Mone Peterson is a regular contributor to the Jazz Corner Speakeasy discussion board. He says he did not insert his name in himself & was just as puzzled as anyone else to see himself appear in this entry. I assume this is some internet joke or dig at Mone or whatever. I've edited it out for now; only if someone can actually come up with a legitimate cite for a 2nd Mone Peterson should this be reinstated. ND 21:49, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Bitches Brew & Sales
Someone inserted a reference to Bitches Brew as the "biggest-selling jazz record of all time". Is this actually true? How does it stack up against Kind of Blue, A Love Supreme, Headhunters,, Take Five, Heavy Weather, &c? -- I ask in part because I recall that in The Wire magazine when they had a feature on the album (this would have been in the 1990s--I no longer have backissues anymore, alas) the author was skeptical about claims of sales; apparently Columbia did get it massively stocked in record stores across the US, & that counts as sales.... but many copies were returned, which wasn't counted of course. (Similar shenanigans go on when bookstore chains buy the massive print runs of bestsellers, then months later tear off the covers & return them.) -- I deleted the unsupported claim for now & also undid the extensive vandalism to the page that occurred at the same time, but in any case would like to know a little more. ND 19:53, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Recent edits to the opening paragraph
Factually, Miles Davis was one of the most influential and innovative musicians of the 20th century. I see no reason why this should be labeled merely an opinion and removed as such like an editor had done {see diff here}. Opinions, please. FjghdK 18:46, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
- Hi. I'm the editor who removed the following three things. I thought my edit was pretty self-explanatory in the comment, but allow me to elaborate. Please keep in mind verifiability, since that's job #1 for anything we publish on WP. Verifiability comes before even truth, odd as that may seem.
- Davis was "one of the most influential .. musicians of the 20th century"
- Davis was "one of the most ... innovative musicians of the 20th century"
- "He played on some of the important early bebop records"
- These words are, by definition, subjective and POV. And when they are prefaced with "one of" and "some of", they become weasel words — they introduce bias without allowing the reader to decide if they're right or wrong or coming from a reliable source.
- If we attribute these POVs to a notable person or publication then, of course, they can remain because our reader can then verify what we've written. Alternatively, we could focus on factual, falsifiable things such as "most records sold" or "longest career". --Ds13 18:58, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
-
- This seems to me a case where a basically sound Wikipedia policy is being applied in excessively officious fashion. There is absolutely nothing controversial about Miles Davis's significance in 20th century music, or his influence within jazz & in the larger musical world. The statements are easily veriable from any source on jazz or contemporary music as a whole, & the list of accomplishments in the Wikipedia article itself goes a long way to making the use of the words self-explanatory. --ND 19:21, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- Hi. Please don't take offense at this, but looking at your profile, you're apparently an experienced jazz journalist and long-time jazz fan. So while Davis' status might be ingrained in you, please consider the jazz-ignorant reader who deserves the ability to confirm these claims at a recognized source. I don't see anything like this in the article, but surely some jazz publication or organization has recognized Davis with a "lifetime contribution" award or something to that effect that we can cite/quote right there in the intro? What's "self-explanatory" to you could use a quick cite for some of us to remove skepticism that the article was written by Davis fanatics. --Ds13 18:49, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- "Lifetime contribution award"? Feh. You could list a bundle of awards for Davis -- for heaven's sake he's even in the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame -- but this is like asking whether Shakespeare won any awards. -- "Self-explanatory" because the list of accomplishments in the main text of the article is enough to explain Davis's importance. --ND 03:00, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
I listen to jazz regularly these days but this is a fairly recent development -- within, say, the last 10 years. I'm hardly a knowledgable jazz fan; I'd be hard pressed to name 5 tunes that Miles made famous. My entire contrib to his article is to fix a typo. But even I know that the man was a giant. If he was not the pivotal figure in jazz during his lifetime, it was because he didn't die nearly as quickly as his lifestyle warranted; quite a few jazz greats came and went during his time. He is widely recognized as the musician who created fusion; if that doesn't qualify him for comments such as "one of the most influential", I don't know what would. It is impossible to read through any review of Miles Davis's life work without coming across such a comment; I can't think of anything that could be better sourced. I daresay any number of sources already provided in the article will back this. Miles went way past awards; he broke entirely new ground and went where there was nobody to give awards in the first place.
