Dave Brubeck

Rok2id,
The following quote is from the same interview with Dave Brubeck that I cited in my earlier post.

Dave Brubeck said, "Look at it this way - the people I respected, Duke Ellington, Benny Goodman uh, Woody Herman, Willie 'the Lion' Smith, Art Tatem, Bud Powell - they all liked what I was doing. Charlie Mingus, Miles Davis, almost all of the guys that really had made it and were experimental people, experimenting, liked what I was doing. So what do I care if some critic doesn't like it? I'd care if Duke Ellington didn't like it."

Onhwy61,
You stated, "To deny Dave Brubeck's importance in jazz history is silly." As we used to say in the 1960s, "Right On".

Rok2id,
With all due respect, I did not miss your point at all. Your point is that you do not care for Dave Brubeck. And you try to buttress your preference by saying that he did not play clubs, so he cannot qualify as a real jazz great, and the reviewers were not crazy about him so that reinforces the opinion you have about him. Personally, I like listening to jazz. My preferences are not influenced by what others say is worth listening to. In any case, regarding the criteria you have put forth for joining the playing field, you are not quite accurate.

For your edification, from this site:

http://www.davebrubeck.com/html/about.php

"The group played in jazz clubs in every major city and toured in package shows with such artists as Duke Ellington, Ella Fitzerald, Charlie Parker, Dizzy Gillespie and Stan Getz. The Dave Brubeck Quartet repeatedly won top honors in trade magazines and critic’s and reader’s polls. In 1954 Dave Brubeck’s portrait appeared on the cover of Time Magazine with a story about the jazz renaissance and Brubeck’s phenomenal ascendancy."

And from this site, from an interview with Dave Brubeck:

http://www.pbs.org/brubeck/talking/daveOnCritics.htm

"SMITH: Uh, huh. You did better with the public in a lot of ways than you did with some of the critics."

"DAVE: Maybe, but we had a lot of critics on our side. I mean all you have to do is go back and read the old Downbeats, Metronomes and reviews and you'll see how many people were behind us."

Well, it's all about image. Brubeck was not born in Mississippi and he did not move to Chicago. And he did not "swing" in the accepted manner. He was brought up on a farm. And he did his own thing. Which does not make him any less great. Just different.

Charles1dad,
I like Sonny Stitt and Lee Morgan very much. I have a lot of their music. And a lot of Brubeck's too. My point is this. It is one thing to say you prefer this or that pianist or group. No problem. But once you get into the realm of who is great and who is not then that's a whole other ballgame. You start to push your preferences into a larger realm. For instance, I imagine a lot of us have our favorite musicians who are not generally considered great and who may not even be that well known. But we may rank them up there with "the very best" because of our personal preferences. As you say, a lot of this is subjective. When it comes to greatness there are two facets here. One facet is those who are generally recognized as great. The other facet is those we feel are great regardless of what others recognize.

Sabai,
Your last sentence says it all.This is no different then when debating the relative greatness of boxers, baseball players or quarterbacks etc. You examine their body of work and from that point on it`s just various opinions without a concrete standard.