You don't show musical influence with statistics; it's difficult, even, to show it in all cases by pointing at another's record and drawing lines from one to the other. Miles was influential -- we know he was influential -- because it is impossible for anyone to talk about modern jazz for an hour without mentioning his name. He was the 400-pound canary who sat wherever he liked. This is indisputable. John Reid 06:24, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
- Okay, I've clearly touched a nerve here, asking for verifiability of Davis' status in an overly quantifiable manner. However, I maintain that phrases I removed such as "one of the most..." and "some of the most..." are weasel-worded and would not be tolerated in most encyclopedia articles without quantifying things a bit more. Yes, this is a comprehensive article and it's possible that what is claimed in the intro is proven and/or backed up later in the body. But it's good practice to cite claims where they are made, so even an intro-only reader knows how and where to follow up on things. Maybe this article doesn't need this treatment because it's all just so obvious to everyone. So be it. This is a good article with only minor nitpicks surrounding it. --Ds13 07:43, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
Miles was big; this is obvious to just about anyone, even a clueless newcomer to the jazz scene like me. We get phrases like "one of the greatest" because it would be a biased, unverifiable claim to say Miles Davis was the greatest jazz musician of the 20th Century. This is not like a shelf full of cereal at the supermarket, where you can say definitely which box really is cheapest, or at least that these 3 boxes are all the same price. There have been, roughly speaking, about a dozen really huge figures in jazz; and at least 100 other greats so close behind that you could start a fight in most bars by excluding them from that dozen. Louis Armstrong, Cab Calloway, and Ella Fitzgerald would have to be there, really close to the top; Lawrence Welk, maybe not. Miles, no doubt at all. John Reid 19:59, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
-
- Cab Calloway??? --ND 05:08, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
Not Cab? Okay, that dozen is real crowded. But not Cab? John Reid ° 21:19, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Pop culture references
Add more or delete the whole thing. Hardly anyone interested in Jazz is probably the least bit interested in Pop Punk <vomits> NJlo 01:33, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
- Well that's extremely POV. I don't agree with your logic, but your conclusion to avoid trivia, which pop-culture references might be, is sound. --Ds13 18:46, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Drugs
I've just read back through the archive, but can't see anyone who has commented don this. I don't feel strongly enough to change the text (and am not sure what would improve it either), but my initial impression on reading the article was that it treated drugs in a very simplistic way: at several points drugs are blamed for problems without any other context.
Maybe this is correct, but it seems to me like a rather simple, one-sided view. Is it honestly that clear-cut? I can think of at two obvious ways in which real life may be more complex: sometimes drugs and related experience are used as a source of artistic inspiration; sometimes drugs are used because "life is bad" rather than being the immediate cause.
I don't want to minimize the danger of some drugs, or their cost to jazz in general, but the approach taken in the current text seems way too easy.
139.229.7.34 17:12, 14 December 2006 (UTC) andrew cooke
[edit] Date of Birth
The first sentence in the article says Miles was born on May 26, but the infobox says May 25. Which one is correct? A quick check on Google gives both dates. --MattiKt 11:53, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
Categories: Wikipedia former featured articles | Musicians work group articles | B-Class biography (musicians) articles | High-priority biography (musicians) articles | B-Class biography articles | Biography articles with comments | Biography (musicians) articles with comments | Start-Class Missouri articles | Unknown-importance Missouri articles | Missouri articles with comments | Wikipedia Version 0.5 | Wikipedia CD Selection-0.5 | Wikipedia Release Version | Start-Class Version 0.5 articles | Arts Version 0.5 articles | Start-Class Version 0.7 articles | Arts Version 0.7 articles
